Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1843-10-04

a Qod Of justice. Whenever any objec-
ton is made TO the murderous doings OF
the Israelies, in rObbng and slaughter
inr their enemies - in other words their
neiQhbors who had possessions they
wanled-we are told that the Most High
was then God CT justice, and that ne
selected one Of the members Of his famlly
as scourge and employed il 10 castiga'e
the others. 1t must not be said, we are
Told. that il was inhuman or wrong IN The
IsraeI,es to butcher helpless women and
children. Il must be called the execution
Of The Justice Of God. Now see. unless
am deceived by very great oOiiquity OF
vision. a similar thing in what is here
done by the Editor Of the Investigator,
and elsewhere by others. in giving new
names 10 laws and penalties. The Old
Testament narrative Of the plundering
proceedings of the lsraelites makes no
such use Of language, and asks for none
10 be made, as is now required, in speak
ing Of their doings. threads =" Acenge
the children OF Israel Of the Midianites."
/" Auenge the Lord Of INDIAN" Mum.
bers XXX: 2, 8. Nothing is said here
about Justice. II is written down honest
ly, 10 plain. unequivocal language-cen-
gsance, Just as their acts showed their
feelings TO be, as all may see who will
read what follows in the chapter from
which have quoted. But now that the
human family have lived on TO a better
age add better state ofthings, as many
as are unwilling to leave those acts where
they belong. as worthy OF the times and
circumstances which produced them.must
give them a different name, that they
NAV the better succeed in getting help to
log them along. So they must no~ be
called acts Of God's justice. It's so with
this whole system Of rewards and punish
ments. 10 the progress and improvement
OF the race, former things are passing
away. But il is not generally seen how
rapidly the work is going on. And yet
there is very generally felt demand and
necessity for calling things by different
names. So the Editor Of the Investigator
talks about restraining lars," to be US
ed, as he says. instead Of laws executing
what would be called "rstributire Jus
tiee." do not say that he is willingly
and willingly deceiving himself and 9TH
ers in This matter. loply say he is 10 an
error if be thinks the distinction he un-
der,akes 10 make can extend beyond the
difference in words. And yet the penal
ties are sofening. But whatever there
il left of them is a part Of the same
system. Violence is violence still
There is only difference in degree
and in names attached to 1t. The rIgh
TO use one form, measure or degree OF 1t
towards rational beings, under some cir
cumstan:es, is the right 10 use other forms
measures and degrees Of it under Other
circumstances. The right TO command
is the right to enforce obedience. Ane
here is where the mischief begins. The
issuing OF the command is the beginning
ofhos.ilities. Il is the commencement o
aggressive war, which if repelled ant
prosecuted, and followed up, can no wher'
end but in the entire exIermination Of lh'
race. Lam not SAYING that those WIZ
have used commands and accompanying
violence have not done according TO tn
best of their knowledge generally. ! an
only saying that believe there is high
er and better philosophy in our reach.
In many other things the Editor OF tn
Investigator reasons from cause to effect
But on this great matter Of Non-Resis
auce, and Rewards and Punishments,
appears to me be entirely abandons hi
wonted course, and takes himself to n'
sumption and assertion. He assumes an
asserts Lhal Non. Resistance cannot be cal
ried into practice and life preserved. il.
better examination Of the subject wi
show him that he is wanting bo:h in fac
and philosophy to sustain himself in III
posision--or l am vastly mistaken.
careful examination Of his production wi
show that he has not brought either Il
one or The other 10 his support He h
alluded 10 the QoakerA Butin doing
what has be done : He has only broug
ont the fact tha. as class they have q