The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1844-03-14
V o L. V. NO. SO

the sympathy they feel for The poor, help
less slave 4!
"lnasmuch as we did it not to one of
the least ofthese, we did it not to me-"
But there is one me ire piece of evidence
winch may bea: with some triRsag
weight on the subject of petitions. On
the 9th day of February 1889, Henry
Clay rose in his place in the Senate to
present petition against the abolition of
Slavery in the District of Columbia, II
seems 10 have been constitutional to re.
celve petition against, but not for abo-
llIlon Mr.. Clay, in his remarks, aIIud.
ed 10 the two opposite opinions or modes
entertained in the Senate for the disnosi-
ton Of abolition petitions-the one to re.
ceIve and report ogoinstthe prayer of The
petition, and the other not 10 receive
After declaring himself in favor of The
fofmer method, he says:-Q quote from
the National ln'elIigencer,)
''rhere is no substantial difference be.
tween these opposite opinions, since both
look to AN ABSOLUTE REJECT
ION OF The prayer of The petitioners"
1t seems the House Of Representatives
on the 9Th of last month acted on the
same principle in rejecting the "2lst
Rule" But mark the fact. This rple
was not rejected until the odious and
SIaVIsh resolution, before quoted, was, the
day before ION The 26,h Feb) by force of
The previous question, adopted. Slave.
holders and their appo'ogisls would not
consent to give up that rule until thew
had first substituted something that suiIed
their purpose better
We discover then, what course H4nrv
Clay and the Wing party, both in g. out
Of Congress, including Inc Representa-
lives from this sla'e. pursued in relation
10 Slavery and the right of petition. |.
only remains to add that when Gen Har.
rIson and the Wings came into power in
1884, they had large mojorities in both
houses of Congress, and yet they KEEP, in
force the 2lst rule against the reception
d abolition / eItions so long as that now
r lasted. 1.-THE least credit, therefore, is
iue for The rejection of that rule it must
De awarded to Democratic, bat not to a
Wing House OF Representatives.
And yet j. Conant his the assurance
o say that he "is DESTROYS, as an Qbolition.
'St lhear that ] of avaiIing himself Of the
influence of these Wings in the counsels
II the nation, as the ONLY EFFICIENT
friends Of the slave !! God grant he
may have but few such friends. | wish
'So, 10 ask Mr.. c., " h lie en- this tonic.
whet! er Harrison's Wig Cabinet was
1ot essentially pro-savery Cabinet, op-
posed IN sentiment and feeling 10 the abo-
lt'onIsts and their measures throughout
he country? Please answer YES or no
regret Messrs. Editors, the painful ne.
;e>slty under which am placed ofaIIud.
ng to the offensive character of lam
,uage With which j. Conant' has seem
1t TO indulge in your paper of last week.
would rather, if could, be spared this
Illusion. The article signed Investigator,
II week before last, contained not a word
II abuse or personalily-it made no as.
eriIons except what were proved by facts
nd authorities produced. Ii contained
ew plain Questions, fairly put to any one
lSposed to answer them. la this situa-
lon of things we fad Mr.. c., instead of
ven attempting TO answer single cues.
ION, or overthrow a single position taken
that piece, making use of such Ian.
.urge as the following:
Investigator has darkened your col
INNS with long series of abuse and de-
ractlon, too riie TO call forth a recapitu-
alton n, or merit detailed reply" Again
The dark groveling shades cast by
Investigator" sc. And yet again we
cad the terms despica6le calumny" ap-
lied to the writer.
That protested aboitionist and chris
an ofthe age of Deacon Conant should
'dulge i'll such dignifed epithets is not
tier all SO surprising as the position in
'hlch he has placed himself in support
1g Shareholders and duelists for Office.
slight glance at his piece will convince
ny one that the foregoing contains the
ISL OF all the reasoning and argument
is learned researches enablad hin, 4.