New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1844-12-14

Discussion on slavery...Ns. 3.

commences Wv recap:,uis;ing the substance o! hi
first letter. in which he endeavored show tina; tn
error in treating the subject OF Slavery was mo-
wholly with the North; that the sensi'iveness q
the South with regard 10 it is OF recent origin: OF,
that it is desirable that the position OF Both par;ie
should be changed tina, the North shoaid treo'
the subject CALMLY and that The South should in.
vie the frees; possible discussion OF H."
Dr.. Wa, laud then bears testimony 10 DR. Fullsrt
independence of character, and his willingness IL
act as the rule Of Christian duty requires. when
ever this rule may be revealed TO him, whatever
may be the sacrifice aud hopes he may be
pled 10 act frou1 The same principles
The assertion thai SId5ery as moral ecit,
which Dr. Fuller denies, Dr.. Way land considers a.
ambiguous in meaning, and that i, s necessary to
define IL.
His ambiguous, lst, ,elh regard 10 The defai-
tio1 Of Stauery.
Or. Foers definition OF Slavery is, that il is GO
obligation TO labor for the benefit of The master,
without the contract or consent CT the slave"
This definition thst ",he master has
night 10 obige the slave 10 labor for his the mas
,ets bene6 without The contract or consent OF 'be
slave"
If the master have this right he has also the
right to use all means necessary 10 enforce and 10
render il permanent If lhs intellectual or moral
cultivation Of the slave would interfere with The
10 arrest this cultivation at any point he chooses, or
10 abolish il altogether. IL this right exist there
FORE no exception be taken TO the sternest laws
Of the Southern States, prohibiting The education OF
negroes Ifihis right does Dot exist then the slave,
in thesc respects stands 10 in precisely the same
relation as any other man.. IL Is necessary, there
fore 10 defne Slavery, as the right 10 oblge
another TO labor for me-, without hs contract or con-
sent, with the additional rig bt 10 use all the naces-
sary means TO ensure the exercise Of the original
right" So much for the definition OF Slavery.
I'd. The assertion that Siacery Is or Is not a
moral coil" IS ambiguous rrltb regard 10 the d.h-
milton Of moral eril.'
"In The one sense, 'moral evil means wrong;
the violation OF the relations which exist between
the parties; the trapsgresson Of a moral law OF
God"
"7a The other sense moral evil signifies the
personal guilt which attaches the being who does
the wrong, violates the Obligation or iransgresses
the law"
Want Of attention TO this obvious distinction has
given rise TO much Of the misunderstanding on this
subject. " Wa at the North have considered TOO
exclusively The first Of these meanings CT moral
evil, and endeavortd to chow that Slavery is always
violation of right, and therefore always involving
equal guilt; while you at the South have considered
as exclusively tho second, and aimed 10 show that
in your present condition you are not chaIgeable
with guilt, and hence that what you do Is not
wrong"
Having thus defined the terms, DR.. Waylandpro |
ceeds TO consider the ground taken by DIR. Fuller,
that Slavery is not moral evil, with reference to
the first meaning of moral evil. He proceeds as
follows: Gin the first sense, when 1t is affirmed
that Slavery is not moral evil, we assert that TO
bold man in Slavery, az il has been above e1-
planned is right, that il violates no law OF God, and
Is at variance with no moral relation existing be-
tween man and man. Now | believe directly the
reverse OF this believe it TO be- wropg, utterly and
absolutely at variance with the relations which
God has establfahed between his moral and ntelli-
gent creatures"
His reasons for holding this opinion he states
briefly as follows:
lst. "sGod, of one blood, nade all men that
dwell upon the esrth;' we all partalers Of The
same nature. as we are all children Of one common
parent" This common nature is not affected, in
any respect. by the color Of The skin or by aoy other
variety of physical formation Though a man may
be wiser or less wiss ignorant or less ignorant
thnn ourselves, he is in every respect az perfectly
u human being as myself" md stands in the same
relations TO the Creator aud Father of us all.
ed. Every human being is endowed with an inn
mortal soul; )" ais placed in the present state OF
probation; p" has an intellect OF endless progress
sion -" and God has given him light TO improve
it, TO whatever extent he pleescs." - lie has pow
external action, aud by of bis intellect,
he may use these powers for the improvement oihis
own condilion-aud the result of this employment
is strictly and exclusively his own
81. I" Every human being is fallen creature Us
sinner against God" has need ola revelation from
God, and has perfect night 10 know every word
that God has addressed to him" and with This right
no other creature OF God, not even the angels IN
heaven, have right 10 interfere"
4h. By the will of the Creator certain subor-
dina,e and temporary relations established
among human beings' such as husband and wife,
and Of parent and child. From these relations GER
tain obligations arise for which the individual is
sponsible, and with which mo human being has
right to interfere"
"'rhese ideas are involved 10 the conception Of
human nature" and The subject does OF admit Of
arg umenr ST is Il matter of immediate moral con-
rcousness." :" To present this subject IN simple
light, Let us suppose thar your lamily and mine
are neighhors; we, our wives and children are ali
human beings in the sense have described, and arc
subsct 10 the law, thou shalt lone thy nefghbor as
thyseU. Suppose that ser fra 10 your house.
shoot you you come out Of it, and seizing upon
your wife and children, 'obige them 10 labor for
nv benefit, without their contract consent
Then 10 retain this acquired power, forbid them
10 read, and thus couaign them 10 intellectual and
moral imbeci.iv." continue TO exercise this do
mnion, and transfer il 10 my children. "Woud ], !
10 doing, act a variance with Inc relations exist
ing between US as creatures OF God? co not see |
how any intelligent creature can give more Than
one answer to this question" Every must say
!, Is tcroag Or in other words that !tis great mo
raj soil.
Again, suppose transfer my acquired power 10
another for money; this in no respect alters the
question: il is still wrong, and "Slavery, with this
mod fca,ion, is again, as before, moral epa"
Again, suppose this Is done by society, The case is
NOT altered: the relations cf human beings are the
sans: il is then social tcroag but the wrong ex-
lists. "The individual act is wrons-t5e law which
protects il is wrong. Before OILY the Individual,
now the whole society becomes the wrong Goer. y
al have thus endsavored TO illustrates my views OF
III. question, is Slavery moral evil understand.
ing by these terms, wrong orvolaton OF moral law.
10 conclusion, DIR. Wayland states his own posi-
tion e speak as the organ of 40 party, and OF no
sect. belong to none. am not and never have
been connected with any Abolition society, and
believe that have read as much on side OF the
question az on the other He says, :" may claim
tina, the sentiments which have advanced are by
necessity involved in the character which hold as
an American citizen and are "cOmptehended IN
the notable words which form the intr0dncton 10 our
Declaration Of Independence" I'VE hold these
truths TO be selfeyden,, Chat sso evident thai they
are, from the principles OF the human uiiad, admit
ted as soon as they stated,) THAT all men are
created equal lhat 10, equal in right 10 use the
endowments o. the Creator as they choose. though