The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1845-03-20

from him, by mail, requiring the manu-
script and die he not afterwards send
three times by messengers, all OF whom
failed in Obtaining iii Did you not keep
back the manuscript some two or three
months until after the appearance Of the
same article in the Green Mountain Free
man of the 23d August? Did you not
(aaer lis appearance) send the manuscript,
when it became Of 20 use to the author by
Stage at his expense? My charge was
that you "rtfused 10 insert tie reply Of
Investigator" If you will truly answer
the foregoing questions we will then see
who is guilty Of "unqualifed and tolguI
| falsehcod D."
Ia my letter of De:. merely stated
that as the question raised by VI. Wing
had never been discussed before your
readers, except on one side, | pledged my.
self TO maintain the positions taken by In
vesligator whenever you would per-
nit their publication in your paper.
claimed no victory" or advantage over
any ore. Instead of accepting this rea-
sonable proposition you try 10 evadc 1t by
saying that | claim 10 have "aunihlated
and used up all who have come before me
in the discussion OF this question" A
graceful apology this for DECLINING the dis.
cussion, or in other words backing out !
But the mos. Singular part Of your per.
formance, remaining We. to be noticed, is
the concluding portion of your reply y
Last summer you laid down the position
that the wing party, or their leaders, had
given tone and spirit TO the subject Of abb
oli.ionism. The only evidence you have
ever furnished to sustaia this position was
an extract from the Savannah Georgian, q
Democratic paper, published in the Her.
| aid of the 2lst Nov. You inform US that
you published the extract 10 show ''who
the people of Georgia are afraid Off,
Now instead Of proving who the South
are afraid Of, it only proves that certain
democrats of the South were fearful that
the wings would succeed al the polls, and,
in order TO prevent it, raised against them
the cry Of ubolilionism. The object was
defeat 10 the wings and TO accomplish it
the democrats did not scruple ut any I'M
lrulh because, with them, 'the end sane.
titles The means But here is The point at
issue. If it be pertinent for you TO quote
from Southern democratic paper TO prove
who the democrats, or even Tho slavec-
Gratis OF the South as you call them, fare
afraid Of then it is equally pertinent to
quote from leading Southern whig pa
per 10 prove who they are not afraid Of
II your argument drawn from the Savln,
nah Georgian was worth any thing, then
my argument drawn from The Charleston,
S, c. Courier, leading wing paper, was
equally valuable and applicable 10 the
question a. issue. Your pitiiu evasion
and quiblinp, therefore, 10 avoid the pub
LEGATION of that article is totally unbecom-
ing your character and prcten,i)ns for lair
and honorable dealing. II ] have the
right TO present my case at all, have the
right to present the Wbole OF it, aud voui
readers, not yourself, should be the judges
o! the per!jnency of the article from The
Courier. The suppression of that article
exposes you 10 the impulaion that you
cannot trust it 10 the intelligence OF your
readers, or your consciousness that, if pub,
lished, it would fully expose the weakness
Of your position.
TO show that do not speak unadvised-
ly in relation TO the bearing which this
article, from leading Southern whig pa.
per, ithe Charleston S. G. Courier may
have on the question will here present
the 70 loving extracts from that paper of
the 3O;h October last, just before The cleo
ton.
" We candidly believe that there are
more and worse enemies of Southern in
sti,u,ions among The Northern Democrats
than the Northern Wings although we
ndignanlIy repel any imputaIon on the
PATRIOTISM and CONSTITUTIONAL fidelity OF the
lormerlo Southern rights 1--WE
however cheerfuIIy and gladly acqul
both Wings and Democrats of any partc>