Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1845-12-26
TIE LAND

relation to the distribution of Public Lands,
and thinks that we might have replied in an
article but little longe, than the one in which
we gave our reasons for declining SO to do.
II is true we might have said yes or no, or
yes and no, as we told him the editors differ
ed with each other on this subject. Many
questions might be asked, to which we could
reply ina single line, but rather than do so, rath-
er than connect, or seem to conRect any extrane-
ouStopics with the Anti-Slavery question, we
would prefer giving in an article Of twenty
lines, our reasons for not replying. We do
not feel bound to answer every question pro-
posed, although the propounder may think
it intimately connected with the system of
slavery-if tUe do not, that is sufficient rea-
con why we should decline discussing it in
an Anti Slavery paper. Wehlve heard some
contend, and with much plausibility, that if
We convert tho shareholders 10 Gnhamism
slavery would soon cease, but that is no rea-
son-so long as we think otherwise why
our editorial columns should be occupied
with dispositions on Dietetics.
Others contend, both opposcrs and appro-
vers Of the system, that the Bible is the
foundation of Am. Slavery; we think other
wise, and therefore do not enter into the mer-
iiG of this question. Friend Hinchman seems
u think that the Land Monopoly, is the prin-
ciple upon which i: rests, (although, we do
not see, by the. way, that the mere question
US to whether actual settlers should possess
the Public Lands has any direct bearing on
the principle of Land Monopoly if SO, we
d. net concur with him, and cannot pursue
the same course, which he must feel it lila
duty to pursue, for each AMI all must act in
conformity with their perceptions of truth, of
duty, of right AMI wrong, of cause AMI eff
feet.
His remark that OR excuse comes with
rather an ill-gracc from a paper thst has had
the independence (be it said to its credit to
speak out on so many and various occasions,
against the corruptions Of the American cler
~ and churches, and other popular %institu-
tions Of the day" is inappropriate, and the
compliment the sentence contains altogether
misplaced; at least, we were not aware tha'
We had spoken against the corruptions Of the
Am. church and clergy in other particulars
than their pro-slAvory position, unless per-
chance by way Of illustration, or by way Of
confirming what was said in regard to sla-
very.
II the Land Monopoly were wrong, ans
the recognition Of every mans equal RICH
to the soil would abolish slavery, still thia
would not be the first question to discuss
but one Of secondary consideration.
Ii the Bible doctrine of Non-Resistance be
true, and tho abrogAtion Of physical %yio!enc {
aS applied to man would destroy slavery, still
this question lies back Of another whicl
must be previously discussed.
We will briefly state our reasons for adopt
ing these positions, which may appear incon'
sistent to some. No man regards his horse al
equally entitl ed with himself to a share o
Gods earth, a. least we never heard anIAnti
Land Monopolist contend for such doctrine
and in our intercourse with Ncn-R esist.nt
we have never met with one who did no
deem it perfectly right to use such physica
force as was needed to compel submissio;
from the animals over which he'chose to exer
else dominion. The slave of the South sus
tains the same relation to his master as tn
horse, and other animals to the Anti-Lan
Monopolist and Notwithstanding is 'one VIII
il in the power of his master to whom he b,
Iong,,"-''a chahel personal to all intents
purposes, and constructions whatsoever,
consequently we cannot establish the slave
right to land, until his right to himself
recognized-he cannot DO exempted frol
physical violence, until he is clothe
with humanity, even though Non-ResistanC
should prevail. We cannot see then tn;
the case of the slave would be reached b
a discussion of either Of these question
until his humanity, and his inalienable rig
70 liberty are established. Some Of our No
Resistant friends, and opponents of Land M
nopoly, overlook these facts, and see the su
ject in a different light from that in whic
we regard It.. This will account for the f
lowing resolutions which were adopted
what the editor of "The Friend of Man,
calls an anti slavery meeting.
Resoiued, That we believe Slavery is n
confined exclusively TO the Southern porti
of this Union, but that it is a part of 4
system of every government of the world.
Resolved, That to successfully abolish