Mississippi Democrat. (Carrollton, Miss.) 1844-18??, 1845-01-29
South Carolina, June 2I. 1914, {

SIR: The last post brought me your
communication, accompanying the memo.
rial of the Presbytery of the Free Church
of Glasgow, in behalf of John l.. Brown,
convicted in this State of aiding slave in
escaping from her master, and sentenced
to be hung in April last. 1t will be graft
flying TO you, seeing the interest you have
taken in the matter, to learn that have
pardoned Brown. In consequence of re-
presentations made to me in December
last by Judge O'Neall, speaking for him
self and the Judges of the court of ap-
peals, committed his punishment to thir-
ty-nine lashes. Facts not known to the
jury nor to the, judges, were afterwards
brought TO my knowledge, which satisfied
me that Brown had no criminal design in
what he did; and in the month of March |
transmitted to him full pardon. was
not at all aware at that time of the great
interest taken abroad in behalf of one
whose case had never heard mentioned
here, except on the occasions referred to,
and was astonished to find myself over
whelmned soon after with vo'uminous petit
tions for his pardon from the non-slave-
holding States of this Union; and 20 per-
ceive that his sentence was commented
on, not only by the English newspapers,
but in the English House of Lords, The
latest, and trust, last communication to
me on the subject, is your memorial
The interference of foreigners, or any
persons beyond our boundaries, in the ex-
ecution of the municipal laws of a sove-
reign State, even if in respectful terms, is
certainly violation of all propriety and
courtesy; and, if carried to any extent,
must become wholly intolerable. / pass
| that by, however. The law under which
Brown was convicted, was enacted during
our colonial existence, and is emphaticaly
British law. 1t is also a good law.
pardoned him not because | disapproved
the law, bnt because did not think he vi.
olated it. 1t would be the most absurd
thing in the world TO recognize by law a
system of domestic slavery, and yet allow
every one to free not merely his own
slaves. but those of his neighbor, when
ever insiigated to do so by his own no
tons of propriety, his interest or his ca
price. What SORT of security would we
have for property held on such terms as
| these? You cannot but perceive, that TO
permit others to take our slaves from US at
pleasure with impunity, would amount to
total abolition Of slavery. There would
be no real difference between this and al
lowing the slaves to go free themselves.
Your Presbytery, and all the petitioners
for Brown, and agitators of his case, must
have seen the matter in this light; and il
is attributing TO US but a small share oil
common sense TO suppose that we would
not take the same view Of it ourselves.
Whether death should be inflicted fol
such an offense is another question. We
have modified, in great degree, the SAN
culinary code of law left US by our British
ancestors; but we have not gone the length
to which some philosophers, both here and
in your country, would have all countries
go to, of abolishing the punishment o.
death. Nor do believe the success your
government has met with in endeavorine
TO diminish crime by abolshing this pun.
lshment in so many cases, will encourage
them 10 press the matter much farther a
this time. Considering the value of {
slave, the facility of seducing him from
his master, the evil influence which fre
quent seduction might exercise on an in.
stitution, the destruction of which mus
speedily and inevitably strike from the
roll of civilized States nearly the whole
slaveholding section of this country, as i
has already done ST. Domingo and Jamai
ca, and the enthusiastic and reckless enc
mics of fhis institution by whom we are
surrounded, it seems to me, that if any Of
fence affecting property merits death
this is one.
Your memorial, like all that have beer
sent to me, denounces slavery in the Sc
verest terms, as ''trayersing every law o
nature, and violating the most sacred do
nestle relations, and the primary right:
of man." You and your Presbytery are
Christians. You profess TO believe, anC
no doubt do believe, that the laws laiC
down in the Old and New Testaments fol-
the government of man, in his moral, so
cia and political relations, were all the
direct revelation Of God himself. Does i
never occur to you, that in anathemema
tizing slavery, you deny this divine sane
ton of laws, and repudiate both Chris
and Moses; or charge God with downright
crime in regulating and perpetuatlng slave
| nv in the Old Testament, and the mos
criminal neglect, in not only not abolish
ing, but not even experimenting il in th'
New Testament ? If these testament'
come from God, it is impossible that slave
ry can 'traverse the laws of nature, o.
violate the primary rights of man." VIVA