Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1845-10-31

We understand that tue Indiana Anti. Slavery
Society nave passed resolutions strongly con-
demuaIory ofthe course tho delegation has pur.
sued We have not yet seen an official report
ofits proceedings. London Abolitionism has no
truo sympashy with that Abolilionism of Ameri.
ca which is willing to sacrifice oil ~sectarian feel
lngs and party prejudice on tho great altar of
human rights.
Bond ST. Anti Slavery is too refined, too aris-
%tocratic, too evangelical TO recognize, even as
couSin'german, the vulgar, democratic, infdel,
anti slavery tina, lahots for the slave. 1t refus-
cd to sit with Lucretia Mott at the pseudo
Worlds Convention, because she was a woman;
and though London anti-slavery was proud 20
have an English woman to command the army
and navy of England and to fill the British throne
II couldn't bear that an American woman should
so far leave her appropriate sphere as 10 sit in
the r convention as an equal delegate. London
anti sTa, cry denied TO the venerable Thos. Clark
son the right 10 say what he wished to as Presi-
dent of that Convention, but cut and trimmed
his speech to suit itself, When John A. Collins
went to England it most foully belied him, and
used its efforts 10 crush the Am. A. s. Society.
Those whose sympathies come to us from acros q
the water are net residents uf Bond ST. LONDON.
They are to be found among the glens and noun
tains Of old Scotland, and the boys and moors Of
Ireland. 1t ia from the Female Society of Glas-
gov, and from the "priSter men, Of Dublin
from the oppressed Chartist, and the despi,ed
Rel ealer, from the few great hearts whose noble
feelings may not DO restrained.
"Who dare to speak unshackled and un-
awed,
High words Of Truth, for Freedom and for
God"
that we look for and receive sympathy, aud
not from the s~ectarian com mittee Of English
abolitionists, or those whom they represent,
We are glad the Indiana folks are hegin-
ming to open their eyes, even SO far as to see
men, as trees walking, In 1910 when the
same issue was presented in another form,
if we mistake not, they were very anxious
some of them at least-tha. brethren should
not fall out by the way; they exceedingly
disapproved Of these 1uarrels among aboli-
t~ionists, and thought it a very wise conclu-
sion to shut out "that eastern controversy"
In 1916 the case is altered. Certain circum-
stances have annointed their eyes, their Wis
ion has grown wond 9rfully clear, and not sat
isfed with going as far eastas New England
to seek cause for controversy they go almost
to the rising of the sun, and in the action of
some of the aholitionistS of Old Engllnd,
find abundant cause for condemnation. BE
careful friends, lest your resolutions of rs
conflicts with your non-commit llism Of 10.
Why should you introduce this rery erfern
controversy into your Indiana Society," Why
should brethren quarrel among themselves!
Why should P~rofbsed abolitiouists waste
thoir strength and energies upon these mere
differences of o%pinionl Unless you are pre-
pared to answer these questions promptly and
categoFically, you will probably have a n.
England controversy with Joshua Leavitt
and his clique, who are hand and glove with
the London committee and the s~ectarian abo-
l~itionists Of Great Britain.