Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1846-06-12
II. w. CURTIS.

IL w. COlCilc.
FRrEvDs EDIroRs valentine Nicholson,
a reformer of some note, and from account,
a very worthy man, has in your last, under
tho head of "Comcouterism," published
some quotations from certain communications
and private letters of mine, together with his
own comments, which very naturally suggest
to my mind a few thoughts.
This friend is grieved that should regard
Comeoutorism the most feeble instrument of
reform.
He is right in suppcsing that would de-
sire 10 know it, if | am deceived, and | would
say to him that | thank him for any light
which he can give me either through this pa
per or otherwise. 1t is his duty to dissent
nate his views, and if they appear to be sus-
tanned by good reasons, | cannot honestly
reject them.
l have carefully weighed the arguments
he has adduced in favor of his doctrine, but
can either not appreciate their force, or they
do not sustain his position. He first states
that no reformation had ever been wrought
except by the persons engaged III them CO.
ming out. The friend may have evidence to
make this clear to his mind, but the evidence
which | have goes to convince me that the
contrary has been the fact. 1t is by %associa-
ted action, and not by individual effort that
the reforms have been produced.
Co,.aoutnrisp l., 20 ,honJo, ,boeo ,,,o1l
tried and successful means of advancing
truth. The Comeouters of religious socio-
ties formerly seem to have had a very differ
ent object from those of the present day. If
the latter were to leave one society and con-
meet themselves with another and a better
one, | could see no objection to them. But
this does not appear to be the case.
Friend Nicholson advances a second arc u
ment by a quotation from Paul l have f5e-
quently heard this text used to induce mem
bers of Friends to stag in to show that it
was unscliptural and wrong for them to min
gle even in a promiscuous .eform meeting =
1t would not be advisable for my friend and
the bigoted sectarian to dispute about their
respective claims to this passage of Scripture,
for it does not appear to me to have any ap-
p~lication to the case Of either.
But it is by these arguments and the smile
of the "acorn," that this friend desires to
convince me of the correctness o. the Come
outer doctrine. There do not appear to be
any facts adduced by him, and the arguments
even, do seem to me, so far as they apply al
all, to pertain to the other side of the question
| will therefore leave the subject for the
present BY offsetting these arguments by tw'
hring facts, from among thousands of a SINH
lar kind which could be named. These arr
Valentine Nicholson and VIM. II. Hilles.-
The cultivated minds Of these individuals ar
the fruits of Sfay-in-,sm. They were boil
taught in the Quaker school. | should des
pair Of seeing such instances in the next gen
Grafton under the reign of Comeouterism.
Friend Nicholson, in quoting from a lette
TO w. II. Hills in l81I, implies that tn
sentiments which | then penned to an init
I mate friend, would cause me deep mortifca
ton by being placed before the public in jux
I opposition with my arguments against Come
outerism. Why does he think so There i
not a word in it in favor of Comeouterism.-
= The extract admits that Friends, as a body
: are opposed to non-resistance. | have neve
entertained a doubt of that. 1t admits Friend
l TO be very deficient in living up to their pre-
f~essions. Where have | ever written an
a thing contrary to this ! This extract, althoug
written at a time when there was perhap
less than halfas many real abolitionists amor
Friends as at present, and evidently under
c much feeling as is often permitted to hay
It place in my mind against the Indifference
members upon reform questions, yet with a
this advantage, friend Nicholson will be un;
BILE to find one idea in my communication
which contravene any part of this extract.
have no doubt, however, that Justice
Friends would at this time forbid so gener
a a charge as | then made. Friend Nicholso
81 will agree with Inc in this, unless he consi,
ers my charge in the extract to be too low
the time it was made, for he knows man
Friends have been converted to the reforl
doctrines since that period. Even within
year a great change in this respect is man
tested in many places.
But why should this friend feel 50 sanguir
o of having discovered a discrepancy betwee
" payr arti,1ne of 10 81 81 I . ts .rI.-l .--I