Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1846-03-20
FRIENDS EDIToRs -
SAM'L BROOKE.

L am In error III supPosipS MN " "N
{. immortality and corruption exist In the Socl-
ETY. of Friends, which it takes no measures to
remeye." Yet in the same communications
he himself condemns the action Of the Socie-
ty in the case of |. T. Hopper and the Friends
of Green Plain! Will b. B. ID. contend that
an act which he admits to be ~wrong-unjus-
ti6able-unwarrantable-is at the same time
perfectly moral! My friend will not vote for
a stakeholder he believes it wrong to do so.
And yet, strange to say, he will not admit
that there is any immortality in the act.
1 confess that when | first read this part of
B. B. s communication, | was more sur
priced than | had been by any other senti-
ment which he has advanced during this dis
c~ussion. When l reflect, however, that he
position that the Society of Friends is a NOR
al and Christian body is the only one which
remains for my friend to take-the only ground
which he can assume, without being con-
demned out of his own mouth-my astonish-
ment is somewhat diminished. If become
responsible before the world for the conduct
Of another, knowing what that conduct is, ]
cannot for a moment claim to be innocent, if |
admit the actions of that person to be immor-
al. My only escape is to deny their inmor-
ality, if still persist in sanctioning them
If it were not that my friend has again and
again admitted that the actions of the Socie-
ty of Friends, and OF its members in oppos-
ing the anti-slavery movement-denouncing
anti-slayery Misunderstanding for slavehold-
ers, &C., &C., are wrong-unjustifiable-un-
warrantable-and that every intelligent anti
slavery person admits the same-as if |
thought it possible that any intelligent per-
son could contend that what is in itself prong,
unjustJfabe and unwarrantabe may at the
l might think it advisable to say more upon
this part of the subject. AS it is | deem it
unnecessary.
b. B. d. attempts to show, that by the add
MISSIONS" as he calls them, made in my last
communication, | have given up almost the
whole ground. Those who will glance at the
communication referred to, will see that he
has but little in the shape of ''admissions,'
to base this part of his argument. And those
who do not want the trouble of hunting up
old papers can see by tho article itself, how
little he has made out of these " admissions"
whatever they may have been. lie repre-
sents me as having said that Friends are not
in heart " nor in intent" opposed to the re.
forms. In this he misapprehends me-. If by
reforms he means the Anti-Slavery and othel
reformatory movements as | suppose he does
believe the Friends do intend as a body tc
oppose them, denying however that they are
in reality reforms.
1t will be remembered that b. b. d. stated
in a former communication that he " scarce,
ly believed the charges of "pro-slavery,'
contemporaries" &C., were applicable tc
, the worst man in community again tina
I" to be pro-slavery, means to be in favOr O
slavery" and that the word "has no othe
meaning" Surprising from this, that he die
not conceive the word 10 be applicable to any
l but such as were in heart and profession, as
: well as in practice, the supporters of slavery
, l stated that had not charged Friends witt
, being pro-slavery in this sense. As | under
/, stood him to define the word, l agree that i
is not applicable to the worst man in this com
munity, nor perhaps to onein ten of the slave
holders of the South. 1t was further stated
that | had not charged the Society of Friends
with having sunk to the htoest depths of i'm,
morality and corruption AS l believe thai
some of the other religious organizations are
still more corrupt than that of Friends. Again
it was stated, that | judged no ones motives
that it was with actions not motives / had
to do-that the actions of the Socisty Of
Friends were some of them pro-slavery though
Tor aught knew, the motives might be good.
/, did notassert that the motives of the Friends
, IN opposing Anti'Slavery, &C., were pure, fol
3 The reason that l knew nothing about them
: l did not deny their purity for the same rea,
: SON. and for the additional reason, that if
i, had known them it would have had NOTHING
> to do with the question under discussion.
These then are the admissions wbic,
T B.. b. d. suPPoses divest the charges mad,
against the Society of Friends of their who'll
force" except SO far as intentional wrong /