Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1846-03-20

creaslng guilt, remains to be decided"
1t has been " decided that a man cannot
give a just title to a farm to which he had
never received a just one. If L." can UNI
derstand how the man who steals another
man, and then steals the proceeds of his toll
from him as fast as he earns it, can sell and
convey a just title to such products, he will
then lie in a Fair way to establish his ground.
1t Will be indeed fortunate for the stakeholder
when it shall have become settled that the
true friends of human liberty can, I" without
violating principle" barter with him for his
booty, although they turn about, or there d.
rectly in his place, declare sIaveholding the
basest of viIlanies.
Can IL" give one reason why stolen
horses might not be purchased with impuni-
ty on the sIme principle that he ~iustifes buy
ing slave produce.
Is the reason of its wrongfulness not in
the inaucement it affords for continuing tho
villany 7 Does that reason not apply to tho
shareholder?
freely answer his heterogeneous. lie
asks whether, if slavery were abolished TO-
day, it would be wrong to use its products
remaining unconsumed. ! answer, ii would,
unless there he an assurance that such an act
would not encourage the establishment of
slavery somewhere.
81" wishes to know whether | would
deem it admissible for him, provided he
could with the consent Of the STAKEHOLDER
get an article, The fruit of his oppression,
without compensating him, to receive and
use it for the benefit of the slave.
II the shareholders consent could be Ind in
the case, it would doubtless be right. But
the question resolves itself into this 81 Ii
h." can mike an abolitionist of the slave
holder, and get him to rehhquish his clam to
The iaJor Of his Stare, would it be right to as
sist the latter in turning the whole of his la
Dor 10 his OWh (the ~slave's) account? All
right, most certainly-just what aboiitionists
ought to be at, constantly.
Yes, ii is - intrpedient," as well as wrong
in principle, to divide the spoils with the
stakeholder. Ii ST." can produce a palmer
proposition connected with abolition, than
that slavery would diminish with the disuse
of its products, | should be glld 10 heir it.
If "L,." writes again, will he please not
to introduce ne'0 prop %ositions till he answers
the old ones. 1t is best to not cui out too
much wo;k in advance. G..
HnLsBoao, re-. I6M, 1916.
FRIENDS EDiToas =
should be pleased to aid in
extending the circula ion of the " Bnele" and
shall do so as far as my other duties will al
low, as | approve mainly of its course, but
not entirely that of all its correspondents;
and you will excuse the freedom Of a strang-
or if | tell you wherein any thing exception
able has met my eye, Of the kind referred to.
! will state, d. correspondent in one of the pa
pers you sent me-, remlrks in substance that
the Liberty party contributed to the eleva-
ton of Polk" Now | am not prepared to
endorse the sentiment, although [ shall never
again act with that or any other party under
the government, as at present constituted.
But still, admitting, for the sake of argument,
that the independent party action of the Lii
berty party was such as to result in the ele-
vilion Of Polk, are they responsible, in the
sight of Heaven, for the sins Of the latterl
| think not. For even your correspondent
must admit that if it is wrong to vote for Biz
ney because we thereby recognize a p%iratical
government, much more would it be wrong
to vote for Clay, whereby We not only recog-
nize the same kind of government AS when
we vote for Birney, but in addition commit
the enormous offence of voting directly for a
bloody fingered and heaven-daring slave
claimant, and thereby put ourselves almost.
! was about to say, out of the pale of com
mon honesty, SO that in the former instance,
we are not so bad by at least one sin and that
a sin of giant magnitude. Now it does not
alter the fact that our action is overruled by
Providence, to the elevation of another pirate
of the same " stripe" The moral code Of
rectitude and honesty, requiring us to repu-
date the claims Of the insolent ~slaveite at the
ballot-box, and every where else, forbids us
in thunder tones from touching as contami-
mating a thing as Clay, if it should be with
as elongated a concern as one of his own flag
staff, and this code is our rule Of action, the
Providence Of God is not our rule of action.
That law then requires us if we vote at all,
to vote for a non-slaveholder, while in the
meantime Providence (if NAV so eynress