Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1846-01-16
COMMUNICATIONS.
FRIENDS EDiroRs:-


ments, in reply to a communication previous
ly written by me, and in defence of himself
and the society Of Friends.
B. B. D. represents me as charging the So
ciety with being "anti-temperance, war sns-
taining, pro-slavery, immoral and corrupt"
That immortality and corruption exist in the
society, which it takes no measures to remove,
l understand my friend 10 admit. That the
society is wholly depraved, and sunk to the
lowest depths Of corruption, has not been af-
frmed. That the Friends are anti-.emper-
ance, war sustaining and proslayery, in the
sense in which d. b. d. uses these terms, !
did not intend to assert; for lie will not, if /
understand him, allow them to be applicable
to any but such as are in heart and profess
sion, as well as in practice, the supporters of
drunkenness, war and slavery. / care but
little about names; and will not attempt to
justify the above, particularly so, as | do not
r~ecollect to have used them, as applicable 10
Friends, with the exception of the word
"pro-slavery," and that in but one instance.
and ] am willing to take that back, and in
sert in its place, ''anti-abolition,' which d.
B. Davis himself uses in speaking of a re-
commended minister in the society, and
which to my mind conveys about the same
idea as the other. And as l do not charge
the society with being pro-slavery according
TO his understanding of the word, / will not
Of course make any objections to the argu-
ments which he uses to prove that it is not
proslavery in this sense.
l stated in my communication to Salem
Monthly Meeting, that many members of the
society, ''vote for Shareholders, and uphold a
proslavery, war-makiug, %piratical government,
and still retain their standing. 1t was not as
serted that the deliberate intention of these
persons was, to uphold slavery, and war, and
piracy, nor is it asserted here; but | ask B..
B. D. if the act does not support slavery? A
majority perhaps of the voting members of
the society, at the last presidential election,
voted for Henry Clay or James X. Polk. B.
3. D., | am sure, will admit that this was a
pro-slavery, war-sustaining act, whatever may
have been the motives which prompted it,
His assertion that those who vote, generally
vote against slavery, cannot be true in fact,
however much they may imagine that they
are doing God service by it. ] Judge no ones
motive. 1t is the actions of the society of
Friends, and not the intentions of its mem
bors, Of which have all along been speak
ing.
agree with my friend that all the acts Of
the society are not opposed to the anti-slvery
enterprize-and that many of them are in OPP
position to slavery. Butare we to infer from
this that the society is not liable to the char
ges brought against it! The man who after
being convicted of sheep-stealing, proved to
the court, that though he had in some cases
stolen sheep, yet he had in many instances
passed by large locks without molesting
them, and that he had on some Of these occa-
sions, sdeclared his dissent from those Of
his companions, who he saw were determin-
ed to steal Is submitting" however to their
course when he saw that the 'harnony Of So
ciety" required it) 1ogs nevertheless pronounced
a thief! Certainly, such a charge was very
much out of place, if my friends logic be
sound. True, the man had stolen a few
sheep; but these few bore no comparison to
the number which he did no! steal. If the
stealing of a dozen sheep made him a thief,
much more did his refusal to steal all the 9TH
er sheep in the world prove him an honest
man! To be serious, this principle Of balanc-
i q accounts, in morals, is, in my opinion er-
roneous. B. B. D. hopes ! keep a fairer ac-
count in my shop than l do with the society
Of Friends. If a man cheats me again and
again in dealing, / cannot give him credit, G.
ven IN my shop, for honesty, even though he
may often deal with me in an u~nexception-
able manner.
B.. B. D. denies that l. T. Hopper and the
Green Plain Friends were disowned for their
antl-slavery principles. l reply that they
were disowned for their actions in behalf of
the down trodden and oppressed. Will he
deny thisl What did l. T. Hopper do, that
was wrong? Was he too jealous! did he go
too fart Wherein does my friend condemn
him2 Did Green Plain Friends do any thing
that was not necessarily anii-slavery in dis
claiming against the course of G. f. White!
Will friend Davis point out their errorl Does
he believe they were disowned for any faultl
] have not space at present to give the facts
connected with these disownments, and if /
had it would be unnecessary, as they are al