Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1847-02-12

would say that we are always glad to receive
such communications as his. 1t is brief, to
the point, and gives no uncertain sound
EDEs.]
FRIENDS EDrroRs:
Permit ne through the columns Of your
paper to express my surprise and regret that
an article such as was published in last
weeks Bugle, over the signature Of VIM.
Hick, should find its way iotoa paper making
such high pretensions to morality and deceu-
cy as does the 2adi-S'aray Baelc. Thelow
tone Of the article throughout-ihe scurrilous,
%profane, and immoral language SO copiously
used in it, are seldom o%qualled oy The vilast
and most obscene polaicai paper or other pub.
l]icaiion in the land, or even by the - Gjo1li-
naJh priests" Of whom we read so much in
the Bugle; and yet that paper publishes it
under the PREDATORY remark that there may be
SOME things Objectionable in the article
Pray what is there in it not objectionable to
a moral and decent individual, if we except
The persons therein named D.?
Although unacquainted with the writer,
i: is my opinion he is not far from correct
when he says,
Look at Nict for a sample of(ooh," &c.
Had the article the slightest bearing upon
the A~nli-Slayery Reform, there would be
some excuse for its publications, hat, so far
as l am able to Judge, it has none, and is on
~ another evidence Of the bitter animosily of
The Disnnionists to every action Of church
members, whatever that action may be; and
| much doubt whether they would join with
the latter were they convinced that they were
using the most %eflectual means for the over
throw Of the agents Of the adversary of mems
souls, in the form Of shareholders, which is
far from being the case.
"NTith talents like his" SC.
What the individuals talents may be, !
know not, but he certainly manifesis no great
talent in the composition Of his pocfry, with
out the talent should consist Of condcnsiug
as much Immoral language into as small a
space as possible. | thought while reading
it that the editors had concluded to publish
the "q"aniity Of Rhyme on hand to which
they referred in theirnolice to correspondents
a short time since. The Anti-$lavev Bucle,
a week or two since, read 10 hbolitionists a
severe homiIy on the immortality Of attending
81 Aigger Concert," as it was pleased 10 call
it, the character of which, l apprehend, it
was entirely unacquainted with. 40, con-
sisiency! thou art Il Jewell ].
Salem, February l, 1917.
We know not who J. is, and should have
been glad had he SO far followed the EXAM
pie Of the writer he complains Of, as to write
over his own proper signature. 1t wounds
him to have any thing said against pro-slave-
ry r~evivals or "Nigger Concerts" and he is
unable to see that the former have any thing
TO do with slavery. The scurrilous, p%rofane,
and immoral tone Of the article throughout,
in his opinion, certainly renders it unfit for
the columns Of the Eugle. We may be mis-
taken, but as J. ventures to guess that we
would refuse to cooperate with church men,
bers in consistent anti-slavery action, We will
venture to surmise that he cares far less for
the character Of the Bugle, than he does for
modern REVEALS, and "Nigger Concerts;' -
and we cannot possibly be more mistaken
than he is, and suspect we are much nearer
the truth in our guess. We are not disposed
to vindicaie the character of the article in
qnestion-we stated in the first place that W
thought it somewhat objectioaable-but if il
is scurTilous, profdne, or immoral, it is nc
more SO than the language and actions of the
pro-slavery church and clergy ; and if the
picture is Objectionable in these respects, it is
because the artist has too closely copied the
original.-EDRs.]
TRIAL OF A SLAVE FOR MURDra.-A slave
named Richard was recently tried at Charles
ton for killing another slave named Maria
The slave was acquitted on the ground, a.
we infer from the account, that the blow!
struck by him and which resulted in thc
: death Of the victim, were inflicted by the di.
rection of his mistress. The Court held tha
wherever a slave in the presence and com
mand Of his owner committed an unlawlu
act, as murder or other crime, he was the
mere instrument of his owners cruelty, and
having no will of his own, could not be aine,
nable TO the punishment Of the law. In al
such cases The owner was to be regarded as
the guilty party, and upon him the vindica.
tory part of the law must fall. The mistress
is yet 10 be tried for killing Maria.-Iribune