Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1847-09-10
The Yearly Meeting.

of that body in relation to the Anii'Slavery
cause. The proceedings since that time, we
are sorry to say, have been far from encour-
aging. All things considered, we regard the
position at present of lhe Ohio Yearly Meet
ing, less favorable to the cause of the slave
than it has heretofore been.
As was stated last week, the Yearly Meet
ing treated the anti-slavery Friends OF Green
Plain and the pr"-slavery Friends of Indiana
alike; the mems meeting refused for the pre-
sent all correspondence with both parties, and
returned to them unopened their cpistles and
certificates. In the women's meeting com
munications from both bodies were read, but
no answer was returned to either. This gave
evidence of advancement; for the Yearly
Meeting had in former years with a partial
exception, in the case Of the meeting held at
Salem two years ago. remained in loving fell
lowship with Indiana Yearly Meeting, while
it uniformly rejected Green Plain, and on this
ground we last week reported some progress.
Formerly Ohio Yearly Meeting said that In
diana's pro-slavery was better than Green
Plains nti-slavery-now it says the one is
as bad, or as good, as the other.
In answering the Query relative to slavery,
the Society said, that Friends are careful
to bear a testimony against slavery, except
in the case of using the products of slave la
Dor" This is the common answer. Do the
anti-slavery members of the Yearly Meeting
believe it to be true? If they do, they have
testified falsely on various occasions, both
publicly and privately, VIXEN they have charg-
ed the Society with falling far short of its
duty TO the slave in many other particulars.
IF they do not believe it, they have shame
fully compromised their principles and suffer
ed what they believed to be false to 90 forth
as the voice Of the body, without protesting
against il, not one in ten Of the anti-slavery
members uttered a word relative to the ques-
ton, and those who spoke suffered themselves
in nearly every instance, TO he drawn away
from the consideration of the great subject,
10 discuss the -" loveliness," and necessity of
"charity and forbearance'' towards each eth
er! Thus it is. A member may be utterly
regardless of the interests of the suffering
slave-may use his political and moral inlu-
ence 10 crush the bondman, and all is well.
But to express decided opposition to slavery,
as though one meant what he said, and in
tended to carry out his convictions of duty
and right without concealment or compromise,
this is disorder, uncharitableness-this, the
objectionable sin in a Quaker meeting!
On the last day of the meeting, an Address
on slavery, reported by a Committee appoint
ed last year, was adopted and ordered to be
printed for circulation amongst Friends. OF
this address we must say that in our iudg-
ment it is far from being what we had a right
to expect and demand from a body having so
many AbolitIonists in its membership as o.
hio Yearly Meeting. If we mistake not, it
is decidedly more Objectionable than anything
which has been issued from the Society of
Friends in Ohio for some years past. Not
having a copy of the Address, we cannot give
its precise language. 1t states, very philo-
sophically, that the differences of opinion
which exist amongst Friends concerning the
anti-slavery question, are the necessary re-
suits of the different circumstances in which
persons have derived their information, and
intimates that the various conclusions at
which different Friends have arrived, were
unavoidable under the circumstances This
point being settled, charity and forhearance
are of course earnestly recommended. All
this will apply just as well in the case Of a
slave claimant in South Carolina, as Of a pro-
slavery Friend in Ohio. How could the slave
holder arrive at a different conclusion from
that TO which he has come! The circum-
stance" of not placing themselves in the con-
dition of the slaves-of not being willing to
spmpathize with the oppressed, is the great
difficulty which prevents shareholders and
their abettors both North and South from en-
gazing actively and zealously in the anti
slavery reform.
The Address goes on to state that those
Friends who, in many places, have refused
to open their meeting houses for anti-slavery
meetings, have been much misunderstood and
misrepresented that they have been charged
with a want of sympathy for the slave, when
the true reason for their refusal is that they
are opposed to the means used, and not to the
object sought after! Many Friends, it is sta
ted, think it wrong to join in the anti-slavery
movement, believing that they cannot do so
without giving countenance toa hireling min
istry. Thus the Address goes on covering
mp the wickedness of the Society, apologizing
for the shortcomings of its members. In
short it is a compromise, giving all parties
credit for sincerity and complaining of moth
ing, except a want of charity" and "kind-
ness" amongst Friends. A portion of the
Address is well enough. 1t exhorts Friends