Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1848-02-04
CampbelliSm.

We this week conclude Alexander Camp
bells defence against James Robertson, hav-
ing given such part Of it as was necessary
to a correct understanding of his position as
defined by himself. We are unable to see
that it differs in any important particulars
from the version given by the Scottish Abo-
l%itionists, though the filling up and the col
oring is OF course somewhat unlike theirs.
He unhesitatingly admits that he is the de-
fender of slavery-of the relation Of master
and slave, and brings his version of the BIZ
Bile to prove that he is right. True, he does
not choose to nationalize the system he de-
tends, he will not call ii Greek slavery, nor
Roman slavery, nor yet American slavery;
but simply slavery-the noun without any
adjective. Believing that slavery is not OPP
posed to christianity, he of course sees moth
ing in the act of slaveholding which d~isqual-
ifes a man guilty of it from fellowship in
the christian church, but contends that il the
man in other respects be a christian, he should
be admitted although a slaveholder-a man
%stealer.
AS Alexander Campbell went to Scotland
proiessedly to preach the gospel, it was natu-
raj that the people of that country should de-
sire to know whether his ideas of the gospel
were derived from ST. Paul or St. Calhoun,
and when they found he pronounced as chris
tian a system of oppression that degrades
Christ's little ones, it was equally natural
they should desire TO make known TO their
friends what manner of man he was, even
though at the risk of interfering with his la
bors in behalf of"the gospel and the church,"
The Scottish abolitionists simply told the
truth when they posted him as a former slave
holder and the defender of menstealers and
he himself admits this 10 be so, if he is al
lowed to substitute for menstealers, the words,
christian shareholders, and permitted to go
into a learned argument, theological and met
aPhysical, to ~disprove what every one ofcom-
mon sense and common humanity knows to
be true-that a man who holds another as a
slave, steals that man, whether he processes
"N4" an" 'he suOu VI lit holueI vi INC
good Of the held.
5 Speaking of the Edinburg abolitionists, he
t very pathetically asks,
. elf sincere in their sympathy for the I'M
: fortunate slave, why unjust 10 me who have
ever been the friend of that slave? If they
, desire to weaken the plea Of the slave master
- and the man stealer, why encourage them by
= placing me upon their side 90
S Is that man the friend of the slave who
says that the relation between him and his
master, is a just and a christian relation q
The relation is predicated upon the idea thai
the slave is property, and as such may bt
held by a master. Those who have tried t.
d build up the relation have found that force i.
d necessary for its establishment-that kidnap
K ping is one of its prerequisites; and that af
ter it is established, whips, and gags, anC
thumb-screws, and branding irons, and vari
o GUS other implements Of bodily, aye, and o
n mental torture are necessary to continue il
S Common sense teaches that if the relation i
right, that which is necessary to establish
and continue the relation is also right. Wei
d NAV the slave exclaim as he looks upon AL
% exander Campbell, ''savs me from ssol
friends"
ir But why place him upon the side of tn,
mau-stealer! lie placed himseythere by pro
,r mitigating such infamous doctrines as he ha
been pouring into the willing car Of Ameyi