Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1849-12-01
salem, Ohio, December 4, Is49.
Rev. Z. Smiths Address.


Rev. K. Smith delivered an address in the
Allegheny Conference, held in October last,
which, if we may judge from its tone and spirit,
he seems to have regarded as an effectual rcfu-
tation of the positions and arguments of the
Disunionists-or as he prefers to call them-the
Comeouters.
His propositions are:
LIST. The Constitution of the United States is
not pro-slavery.
I'd. If it is, the Comeoutcrs are as deeply in
volved in the damnation Of sustaining slavery
as the Stay-inncrs arc.
3D.. If the Constitution of the United States
and the Government it authorizes, were as pro-
slavery as the Comc-outers say, yet Christians
may rightfully and innocently remain in the
Government and give it their sanction.
In defence of his first proposition Mr.. Smith
offers no new argument but merely r~eitcrates
the assertions of Goodcll and Spooner that
Slavery has no legal existence in the United
States,-that it never had a legal existence in
the Colonies prior to the revolution orif it had
that the Judicial Tribunals of England effected
its death and that finally, admitting Slavery
to be legal in the States, the United States Con-
s%titution gives it no support.
These positions of Spooner and Goodcll have
again and again been fairly met, examined and
rcfuted, as well by Liberty mon, Free Sellers,
Wings and Democrats, as by Disunionists.-
The Free Soil party, as a party, entirely rcpu-
dates them. Nineteen-twenticths of all the OPP
ponents of Slavery in the Nation, of whatever
party, admit and believe that the Constitution
requires the return of the fugitive slave, and in
several other respects gives countenancc and
support to the system of Slavery as it exists in
the States. Let the remaining twentieth read
and weigh fairly and candidly the arguments of
DIR. Baily, VIM. Elder, Wendell Philips, and
VIM. 1. Bowditch, before receiving as conclusive
those of Spooncr, Goodell and Smith, and their
number will be still further reduced.
Mr.. Smith charges the disunionists with pub
fishing "garbled extracts" from the Madison
papers. This statement is a falsehood and it
is only by supposing him moro ignorant of the
subject he was discussing than any man ought
to be under such circumstances, that we can
suppose him honest in making it. Tn extracts
referred to, contain everything found IN the Mad
ison papers touching those clauses supposed to
give countenance to MISREPRESENTATION, ital-
&c, and all. We will give the charge, however,
in Mr.. Smiths own words:
The come-outersh have published garbled ex-
Tracts from the Madison papers, which they
think prove the Constitution Pro-Slavery. But
they have one extract which is on the lett side.
| Oh but if'S a aoOlpr II sparns that - snryi-
tude" was about to be employed in the Consti-
tuition, but was objected to and struck out for
the reason that it denoted the condition of a
slave-while service was inserted, because it ex-
pressed the obligation of a freeman.
Now, l ask whether a provision thus worded,
and for these reasons, can be fairly construed as
a trap to catch slaves-themsclves being judges
Perhaps, as the Rev. Gentleman was himself
about to misrepresent these papers, it was natu-
raj he should try to direct attention away from
his own garbling and unfairness. From what
he says about the words Z" servitude and "ser-
vice." any one ~upacquainted with the facts,
would infer, that in the clause requiring the de-
livery of persons held to "~service or labor" the
word service had been substituted for scrvitude
This was by no means the case. The substitution
referred to was made in Art. i, Sec. 2, of tho
Constitution. The phrase those bound to SER
vice for a term of years." was originally draft
ed "those bound to servitude," &c. The Mad.
ison papers, as well as all other testimony rcla-
ting to the matter, clearly show that the clause
requiring the giving up of f~ugitives from "ser-
vice or labor" was inteded to refer to runaway
slaves. And Mr.. Madison himself declared
in the Virginia Convention, called to ratify the
Constitution, that "this clause tcas expressly IN
serted to enable the o,oners Of Slaves to reclaim
Mem"i Yet Mr.. Smith in view Of the Madi-
son papers goes on to declare, that he does moi
believe the article referred to was ever intended
by the trainers to refer to Slaves And asserts
that such an application of It'll ga pcrvcrsion o
its meaning and a prostitution of its design"
The Rev. Gentlemen seems to have an aston
Iishing faculty of believing without evidence, o.
rather against evidence. Had we this power t.
the extent which he seems to possess it, w
might perhaps be able to believe him honest il
his assertion.
In defence of his second proposition Mr.. Smith
aiiirms-That the payment of postage, taxes
and duties, involves just the same countenancC
and support of the United States Government
that voting does; and hence he concludes that
come-outers, who pay these taxes, &c., are just
as guilty-supposing it wrong to support the
government-as though they also voted under
it.
To this-which is by no means a new argu.
mcnt-we reply, that if it is wrong to sanction
and sustain the United States Constitution and
Government, then the fact-if it be one-that
VIC fall short ofour duty concerning this matter il
some respects, is no reason why we should vio-
late it in all. There are few persons-if any
living, who carry out in all their relations the
principles of the purest morality. Shall We