Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1849-11-10
Fruits Of The Anti-Slarcry Agitation.
From the Boston Republican.

To decide whether the Anti-slavcay agiia-
ton here atthe North has retarded or las
tened emancipation, and of course our duty
i'll relation to the whole subject, it is neces-
sary TO extend our view over the period of
past thirty years, and compare the feelings
and opinions both here and in the slave
States on the slavery question, then and now.
Has any change occurred in the views of
prominent men, and of the masses, on The
slave question, since 1890? If SO, as think
will be admitted on all hands, both South
and North, what is the primary or principal
cause which has wrought this change? Let
the facts answer.
In 1920, the Missouri controversy termi-
mated in favor of the slave power. The
North experienced, what on all hands was
considered, a Waterloo defeat. The contest
between slavery and freedom terminated
was abandoned on the part of the North, and
given up as a hopeless controversy. There
after, it was generally conceded, that the
slave power should have its own way in all
things appertaining to slavery. Not a syla-
bic of anti-slavery was-publicly uttered, from
one end of the country to the other. The
whole question for more than ten years, was
by tacit consent, left to the providence of
+ God, and the chapter of accidents, so far as
iiC INOIiH was COiCtlllttl. Ilt UODIl VI
slavery was considered fastened on the cotn-
try, past all doubt. This was the faith of the
nation till 1881, aye, and long after that
What is the prevailing hope now, of tie
lovers of freedom, and the prevailing fear of
the supporters of slavery ? | need not say
at this time no intelligent man at the North
doubts that slavery is doomed, and must ere
long he abolished nor is there any intelll-
gent slaveocrat at the South, whose absorb
ing fears do not point to the same result
" A n man thinketh so is he"-and as a ma
ton thinketh, so will its laws be. We know
the thought of the nation up to 1936-and
the signs of the present times leave but little
doubt what its thought now is, or soon will
be.
In 1881, emancipation was unthought Of
no ono advocated it,-and whatever eXpecta-
tons were entertained, had passed quietly
away and left no trace. How is it now p
Wing and Democrat, priest and politician,
tie doctors of divinity, and the model states
men of the entire North, claim to be detcs-
tors of slavery, and lovers of emancipation
and however hypocriticul may be the pre-.
tencc of many of these dignitaries, yet the
! tAct thai haAyse Claims are Nit farta@aAstA
state of the moral atmosphere. "Assume &
virtue if YOU have it not" is an old adagc
| hOi ny ~
Now, what has caused this revolution in
public sentiment-driven the two political
parties from their former positions, and bro't
into action a third party, which holds the ba-
lance of power, and places public men and
parties under a sufficient bond for good be-
havior? Are we indebted TO Henry Clay in
this matter, the author of the Missouri com
promise? The last we heard from him pre-
yious TO his recent letter to Richard Pmdell,
was in the United States Senate, where lac
emphaticaliy and explicitly declared his OPP
position TO any scheme of emancipation what
ever, either gradual or immediate. Nor has
the church or political parties been instru-
mental in causing this change in public sen
timent: but OH the contrary, politicians and
sectarians of every hue and grade, have uni
tormly striven to quell and put back this rls.
ing spirit of anti-slavery among the people
No-to none of these can honestly be laiC
the responsibility of the prevalence of al
anti-slayery feeling and action Throughout
J this land but to those impracticabie, outspo
} ken anti-slavery men women, who first raiseC
D the standard of immediate emancipation
the duty of the STAKEHOLDER, and the right o
the slave.
TO those d" gentlemen of ease" who max
: speeches in Fancuil Hall and the Taberna
: Gle; and mighty easy 10 doubt it was t
make speeches in the face OF furious mob,
t~llirsting for the speakers blood, aud unde
y the ban Of social degradation, as was til
case throughout the free States in lS3o an
1896. And the means were the unvarnishc
declaration, that slaveholding was sinful, an
shareholders aud abettors were culpable sill
70 ners.