Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1851-04-05
The Right Of Snfiragf.

many would gladly make use Of this right who
now refuse so to do, il in their opinion il in.
volvcd no inconsistent action.
Many believe that in voting under the Con-
stituton we obligato ourselves to support slave
ry, and were they convinced that no such com
pact was made, many such would gladly WELD
the ballot. The doctrine that an immoral obi
CATION is not binding, after being knowingly and
willingly sworn to- is untenable and meets with
but little appreciation. That the Constitution is
anii-slavery in character, as held by some, is re-
Jectcd as preposterous.
Shall anti. slavery men hold themselves aloof
from all participation in the government, or shall
they grapple with the enemy upon his own
ground, is the question which is now submitted
to them. 1t certainly bchoovcs us to investigate
this subject with candor
"Goverment derives its Just powers alone
from the governed" and in pursuance Of this
principle we are, with certain restrictions entit-
led to representation in the government This
is one Of the natural rights-onc of the ieois
non serpte of this Republic at least. 1t is uni
versally acknowledged to be so. 1t is as much
the right Of every qualified voter to vote. as it
is to breathe the air, enjoy his religious opin-
ions, or make will or contract. Any infringe
mcnt upon the right of suffrage then, is an in
vasion Of q natural right. 1t kind Of diress
or constraint, which is Of no binding obligation.
This We hold is dcmonstrable from principles of
common law, that it, while exercising legal
right, man Is constrained to act contrary to his
will, his acts arc not binding and may be avoid
cd. Thus Blackstono's Com, Book |, (l3O,)
If a man through fear of death or mayhum
is prevailed upon to execute a decd, or do any
other legal act these, though accompanied with
all the other requisite solcmnties, may be after
wards avoided, if forced upon him by a we'll
grounded apprehension of losing his life, or
even his limbs in case of his noncompliance.
And the same is q sufficient excuse for the COM
mission of many misdcmcanors." lie further
says fear of battery, or of having ones house
or goods destroyed, is no darcss, because in
these cases, should the threat be performed,
man may have satisfaction by recovering equiv
alcnt damages" The principle is plain, if there
be no means of redress the act is not obligatory.
The foundation of the argument is this we
hold 1t TO be q natural as well as legal right TO
vote; right about which there can be no ques-
ton. Any invasion of this right by statute or
constitution, which compels us to do that which
our wills reject, and which ia not absolutely ne
ccssary to the relation we sustain to the gov
ernmcnt, (for we may be required to surrender
certain Individual rights in voting, which the
act necessarily dcmands,) is a duress and not
binding. The rcquisition to support Slavery is
one of these innovations, for the very act of vot-
ing may be to strike a blow at the institution
There is no means of redress, and il will not be
claimed that Slavery is necessary to the machin-
cry of government. This then is a requirement
rejected by our wlls-H duress eonscienie0-a de-
mand of no binding force.
Again. Blackstonc's Com, Book 4, (2S) "a
ing from coApaision and unavoidable neces-
sity. These are a constraint upon the will,
whereby man is urged to do that which his
judgment disapprovcs and which it is to be
presumed, his will Gf left to tself) would re-
jcct. AS punishmcnts arc therefore only inHict-
cd for the abuse Of that free will, which God
has given to man, it is highly just and equitable
that man should be excused for those acts
which arc done through unavoidable force and
compulsion." If then, in tho exercise Of the
right of suffrage, we swear to support Slavery,
VIC do it through unavoidable necessity and COM
pllSion. The oath is therefore not obligatory.
1t is no contract. According to the foregoing
authority, Book (4i2,) it must be an "agrec-
ment, mutual bargain or convention" before it
can be contract.
The reader will not fail to perceive wide
difference between acknowledging the existence
of an immortality, swearing to support it as
such, and then rcfusring to be obligated by it,
and denying the obligation Gb initio. We deny
that in voting We necessarily obligate ourselves
to support Slavery at all, from reasons already
stated. If we do. it is by virtae of contract.
What then is the nature of that contract p
Blackstone, Book (444,) "The civilians hold
that in all contracts, either express or implied,
there must be something given in exchange,
something that is mutual or reciprocal. This
thing, which is the price or motive of the con-
tract We call tho consideration, and it must be
thing lawful in ITSELF"
Now il this be contract what do we give
and what do we get "in exchangei" We give
away our freedom-our freedom to vote with
out sanctoning this accursed institution-the
Slave to chains and calling tyranny-our coun-
try to infamy and crime. What do we get sin
exchange Reader, can you tell We see
the consideration is all on one side, and
one-sidcd contract is no contract.
Again, the consideration f" must be thing
lawful in itself, or else the contract is void."-
Is it "lawful in itself" to deprive man of
liberty, to make him the chattel of another p