Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1851-12-20
NO. ii.
From the Liberator.
THE STORY OF THE DOGS.
coxconD, N. H., Nov. 20, 1861.

perform an ant-savery mission in Ohio, stu
pid and scurrilous story was going the round
Of the newspapers throughout the country,
particularly the religious journals,) represent
ing that had committed very sacreligious
act, in baptising a number of dogs, and adj.
mitting them to the church. I supposed the
story, like the thousand other ISLANDERS which
have been circulated about the friends of the
slave, would have its day, las you know every
dog must,) and die natural death. II has
been so, ] believe, except in a single case, and
that unworthy Of note, only as there is now in
volved the name Of most respectable gentle
man, a STAKEHOLDER, in Richmond, Virginia
At the meeting where the famous dog sto-
ry' originated, this stakeholder was present, and
took some part in the discussions, demeaning
himself in The most courteous and manly man
ner, although uttering what VIC abolitionists re-
gard as very wild, as well as wicked sentiments
1t was on account of his gcntlemanly bear.
ing towards me, both in the meeting and out,
that addressed him the note afterwards, on.
closing it in letter which my friend JAMES n.
BUFPuM Cat whose house / was then visiting
with my famly,l was writing him on some 9th.
CT. r.busincss. had seen the strange story in no
ono can tell how many papers, and my friend
Buffum and myself thought it would be mat.
ter of some interest TO know how il would be
regarded by a candid stakeholder.
Hence the correspondence between myself
and Mr. JONES.
The only instance when or where l have
made any use of it, was when one of tho rclir.
ious papers. after being convinced that had
been grossly outraged in the affair, then charg-
ed the origin of the miserable story to "a STARE.
holder present l Immediately addressed a
brief note to that journal, reseWing the name Of
M. Jones from the unjust charge.
Such is the only notice have ever taken of
the most unjust and wicked outrage ever per-
petrated against me; and one of the most vile
and wicked l have ever seen perpctra.cd against
man by his fellow. And such would have been
tho only notice ever should have taken of it,
only that Mr. JoNEs now calls upon me to pub
lish his letter. l regret this, for his sake for
having been Influenced and miscd by the rep.
reservations made to him by persons unknown
to me, he has since caused the following to be
published in one OF the Massachusetts papers,
Ito whom sent do not know,) which, as will
be seen, is not altogether in keeping with his
letter to met
RIcuNoND, Va, Nov. 10, 1851.
DEAN Sin:
/ have this moment received your favor of
the 7th instant, and you will not wonder that
its contents caused me great surprise. 1 did
write letter to Mr.. PARKEn PILLsnuRY in re-
lation to one he wrote me about the Doc Story.
A copy of that letter have mislaid, but you
may rely upon it that it has not been fairly rep
resented, if it is made to say that denied sin
gle statement contained in The Salem Register car
ly in July, giving an account of the Danvers
meeting. AS proof, l now call on Mr.. PILLS
BURY to publish my letter, &C., sc.
Now have not represented or misreprcscnt-
ed Mr.. Jones letter to me at ALL except in the
case already mentioned; and then it was alluded
20 wholly in his own behalf, and for his own
benefit. and with the most kind and friendly
feelings towards him. II he disclams my
statements in that letter, and confcsses himself
the author of the wrong done me or accessory
to it, then let him be prepared to meet the re-
sponsibilty. have surely never thus charged
him. But here is his letter, which he calls on
me to publish:-
RIcnSSxD, Aug. 6, 1851.
Mn. PARKER PILLsDURY:
DEAR SR-I regret that my absence from
town, for some days past, prevented me from
receiving and Of course answering your note OF
the 3lst ult. before
will most checrfuliy give you, as you desire
it, my understanding or THE ILLUSTRATIONS
USED by YOU, in admitting dogs into the church,
&C., SC.
understood you as ridiculing the idea Of ad-
mitting slaves into the church, while they were
held as BRUrEs on cHATTELs. Bur DID not UN.
DBRsTAND YOU AS YOU HAVE BEEN REPREsRNTEr
IN SOME oE THE PAPERS.
l gave you my own understanding of the
matter (unsolicitcd,) in letter from this city
to the NeU York Journal Of Commcyrc, and pub
lshed in that paper Il think) on tho goth o.
July, to which l refer you.
Now, do not let me be misunderstood.
condemn entirely, as strongly as any one, your
modo Of argument, rdiculc, and misundcr
standing (if NOT misrepresentation Of the slave
question:; yet would do you no wrong. 1 an
satisfied that your mode of treating the subjco
is calculated to do much harm, and especially
10 those whom you are endeavoring to benefit
You will labor under great mistake in suppo
sing that slaves are treated as 'brutes,' or evei
as chat;els.' know what your reply to tn
word 'chaHer will be, but, nevertheless, I know
the slaves arc not treated as you allcgc. But
cannot, of eopSsc. 90 into the argument of