Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1853-04-02

right TO ask Mr.. Mann to be moro careful, in
future, to express exactly what he does mean.
But granting Mr.. Mann spoke those passages
only in his Congressional legislative, political
capacity, they prove exactly what charged
My original language was
The same speech contains tho usual dopre-
catory assertions, that Free Sellers have no
wish to interfere With slavery in the States !;
that they consent to let slavery remain where
it is If he means that he, Horace MANN, a
moral and accountable being, consents to let
slavery remain where it is, all the rest of his
speech is sound and fury, signifying nothing
II he means that he, HoRAcB MANN'as poiin-
tician and party man. consents TO that, but else
where and otherwise, will do his best TO abolish
the " li-comprehonding wickedress Of slavery
in which every wrong and every crime has its
natural home" then he should have plainly
said so. Otherwise his disclsimor is an unwor-
thy trick, which could have deceived nc one.-
JIc must have known that all the South care
for is the Gction, not in what capacity tho deed
is done
did not say Joshua II. Giddings, Charles
Sumner or Horace Mann had no wish to in
terfefe, &C., but these gentlemen As Fms
SoILBRs, i.e., acting in their Congressional, leg
. . ieihNNtf lhhl NhpuCltls AUu tnUkeu lur-
ther, that Mr.. Mann was not explicit in letting
his hearers know in what capacity these hum
bling and crippling words were said, and how
far they bouud him. He thinks he has been
sufficiently explicit, and refers the reader to his
whole volume. So do land chcerfuly abide
the verdict Of any one who will read it with
care. But mark no no,o confesses that he docs
hold himself bound, as a CoNoREssIoSAL LRGIs-
LAToR not TO interfere eiM The subject Of siareyy
IN DC States, and SUCH 'coHsents TO let sidrery
remain phere IL is This l consider the great
weakness and mistake Of the Free Soil party
The Constitution, as it stands, gives no power
to interfere, directly, with slavery in the states
oxcepet in j. q. Adams's opinion, when some
crisis in war shall make it necessary. The
opinion Of so eminent a statesman, as able
judge of Constitutional law as we have ever
had, is reason enough why an antislavcry leg
isla,or should never assert, in unqualified terms,
that we havo no right to interfere with slavery
in the States. Lot US hold on with tenacious
grasp, and keep constantly familiar, every, even
the slightest claim we have to such an intcrlcr-
encc.
But, in excusing himself for his official oath,
Air. Mann says, Il do not swear to support the
Constitution in any such sense as forbids my
doing al can to alter it. In that office, have
better means Of changing it. Now, how is the
Constitution to be sltoredi BY Congregational
legislation. Congress proposes amendments,
and submits them, for ratification, to the States.
This right draws after it the political right to
'agtate the question Of slavery in the States
which Mr.. Mann so carefully repudiates. AT
the balios box, IN political conventions, in Dir.
Mann's place in Congress, man can 'agitatc'
to have the President chosen for li.e. to abolish
the war-powers of Congress, to have women
vote, to abolish slavery in the States. The
whole question of slavery in the States is open,
therefore, to every political man in the Union.
Mr.. Mann is young in the ant-slavery cause,
or he would have learned the distinction we
have always made between legislation and agi
tatioa. No one, except 0errit Smiths party,
has ever claimed the right to isgisiats on S,ste
slavery, while the Constitution remains as II is
But, in defiance Of Henry Clay, in 1899, and
|
claimed the right to 'sgitatc the question of
slavery in the States even on tho floor of Com
gress. in our political capacity, as well as in
every other To be sure, the attempt to alter
the Constitution, in this respect, is about as
hopeless as the purpose which some Free Soil
crs avow, of altering its three 6fths slave basis
Of representation. Both are equally hopeless.
But the right TO stir them is invaluable. Why,
then, this perpetual harping, by Free Soilers,
on the impossbility of their saying this and
the other thing, or avowing this OF the other
purpose, in their political capacity; l assert
that O, Free Soiler, no matter whero he stands
in Congress or out, can honorably make every
effort and ayow every purpose that an abolition
ist can, except the effort and the purpose to
disobcy the Constitution as il stands. That
glorious right Constitutes our peculiar privilege,
and Whenever any Free Soer uses it, he stamps
himself as foresworn. Up to that limit he can
60, and is bound to go; and whenever he fails
to do so, no fails in his duty to the slave
Most Of the political aboitionists, who talk so
much of political capacity" and under the
Constitution do it to propitiate public sent-
ment, knowing well enough all the while,
what their rights and what their desigus are
In this description, by no means include Mr..
Mann. Such men know that, even under the
present Constitution, were it possible Free Soil
T ers should ever get the rule, our Federal gov
eminent, by indirect influence, could in various
ways interfere with slavery in the States. Let
it establish the perfectly constitutional rule,
that no STAKEHOLDER should ever be appointed
to National office, and there are States where
such a course would kill slavery in Eve years.
Sagscious men of the party know this, and in
tend 10 adont II uhenavar roaa;hlo W. Al l