Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1853-03-05

/ Ocbb W bhe NhO NOhh0 Noet ohA
execute Office under its influence. For exam
pie Mr.. Garrison or Wendell Phillips, will per-
sist in doing nothing but ialk-talk talk
How harmless their efforts compared with
those of J. Z. Hale, who besides his talk, is to
! be elected President in 1856, and will then ex-
ecute this constitution with his pro.slavery
view of il. Or the disunion papers, all Of
which have as he tells us, very feeble exist.
cncc and limited circulation, why should ho so
labor to set them right on this point, and dep
reciate them for differing with him upon it,
while he has no word of rebukc, "deprecaton"
or regret, but on the contrary is full Of cxulta-
ton, that the National Era crculatcs by the
tens of thousands, in advocacy Of the same
opinion. The argument therefore, Of right and
by their position belongs to the Free Soilers
and we shall not meddlc with it; but leave
them to settle IL with Vindex as best they may
only expressing the hope, that somehow, by
the constitution or in spite Of it, some way
shall be found for the overthrow of slavery.
And now for our trial, to set Nindcx right
before our readers. And in this we cannot do
better, than call to our aid, Vindex himself
We ask the reader to read the paragraph at
the head of this article and then read the fol-
lowing from Vindcx's essay. No. G.
We charged Vindex with proving to his
o,on satisfaction, that Disunionists were uurc-
asonable in maintaining, that there is no differ
enco to the slave, between his return by nation-
al or state authority, in case of escape"
Here is our authority. Vindcx says:
" 1t is cause of deep regret, that any of
the proicSsed friends OF The slave-nny " ho
really wish tO see him restored to freedom,
aud the enjoyment of equal rights with his
white brethren, in their iuordnate zeal 10
crminaIe the founders OF our government,
should cndeavOr 10 lnlate this us,rpaiion
OF power ou the part of Congress, and in.
Sist that he rendition clause, so called, IS
EQUALLY BAD, rtgW,t as q coalpaci beitceen
he .States as though 10 ,oere construed 10 rest ia
congress The porer 70 fegisdie jor The reciamd-
ton Of Jhg'hues. u they are so blinded by
The" nn~trrnte prejudice against he gorernmsni,
TnAT rnEr CAN SEE 40 DIFFERENCE, ii tpouM
seem a hopetss wo& 10 dHemPt 10 snlighicn
them"
a. We rot iplHd.l 800 making onr fr.t
.hstaa noe. o.. f.HeS .Huk us "unrea.
,a.s''e' e sfrnu- .a..ea l1 Inference TO-
Sac slave. vhvu power returns nun; V"tex
secs "a uatarig. difference, irJ nc think. tic
."an An' cannot see q. !, stupid beyond hope
ot eniisntcnment. lie continues:
"'What difference snys the dsunionis,,
to the slave, whether he is surrendered up,
H.. 7 = A
th- verdict ul Jury or the decision Ot
As though This ,ods The ques.
lion al issue"
The supersilious contempt with which Vim
dex thus disposes of the question. clearly JUS
titled US in saying, "ho is satisfied disunionists
are unreasonable" IN asking it. We need add
nothing in relation to our first charge. 1t is
fully sustained.
But VIC have word to say IN regard to the
pertinency of this question. 1t is Mc question
of abolitionists. Their question aud their oh
jcct, has reference to the slave and his emanci-
patton. In the estimation of Vindex, or of
others, who have point to maintain, it may
make difference whether the slave is returned
by national or state authority, but to the slave
it makes none, and to abolitionists it makes
none They would as soon condemn the state.
as the nation, for the injustice. A. soon con.
demn Vindex and the Homestead, for conced-
ing this wrong to the state, as Mason or Fill
more, for conceding it to the nation.
Our second charge was that he contended
that we should be satisfied to have slaves sent
back for the present, by state authority and
jury trial, in consideration of finally abolishing
slavery by some other means"
Says Vindcx:
Without conceding for one moment the
fairness and Justice OF The construction we
linve given to the clause" he the nDii-slavery
OF the fugitive clause y" we ad-
init thnt the masses, from Il long course of
erroneous inculcation, are not prepared 10
receive il. We loould therefore araii ourselves
of The benefits Of The doctrine whieh is noo
centrally reeeiued, and ,ohich consirues The said
clause 10 be compaci, simply bettOeen the states.
Then zee toould ask, and il IS The only question
that need be asked, would the facilities Tor re-
capture aud kidnapping be increased or di-
minished thereby? | answer, diminished.
No slate unpolluted by "Cushings," would
evei enact sucI II law as disgraced the con-
gress of 1850. The citizens of the free
states, would have full scope for their be-
nevolent impulses in aiding the flying fugi-
tive, with 10 fears of pains aud penalties
before their eyes, and il perhaps a victim
should fall into tho hands of his pursuers,
he would hive To satisfy twelve uuhribed
ireemen, that the human being claimed us
property, WINS horn contrary 10 the declara-
finn N InInnenunnra a. nNyp1 slnIf ha