Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1853-09-10
REMARKS OF MIR. FOSTER.

Stephen Foster said the question was, shall we
~ men become part and parcel of a pro-slayery
Government, and help enact and execute the laws?
lie said no. lie would remark in the first place
that we had n great work to do, and few to do it,
We ought not to take work upon ourselves which
others can do. If il were not absolutely necessary
that We should aid in carrying on Improvements,
We shouIdJleavc them to other hands, that is if
could do it without dctriment to the cause. Could
We accomplish any good by political action? What
was the effect of the vote? 1t first to appoint
men to Office to write the statute books certain
laws. Well if people regarded their statute laws,
it was worth while 10 try to get the right kind of
legislation. But he would affirm that the law had
no binding force on the hearts and conscienccs of
the people. No matter what was the character of
the statutes, We had only one law in the country,
and that was written on the hearts Of men, Col
orcd men voted in 0bcrn in spite of the Constitu-
tion, Women might vote if they only had courage
enough To demand it in n body.
So with the fugitive slave law. Where the public
sentiment was in favor Of it, the slave is taken back,
but he could not be seized where it was not. In
Cincinnati hc is seized, but not in Salem If the
law were of any consequence, public opinion would
conform to it everywhere. In Boston, Sims was
taken in violation of Massachusetts, law had ho been
nWorcestcr the fugitive law would have been tram
pied under foot. What we wanted was a renovated
public sentiment, that would settle the whole ques-
ton Of law. Every official in the country was
not an executor of the law, but the degraded
tool of public opinion. Of what use to change
the law, then. lie knew it might be said that
the people had such respect for law that II
shaped public opinion. lie denied it. The Amer
lean people feared neither God or man. Why thcr
waste time in getting the law altered when it had
NO controlling influence after being changed? liC
said secondly that it was not only unnecessary Il
20 into politics but destructive to moral principle
The best party (the Free Soil proposed to deliver
up fugtiyes and put down instructions of slaves
Ii had not given an intimation to the contrary
Could wcinnocently join party which would aiC
Slavery to any extents lie would join a party t.
abolish the fugitive law if it would do no moro
but if it proposed to put down slave instructions
he would not think of it.
Another reason for not engaging in politica
action is that might remain free from suspicion
Of Interested motives. As soon as we began to ac
politically, it would be said We wanted Office
Voting never made an abolitonist. Separate polit
ical anti-slavcry action was fatal policy. We haC
more anti-slavery legislation before the Free Sol
party was formed than since.
Again, he had another objection to political &C
tion, and especially to Free Soil 1t was, that i
held itself ready to unite with either of the othe
parties provided II could share the spoils of Office
Such party could have moral power.
Another objection was, that its tendency was t.
mako Slavery popular and respectable. 1t tmust bc
made villainous before il can be put away. b,
voting we sent men to Congress to sit down witt
the yiest Of the human race, pirates and robbers
10 bind us and themselves to abide by laws whiel
they conformity shall make. What effect could thi
have upon the stakeholder? Wecould not do NOR
to sustain him in his position, except by joining
she Church with him. We should turn our back
upon him, and say he is villain and we canno
associate with him. And if we could not do
ourselves we should not send our Representative
to do il. We should treat the endorser in the sam
way as we do the principal. When we went to tn
ballot-box, we associate with those who neces
sarly villains, that is, if they understood their posi-
siton. IIc had rather stand as horsc-thicf at thu
great day of accounts, than as a Wing or Democrat
There was not Wing or Democrat in the house
who had not stolen his neighbor's child, yea, wht
bad not plundered hundred cradles since the