Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1853-10-01
ANTI-SLAVERY BUGLE.
REPLY TO MR.. HOOVER.

knoUs that the Constitution gives the STAKEHOLDER
certain privileges Which enable him to capture his
slave in any State or Territory into which he may
have fed" And also further says, th6t IL will
not be denied that Horace Mann is ignorant of
what has been doing under the authority of the
Constitution" Friend Hoover, we think thy
grammar has destroyed thy meaning hero it takes
two negatives to be equal to ain Affirmative in gram
mar. However, if We are to interpret it as do
the Constitution, htIing as reads, we must dis
sent from it; for we think he does know something
Of what "hds been going ch," and the reason of its
"going on" too from his noble and mastery expo
sition of the vile plot, consumatcd alone by the
hncqualed duplicity Of northern dcmagogues in
their obedience to southern dictation and rule
Why Sir, Horace Mann speaks tcllihgly of the vile
purpose to which the Constitution has been subycr
ted to meet showing irresistably clear to us, AT
least, that the unparalleled crime Of American Sla
very had been carried In direct violation to the
organic Law Of the land. Sir, in direct violation
of what all alotiohists Mr.. Hoover and the rest
unite in declaring to the letter. word and therefore
the spirit of the Constitution, if words have
meaning 1t is needless to ask repeated admis
sion Of this premisis. In this, the worl'ng Of the
instrument, all must agree. In this, all har. agreed
In the sentence in connexion with the above, you
say, in substance, what has been done under the
Constitution, may be done and will likely be, again.
''uness il be arrested by the controlling power of
public sentiment" Very true. lrhis is what we
hll are so busily engaged to avoid. But public
sentiment has been generated in the halls of Con
grcss and may be found terrible to dcspots in the
bnotbox.
A little further down you say, The Constitution
Is somewhat si'mlIar to the Bible, tlais means Just
that public sentiment makes mean" Very true,
Ssc agree with you again exactly. As we have just
proven that its words and meaning had to be de-
stroycd, to make it pro-sidrey we now aHagrecd
that it, land for my part, the Bible with it) is like
nose of wax, that it may be changed to suit the
parties! Very well. But What is to become Of
your premuninitionY
And what Of Garrsonianism? Do Garrisonians
claim to labor to elevate to mould public sentiment
to direct it in the right channel, certainly to
shape 1t to their own lkng(?) Then why twist this
nose of wax to suit the stakeholder? Why, do tell
me, why can you thus be led to throw around the
tyrant the cloak of the law? Why acknowledge
his legal claim to his victim? and yet complain OF
his using it.
Mr. Hoover, | think our conclusion is an una.
voidabe one from your premunition laid down.
And now let me say in conclusion and in candor
that while / can readily imagine an induccment
for tyrants to gain this position to thus controver
bven the organic law of the land to serve their de
sign, and aid in tyranical purposes,-I say while
can even in a measure palate for the STAKEHOLDER
in a degree owing to his society, education anC
training, my powers utterly fail rrc, WHOM | woulC
account for those who kHO,cni se0lous friends
the slave wasting the finest talent the best Of pre-
cious time and money, biggotodly maintaining wha
is than labor lost in the fnce of all truth
discretion against the slave for the tyrant, and il
face of their own every day avowals. did no
think to mention, and here let us for n momen
try the form of this most powerful of all agencies
'puJlic sentiment () upon the Supreme Court wer'
ours that sentiment As this is one of the points
In which we cordially agree, land we have in mos
or quito all points, | believe,) then shall We no
agree upon the inevitable and noble results tina
that would follow,-the Constitution restored, ,-it
ample provisions for liberty secured without spo
Or blemish, the Stare set free!
You point to Art. lst Sec 3D., Art. LIST sec. 9th
Art 4th I'd of the Constitution, which you sa,
sis pro-slavery the stakeholder could ask. -
But you have said, al means just phdt public sea,
tin,ent makes mean! Then it is a nullity.
But have carefully referred to those articles, an,
can't possibly find the word slave, slavery, negroes
stakeholder or any other thing that slavery
If give words their legitimate meaning, in thi
ease we do in all others. cannot find a singl
word that conflicts with the liberty of the slave
Nor could possibly gain the idea by reading thd
that document, that slavery ever had had an exis
tence under its auspices Future generations can
not learn it when it be abolished. And now, Nh
Iioofer, coGid your Your only answer is no, No
Then what are abolitionists at war with Do yo,
answer, the 'intention of IFS .frdmeys! Sir, thi
fabrication was treated in my reply to your first
and has been used up by Gerrit Smith aud Spooner
and extnguished by Frederic Douglass aud IIorac
Mann. A word in reply to your last question an,
I will close, as have extended my letter too lon,
already. You ask, "Will friend Copeland sa,
by what authority the United States troops wer
sent down into Virginia to quell Nat Turner's in
surrection ?" Answer: because Che Constitution
gives the power to quell imsmrectiOns! Was ther
not slave in the country, nevertheless, would no
this clause have been proper Were the slaves
Assert their rights, and were the Executive tru
abolitonist=were he true man, toould he not tai
The side of the slareP Let MS take the matter t
ourselves. Would you not, Mr.. Hoover, as pr
sate citizeni DO you not claim he stakeholder an
not The slaee. as the iasWgeate Most certainly yo
do! Then, my dear Sir, would you not do the sam