Carroll free press. [volume] (Carrollton [Ohio]) 1834-1861, 1854-04-06
DOUGLAS, v.. THE CLERGY.


When the ps,itiOn Of he 800 slsrUmsn from New
England was received In The Senate O the u s. no small
amour, Of unessnsss prevailed accOgnt Of ibis OpPO
sition to the Nebraska Bin.
The senator IN remarking on the petition said
Ny only object is 10 cal The attention Of the
senate to the memorial 1t is presented after
the action Of the senate. as a protest against eur
action, against the aston in which, certainly,
two-thirds Of this body eoneurred. II protests
against our action, as being breach of faith,
as involving moral wrong, as destructive OF
all confidence, and as subjeetihg Us TO the
righteous Judgment Of the Almighty, Il is
presented, too, by denomination Of men call
ing themselves preachers Of the Gospel -
IL has been demonstrated in debate that there
is not particle Of truth in thesallegations Of a
breach Of faith or breach Of confidence.
| hold that this senate is as capable OF ludg-
ing whether our action involves moral turpi-
tude, whether it involves the subVersiOn Of NOR
ais whether il subjects us to the judgment Of the
Almighty, as are these political preachers, who
do not understand the question.
1t is evident that these men know not WI at
they are talking about ltis evident that they
ought to be rebuked, and rebuk ed to conhne
themselves TO the vocation, instead OF neglect
ING their holy religion, and violating its sacred
principles, and truth, and honor, and getting up
a document here which is offensive, and which
no gentleman can indorse without violating all
the rules of courtesy, propriety, and Of honor
There seems to be an attempt to file upon our
table offensive documents, SANDER upon SIAN
der, libel after libel, in order that the abolition
press may copy it as coming from the records
Of the senate, and go back and give it credit in
the country.
The memorial purpOrts TO speak in the name
Of the Almighty, and In that hame protests
against the bill. 1t tells Congress plainly that
the gates of heaven are closed, unless we'obey
the Jehsst of tie 0bolitiOnists. He had great
respect for clergymen and their calling. He
had no doubt but these memorialsts we're men
Of learning, intelligence, and responsibility;
but he was sure there could not be found,
throughout the country, any other body ct
men, Of equal number, who had more ignorance
upon this one subject upon which they now
protested. How many of them had ever read
The history Of the act Of 1920 Not one. How
many of them had ever read the history and
the votes of the northern states repudiating at
the time of the adoption of that very act 2
Not one. How many Of them had ever read
the votes and proceedings of the acts of $50?
Not one. Yet they profess to speak the will OF
God upon subject in relation to which they
are profoundly iSnorant-they speak OF the
sanctity of national engagements. Did any
one of these three thousand preachers tell their
people in 1850, when the Fugitive Slave law
was resisted by force, that it was their duty to
obey it on the ground that it was national en-
gagement of the Constitution of the United
States? Not one. Did they tell their people
that the senate did right in passing the act,
and in carrying out national engagement?-
Not one.
/ If it was part of the duty of these 5000
clergymeR to speak about the sanctity Of nation
al engagements, where were they in 1850,
when in Boston the law was openly resisted by
force? They were silent. But now, at the
bidding of the junta in Congress, they come
forward and arraign the senate of thu, United
States in the name of the Almighty. He cared
nothing personally for tins or any other insults
caused by the addresses Of abolition confeds-
rates.