Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1854-11-24
abe @aiIp sSpp.
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER "a, 1854.

Rev. Orville Dewey, ID, D., lectured before
the Mercantile Library Association, in Boston,
last Monday evening. After speaking Of our
invincible repugnance, at the North, to the
slave-systen, and saying that rather than be-
ieve it will be perpetual, he would believethat
Continent itself would sink, engulphed in the
ocean deeps. DR.. Dewey went on to defend
himself against the imputation Of sentiment,
which he had been charged with uttering.
when lecturing before the Association on a
previous occasion, to the effect, that he would
see his own mother sent into slavery, under
the Fugitive Slave law, sooner than that the
Union should be dissolved. We do not see
that he helps the matter whit, by his
explanation; for the only mistake or misrep-
resentation that he pretends was made, was
the substitution of the word "mother" for
" BROTHER which, he affirms, was the word
he used. As matter of mere taste, perhaps
the correction is a slight improvement; as a
matter Of principle, it is none. Mr.. Dewey
adds 81 .ab oFa
Gentlemen, 1 hope you viii pardon this
allusion to myself. 1t is almost forced from
me by the circumstance, that the last time |
addressed you, l gave utteranee to the senti-
which has been SO perseveringly misrep-
resented (which sentiment was expressed in
these words Casting in my LOT with the At
rican man, applying no argument TO him which
would not bring home to myself, said
would coAsent'-for / did not speak of send
ing anybody into slavery would consent
fhof ~ lrnf 1aarr otvu
into slavery-ten times rather would go my
self, than that this Union should be rent in
pieces for me or mine, and | believe you all
will feel. that if could have saved the Union
from being rent in pieces by becoming slave,
no bosom in all this continent, or the world,
would have been filed with such JOY as
mine"
This whole matter, the original declaration,
as well as the explanation, presents strange
perversion of sentiment and principle, on the
part of the reverend lecturer. What differ
ence did it make, except as a matter of tastes
whether he said his mother, his brother, his
son,--and both the latter he admits he did say
himself, or any other persona The Union
that would require either, is not worth saving,
but had better instantly perish, than be saved
by such sacrifice, for if it requires such
perversion of right and justice, there is no
safety for any one, under it. Nor dove think
the lecturer helped the matter any by the
pseudo-patriotic offer of himself, as victim
to the patriarchal institution. So far as he is
concerned himself, per Sc, he has, perhaps, the
right to offer himself as a sacrifice, but he has
no right to subject his posterity, or any other
human being, to slavery, to save this Union.
or for any other purpose whatever. DIR. Dew
ey's infirmity of principle, his want of appre-
0 alton Of the just and true led HIM to COM
NIT sad blunder and having discovered his
mistake, be attempts to explain it away, but
only makes himself ridiculous by the attempt,
The best thing the DR.. could have done, would
have been, frankly to admit that he had said a
foolish thing, or else to keep still, and let the
matter be forgotten as soon as possible.
In relation to the latter part of the ques-
ton, above made, we may say that, as to the
Doctors joy in becoming slave under any
circumstances, we do not believe word of
it; but, if it is true, then it is only the more
disgraceful to him.