Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1856-04-26
FRANCIS P. BLAIR.

The National Era in reply to the charge of the
papers that Francis p. Blair is a STAKEHOLDER has
the following statemen
1t may he proper to notice the attacks of a few
Anti-Slayery papers on Francis 2. Blair, of Mary
land, who was called to preside at the Pitts burgh
Convention. He is q mere stakeholder, they say,
and this fact shows the true character of the
Republican cause. Besides, he sustains this cause,
as a remedy for the agitation of the Question of
Slavery! DO they expect n man reared amidst
slaveholding institutions to take precisely the
same views that they are accustomed to ? Is
it not much for q stakeholder to separate him
self from his caste, to incur obluquy and pro-
%scription, by taking upon Southern soil a posi-
ton OF open antagonism to the cherished policy
of that caste-to the policy 10y which it seeks to
perpetuate and increase its power 7 Would rot
every reasonable man ut the North rejoice, if all
Shareholders would proclaim boldly thai, re gard
ing Slavery a great evil, n source of discord, at
war with the main objects Of the Union, they will
no longer seek to extend it, but unite with the
Free States i'll concentrating the Territories of the
United States TO Freedom and Free Labor Men
of the North might differ from them on the moral
question, on the question of their personal respon-
sibilities to the system, but would this abate one
jot or title Of the admiration such a declaration
would awaken I? Why not, then, award full credit
to Mr.. Blair for taking this manly position
lie is q man advanced in life, in easy circum-
stances, highly esteemed by all who know him,
without ambitious purposes. The confidential
friend of General Jackson, one ofthe ablest editors,
in his day, Of the Democratic Party, lie had retired
from political life, and might have enjoyed, in his
declining years, the undated respect of a Party
in whose service he had won reputation. But
when, in 1913, that party seemed to be fully COM
mitted to the policy of Slavery Propagandism, he
so Tar emerged from his retirement, rs to give his
support to the nomination of Martin Van Buren,
intended, as we all know, to battle the Propaganda,
lnnl Y1,aA Nla Iolaua1 ~
Liberty. Since then, his sympathies have uniform
ly been on the side of those who have been on the
side of Freedom and now, when an opportunity
is once more presented to strike a blow against a
Despotism which he regards as inimical to the
Union, he dees not hesitate to enrol himself in
support of a Movement which numbers among
its advocates such men rs Seward, Chase, Hale,
and Sumner--names used by demagogues to
inHame the most truculent prejudices of Slave
holders.
Such n man deserves high respect ond confidence.
Let tn use disposed 10 criticise him, ask themselves
the question, "Placed in similar circumstances,
would we have done so bravely as he has done2"
As to his slaveholding, these are the facts, so
far as we can gather them. There is not a slave,
so called, on his place, who has no, been purchased
at his own solicitation, or ut the request of benev-
client persons, to save him from being sent to the
Southern Market or to prevent a family from being
broken up. The money is advanced-the man or
"phh i'o NV NilN Va IL -ttbi w
prevent all risk, the freedom of every one of them
is secured, by will, in airy contingency, and not
only freedom, but provision for a homestead.
Now, whatever may be thought by Anti-Slavery
men as to the abstract question concerning tins
course OF action on the part OF Mr.. Blair, no man
with flesh in his heart, whatever his theory OF
morals, will deem him a fit subject for denun.
citation.
This statement of facts makes it apparent. that
NJ Dl,;, :, - Io,ovo1o,t Eool;,r ond n,,,;,J o,oo
sition to Slavery, in advance of his brother slave.
holders in the country, and so far as he is right he
should receive the respect of the good. But il
docs not disprove the charge of his being n slave
holder, nor does it deny the statement Of Mr.. B
himself AT Pittsburgh, that he trusted to RepuD
licanism to quiet the agitation of the Slavery
question. Nor does it relieve the Republican
party from Just liability to the charge Of disregard
ing the interests of the Slave, when it sets up Mr.
Blair with these declarations on his lips, rs the
repre- entative of its principles. The Era very
adroitly suggests that those disposed to ''criticis'
him should ask hemselves-"Placed i'll similar
circumstances would we have done so bravely a.
he has done?" Perhaps not. But what then
1t does not prove Mr.. Blairs fitness to lead in al
p anti-slavcry movement-Nor disprove the propri
g ETY. of criticiSing him or the Republican party
, We recollect that on one occasion, some time since
+ the Era, in justification Of itself for criticisinl
some good men declared with emphatic distinct
ness, that "an angel from Hearen iras not to /,
trusted in a false position" That's precisely GU
opinion. An opinion which universal observation
fully sustains. And Mr.. Blair, while he hold
the false position of legal master and owner O
human beings, is not to be trusted as a leader il
o an nnti-slavery-or even an anti 'slavery-extensior
warfare. Hence too we cannot trust the Repub
lican party while it acknowledges the rightfu
political existence of Slavery, and the Constitu
tional obligation to let it alone, however high on
respect for the general character of many of it
= members, or however thoroughly We may be con
u WINGED of their good intention in occupying a falls
position.