Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1858-02-20

VI uhN1s ht uhC OlltONCu u NV ~ W
be paid into the township treasury for township
purposes.
We can hardly conceive Of anything more inhu.
man, tyranical and wicked than the provisions Of
this bill, and yet our Legislators seriously propose
to adopt it, and most probably they will do it.
Commenting upon it the State Journal truly
says at does not provide what is to be done with
the negro or mulatto if he has not money enough
to pay his fines, but we presume that he is to be
sent to Jail, else the provision is on absurdity.-
Nor does it tell how he is to earn money to pay his
fines after he is put in Jail. Nor does it tell US
how the negro or mulatto is to leave the State
without money. How his fare is to be paid, or
how he is to live. Should be travel on foot and
beg his way, he would be taken up as a vagrant,
and as nobody dare hire him to labor, he would be
likely to starve; besides, he would be liable to be
prosecuted in every township through which he
dragged his weary feet. This bill ought to be cal.
led a bill to establish slavery in Ohio and to legis.
late the souls Of white men out of their bodies"
Aye, truly, men white or black who yet carry
souls in their bodies, will oppose such internal
legislation as this.
From the Journal we also copy the following:
Mr.. KiNcAID's NEGRO BiLL.-The Salesman of
this morning makes a lame and impotent apology
for the bill introduced by Senator Kincaid, to prac.
tically enslave the colOred population of Ohio, and
to prevent the emigration of others into this State
In its abstract Of the bill. it fails to present to its
readers its most attrocious features. 1t gives rs a
reason for the introduction Of the bill, that there
are some two thousand negroes and mulattoes in
the counties of Brown and Clermont, the far great
er portion of them are settled in two camps in
Brown, a more ~shiftless, thoughtless. worthless
.ar,lottan - hnrIt, 30 10 CNna1 h.a al ~ n,-on
river itself" This then is the rhetoric for the bill,
Let us see what the facts are. By the census OF
1850, we learn that Brown county had a white
population Of 20. 466, and a colored population Of
S63, ~Clermont county had a white population of
30,043, and a colored population of 4l2. Total
white population in the two counties, 56,5l2.-
Total colored population, ! 215.
However much the editor of the Statesman OF
the honorable Senator may be troubled with the
"negrophobia," we see nothing in these facts
greatly to alarm either Of them. there being over
fifty white persons to one c0lored. Now, then, lei
us contrast these two counties with Franklin coun
ty. According to the same census, we had il
Franklin county in 1850, a white population o
Al ,302, being IL. 900 less than in the counties o.
Brown and Clermont; and we had at the same TINT
a colored population of 1907, or 332 more than il
the two counties represented by Mr.. Kincaid.-
These facts show the shallowness OF the States
mans argument. No man in Franklin want,
: such a bill passed. and if the Senator will advocat,
i a bill to instruct the colored people Of his countie
$ in useful learning, and will urge the people h
represents to treat them as though they were hu
man beings having inalicnable rights, he will
c greatly improve their character, and make then
useful citizens.
n Mr., VALLANpINcnAM the democratic gentleman
If who is now cohteeting the seat in Congress Of Nj
= Lewis D. Campbell of the Butler District in .hi
Sto,a eeap,s IN b.va q hard TINA of ~ auan .roon
IS his own friends, the slave drivers. The vote b.
e tween these gentlemen was a very close one. Nj
d Vallandingham claims that the dozen or two
votes by which Mr.. Campbell obtained his oertii
cate, were cast by negroes, and are therefore ILL
r gal and claims the place as the genuine represer
If tative of the true white mans party" To I.
his qualifications as a Democratic legislator ft
slavery above all question, Mr.. Vallandinghan
" having been charged with voting in the Ohio Lei
ID ~islaturs for the repeal of the black laws Of our sta
n ten years since, published in the Washingtc
Union a denial of this grave offence, declarir
, that it was made his duty to engineer this b
to its defeat" and that although he voted on
for the bill. it was with a view to securing its I
: consideration and thus its ultimate defeat.
With a cruelty which certainly must have be,
- learned on the plantation, Mr.. Gilmer, a Nor
Carolina STAKEHOLDER, replies to Mr.. Vallandingha,
From this rejoinder we make au extract. 1t sho,
conclusively that northern services have a ha
time of it, and that like all other reptiles, tn
lis must be content not only to crawl in the presen
ed of their superiors, but must also meekly perm
of their masters to put their feet upon their nee
IN. and spit upon them at pleasure, whenever t
no wigglings do not suit their fancy. Mr.. Gilm
res asks:
ire What is the law, which he admits he voted
mt with the inten, to reconsider 1t was for a Ia
- repeating another law of long standing one 81
ton of which is as follows!
" 'SEcTIoN 4. That no black or mulatto pers
" or persons shall hereafter be permitted to be swo
or or give evidence, in any court of record,
elsewhere, in this State, in any cause dependi
m. OF matters of controversy, where either party
- the same is a white person ; or in any pr osecuti
eS' which shall be instituted in behalf OF this Sta
cts against any white person."
XIV He excuses his vote in favor of repeating t
ans above section. on the ground that he desired
vote 10 be in It's .taror, that he might reconsid,
io de also avs he voted thirteen times, upon vario
in motions, all intended, directly. or indirectly,
ill, en,barrass or defeat the bill; but he does 1
div state how he voted on these various motions.
By referring to the journal, page $50, it will
u" seen that Mr.. Kaler moved to postpone the b
EVIL until the first Monday of December, Ia peri
ecu beyond the session)-yeas 80, nays 38-Mr. V
low landingham voting may" | would subj
20, whether this was not a strange vote for one rea
W opposed to the bill, aud particularly for the me
Ia Der upon whom was derOlced The business Of en-
by neering is defeat" On page 45l of the jour
rest it appears Mr.. Bloomhuff moved to postpone
dos bill inde6nitely-yeas 33, nays 34-Mr. Vail
digham voting may" His vote on the occasi
the would have killed the bill. In this pote / su5n
lity respectfully, that Mr., Vallandingham was remi
our and especially so for one who was engineer to
un feat the bill, For this vote. the ingenuity Of N
cannot find room for the excuse that he CAV,
oe with any view to reconsider or TO defeat. On
ard same page ash he voted yea" on ordering
D or bill to be engrossed, which was a vote in favor
b a the repeal. and a vote he admits to be a test VI
On journal, page 523. the question being Ssh
the the bill pass I" yeas "a, nays, 80, Mr.. Vallandi
hen ham voting yea" This vote, he says, was gi,
with a view to reconsider. On this motion !
tho IIibberd demanded the previous question v
u lnA ~