Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1858-07-17
Communications.


least attempted to embody common sense, | con,
tinue my communications to the Bugle, moved
thereto chiefly by the thought that some things are
urgently needed to be said, that | fear no one else
will say.
Our anti,slavery meetings continue with unaba.
ted interest, and applications for us to hold them
in surrounding neigbborhoods are numerous, al.
though it is well understood that doctrines will be
taught the most radically revolutionary. We claim
that on the question Ct human freedom, from ,he
necessity Of the case this ration is divided into but
two parties. One of these, the anti,slavery party,
is composed Of the saves themselves, and the dis
iranch,sed aJolitionists, whatever be their color or
sex. This party is entirely free from all y%olunta.
ry, and in a great measure, if not entirely, free
from involuntary political support of Slavery
The great pro slavery party is composed of the
several factions, calling themselves Democrats,
Republicans and Americans. However else they
may differ, these factions all agree to give to sla
very all the support which the constitution of the
United States requires of them to give.
We charge that it is by and through the instru.
mentality Of the Federal Government alone that
the slaves are held in bondage and hence it fol.
lows, that every man, no matter what his profess
ions may be, who holds office, or votes under the
contederacy, is practically a slave holder, and in
ours all the responsibility and guilt which that
relation, simply as such, involves. We teach that
the position Of the people of the non slave owning
states, who support the government of the
United States, is not the less potential in
support Of slavery because the power they ex.
erciSe is indirect in its operation, partially con.
cealed. analogous to a masked battery. And
that individuals are none the less accountable for
the guilt ana crime they commit. We charge up,
on the people of Ohio, who assemble with us, the
guilt Of Kidnapping, by their agents. the fugitive
slave, when he attempts by flight instead of VIC.
lence to obtain bis freedom, and OF depressing
those who in defiance of ubiquitous laws. extend TO
him the commonest Offices Of humanity and chris.
tan charity. We accuse them of disfrancbisinp
the colored man of Ohio-of refusing him equal
educational priyileges-of robbing him by taxa,
ton in support of white raupers and refusing
him an equal share in the benefits of the moor
house.
TO these statements of the actual relations which
the voting population sustain toward the negro
race, the people listen e%argerly, enquiringE, as if
more than half persuaded to believe. cfasion-
ally the members of pro'slavery churcnsn and
political organizations, always howeverauty cling
for themselves an anti slavery characiof t6s4ser.
take in hearty fellowship, to save the vS6is 1.1iob
seem to be IN danger of being Withdraw from
the political arena. But in doing this eTacitly
admit the truth of every doctrine which we teach
by passing them without reply, and in some in.
stances by admissions which necessarily substan-
tiate them. Instead Of showing that we err, in
charging upon them the guilt Ct slaveLolding, and
OF depressing the free man Of color. they endeav.
or to change the issue, by charging US with incon-
sistency, in a particular wholly different, seeming.
y hoping thereby to distract the attention of the
audience, and withdraw it from a contemp latiun
OF the individual accountability Of each.
BY imputing language to us which we do not
employ by enormously charging that we claim
to be entirely consistent, and perfect, anti.slavery.
wise, they undertake to show we are inconsistent in
:he use of the products of slave labor. Suppose
we should make the claim of consistency which
they mistakenly charge upon us, who are thew,
who rebuke us? Are they those who relic.
iousIy abstain from the use of slave grown pro.
ducts? They make no such pretension. They
acknowledge the impossibility of living in ciyiliz.
cd society, and carrying oct the idea and that thew
d" not attempt it. Now suppose one of these apos.
ties of consistency to encounter n com mon
drunkard, and attempt to arouse in him .
sense OF the criminality of his conducr. The err
ring one, having adopted the philosophy Of his
teacher, would naturally ask him, "Do you chew
tobacco !" To the reply of yes, he would saw
behold your Inconsistency | and with reason ex.
pect 1t to close the mouth of the monitor if honest
and possessed of any confidence in his own NH,
~losophy.
And the same plea would servo the thief or
any other criminal, until the door would be com.
pletely closed against all effort at moral reform
and no one would be permitted to rebuke sin in
his %neighbor, while conscious of any imperfection
in himself. This is so obvious there seems sniff
Gent warrant for assuming that this question of
free labor has been thrust into our meetings IN
distract attention, and cripple the anti.,laverv
movement rather than from any desire to promote
the cause of reform.
All conscientious adherence, by the individual
to principle commands respect, even though we
may believe his conclusions to be drawn frou,
premises which are incorrect. To him who Ia
lieves that abstinence from slave grown n,od,oo
is an anti slavery instrumentality, and who rrac.
HaRZ
tically teaches the duty of abstinence to reliovo
himself of the guilt of its support, | can Listen
with respect and attention if not with roveronoo
But when the argument is introduced into our
meetings. and urged by those who make no nrA.
tension of conscientious adherence to princinls in
tho matter themselves, il savors more Of tho or,,
OF the demagogue than OF the spirit of the re,
former. 1t Is earnestly hoped that some of our
r. .
friends whose antislavery efforts in times past
have been too manifest to admit of question, NAV
yet see this matter in its true light, and if thew
cannot get their own consent to help us, will a.,
least refrain from the attempt to hinder. We in.
vite them to the discussion of all questions unon
which we practically differ. Either the positions
we assume as above stated are false, and we pre,t.
ly mistaken in the direction we have given our
labors, or they are true, and our philosophy of 40.