The weekly Mississippian. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1859-1864, 1859-10-05

and become unfaithfal. Being thus at liberty
to become an unfathful slave, he may at any
hour Of the night, indicate that want OF hdei-
ity, by taking an axe and killing me while IN
unconscious repose. Were he to do 50 he
would use and employ natural agencies anu
natural powers. Hence, nature would a'u anu
assist him. Hence, he would act IN accor-
dance with nature, for he could not IL ne
wished, act othcrwise-that is to say-act
sinner naturally. He is only at liberty to use
natural powers or liberties In other words,
he is only naturally free. He is only naturally
free, because, morally, he is bound-norally,
he is extraordinarily, he is directed to
protect me and guard me from injury.
Our Declaration of Independence uttered
the truth when it declared all men to be free
| naturally, but does not seem to have perceived
what natural freedom means In my judg-
ment, natural freedom means freedom from civil
and moral overnment-freedom from those
rules that regulate the social relations of life.
Hence, all men naturally, are free agents, that
is to say-one man has as much natural free
dom. to obey or disobey Gods moral govern
ment as another, for they all have this liberty
naturally. Bat they do not have it morally,
because moral government means the contrary
of liberty-means obligation.
Obligation and liberty are correlative terms
mean the opposite Of each other-stand in
contrast.
Mr.. Editor, one of the objects had in view
when l undertook, with your appreciation, to
write out @ theory of slavery-write out
grounds of defense on which, in morals, it
reposes, was that have now in manuscript a
work on Moral Philosophy, which | hope to
be able to put to the press some time this
coming winter or following summer
In treating morals could not escape the
question of slavery. | was thus forced into
it, and had to meet it. And having taken the
ground that all men are naturally free agents,
had either to accord this freedom to the At
rican or to deny it.
| saw at once that if l denied the free agen-
cy of the slave l at once denied his moral ac-
countability, his virtue, fidelity, responsibility,
| &C., &c.
IT. on the other hand, ! conceded his free
agency, could not then say it was moral
free agency, for moral law, implies an obliged
agency. Any one can see that an obliged
agency is not a free one. Twas, therefore,
compelled to yield to the doctrine of the
text, viz: that free agency means liberty to be
either good or bad Hence, l concluded if l
am free to be bad, my slave must have that
freedom al0. If / am free to disobey Gods
moral government, my slave must have that
freedom also If | am not free to disobey
Gods moral government, l cannot be free to
obey it, because freedom of choice demands
an alternative choice that is-two things to
choose-two or more things and not one thing
not one course Of conduct but two or more
courses of action. Hence, every man is free,
because he can choose between two courses
of action namely the good and the bad
the moral and the immoral-the religious and
the irreligious.
What does free agency mean if it does not
mean liberty to obey or disobey moral rules of
conduct
This liberty must be called natural for
it is not moral Much of it is intensely im-
moral
ALI that natural liberty of action used
and employed in disobeying the moral govern
ment of God is Icentious-immoral-b
liberty, and this accords with the opinion Of
Blackstone, who calls it "a wild and savage
liberty" a liberty as he says, inconsistent with
all harmonious social intercourse.
This is good way to shut the mouths of the
Abolitionists. Their chief argument is that
slavery abridges the natural liberty of man.
Does not Blackstone plainly admit that the
British laws limit and restrain the natural
liberty of man? Certainly.
Indeed, strenuously maintain that if sla-
very did not abridge the natural liberty of the
slave it could not, by any possibility, be
anuannsu~anssnzA institutions God could
not sanction it and preserve the integrity of
his character.
ANY institution which does not limit and
restrain the natural liberty of man must, if
Revelation be true, have the Devil for its au-
thor, for it cannot have a less benevolent
origin.
1t is obviously, because mans natural free
dom to do as he pleases, is abridged and reg
ulated by civil rules, and by Gods moral gov
eminent, that those civil and moral institu-
tons are hostile to the wishes and authority
of the Prince of Demons. He would prefer
nature to be unrestrained, for thereby would
come, moral and physical prostitution.
Iwould be glad, Mr.. Editor, if you would
open your columns to any attack on these
three positions have taken on the subject of
slavery. My object is to present the truth
which am persuaded have done, but if
there be any infrmity in my reasoning, l
would like to have it pointed out, by friend or
foe, by STAKEHOLDER or abolitionist
In my former articles the reader will please
read succumb for account, illuminate for illu-
inmate, sway for survey, ruin for view, agri-
culturist for agriculture, grasses for grapes,
pains for powers, governed for government
were we for how we social for sacred, &c. l
will re-state my second position in another
number
w. S. GRAYS0N.
BENTON, Miss.