The weekly Ottumwa courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1857-1872, 1859-03-31

Ell. De they neltner mine nor yours
But beware .r-.
... -.g. To the Editor Of the Courier
SR:-I have begged of Mr.. Fowler for
light! light! light!!!
Let him hear my never ceasing cry,
Give me light, or else die"
In other words, if he cannot remove nv
present darkness on the "great question" :"
then, as Democrat, must cease to exist;
but hope to rise again, surrounded by a
purer atmosphere; canopied by brighter
political skies; and illumined and invisorated
by the lifs-giving rays of the Sun of Univer-
sal Freedom. . ..-.- .... ...
With your permission will continue a
statement Of my perplexities and darkness
ofmind. In the discussion to which have
heretofore alluded, Mr.. Taunton contended
that his opponent was bound to defend
Slavery as it exists here, in the light of the
Gospel, that being the only religion recog-
nized by us, and not by the worn out and
ahrogated civil code of Moses. But he
said if we test it by the law of Moses, that
law if applied in the South would complete
ly deprive the peculiar Institution of all
that gives it vitality worth contending for
the two portraits, mosaic servitude, and
Southern slavery are so little alike that we
can scarcely trace a relationship at all; thus
Mr.. Taunton quoted the 23d chapter of Deut-
eronomy, 18th verse, which forbids the
Jews to return to his master, servant who
had made his escape; and the people were
especially enjoined to suffer such fugitive to
live amongst them, wheresoever he might
choose. To this Mr. Fowler made no reply.
This quotation naturally presents two con-
siderations to the thinking mind: 1st. 1t is
not Just to appeal to the Mosaic law for
authority to hold men in bondage, and then
refuse to accept every amelorating feature Of
that code. Ifthe above provision was adop-
ted, our Fugitive law could not remain on
our statute books. 1t would abolish slavery
as it exists in our country eatirely and
speedily, for if the slave escaped into an ad-
joining township or village, he would be free
to remain. The very authority therefore,
to which the pro-slavery men appeal, would
destroy their idol at blow. And, End; this
quotation suggests the further fact that serv-
itude in the Mosaic times, approached very
nearly to roluntary labor. The very feeble
tenure by which the Jewish servant was
held, secured to him degree of kindness
and consideration which probably rendered
the occasion rare in which the servant took
upon himself to sunder the ties which held
him. In fact, Moses seems to have de-
signed that the relation Of master and SER
want should be kept up, rather by the law of
kindness, than by the law of force: and this
is evidently the reason why we so often find
the injunction to the Jews, 10 have one law
for the stranger and for themselves: to alb
stain foom ''rering or oppressins" the stran-
ger. If the bondmen of the nations around
them were not strangers" who were? To
this it may be replied, that the bondman
was located in the masters f.milv, and is
expected to remain at least some years; and
hence he cannot be called stranger" To
this I reply, the term stranger is used in
Scripture to signify one of another Nation,
without reference TO his condition, whether
bond or free. Thus the Jews were not to
oppress the stranger; and why nots 'Be-
cause We were strangers in the land Of
Egypt; We know the heart of the stranger" !"
Thus the Israelites were called strangers in
the land of Egypt, although they had lived
and served there four hundred years.
Again, Mr.. Taunton showed from Exodus
XXI. 26, that the loss Of an eye, or even a
tooth, by the violence of his master, entitled
the servant to his freedom. think, no re-
ply to this. Would the South accept this
provision, and engraft it on their slave codcg
Probably not. What single enactment is
there in the Scripture code of servitude that
would suit them? Probably not one.
We find that when an OK or an ass is lost
or strayed, the finder is enioined to return
them to the owner; but nothing is said OF
the lost or strayed servant. This is very
significant; it susg ssts two distinct ideas.
lst. A man is certainly of equal value
with an OK or an ass. Why then is not tn,
servant mentioned? Ishe not quite as like
] ly to "stray" as tn, animals mentioned.