The weekly Ottumwa courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1857-1872, 1859-07-07

lie would see the dodge, or he was too dull to
see it himself, or If he did see it, he had not
the moral courage to come squarely out and
brand you, also. Virtually, therefore, altho'
not officially. we are both read out of the
ranks of the "honorables," and we need not
be surprised ifyet the code of "Honor" is so
amended as to exclude all but shareholders
and their Jacks.
Among other "preliminaries, we find Mr..
F. speaking of "Mr. Taunton and his adher-
ents;" children of error, of course: and Of his
own party as the "friends of truth" This
is cool-would it not be well to let the pub
| lie Judge for themselves who are the sons of
| light? and who Of darkness? If all who
think that slavery is not Divine institution
| are "adherents' of Mr.. t., then he is one of
a mighty host. 1t is very certain that ex-
cepting about $50, 900 shareholders, and their
Jacks-some few in Russia, Brazil and Gu
ba-the whole population in this round globe
| are in the schedule Of the branded "friends
Of error" Even the personal and political
| friends of Mr.. I. do not all 60 with him, for
it was little remarkable that one Of those
friends, (Mr. Samuel Hurst,) strongly and
publicly advised him to take the subject up
in its political aspects; "for," said he, at
cannot be defended on moral and religious
grounds: it is not right we all knog it is
not right" This was very candid, but the
speaker must pay the penalty by being c'ass-
ed as an "adherent"
Now, like to see things called by their
appropriate names-why not have called
the one party "the friends Of freedom"
and the other the ''friends Of despotlsm ?"
These terms would have clearly defined the
true positions Of the parties. True, the lat
ter name is of the satanic stripe, but it is
fitting, and will stick; and by trying to var
nish the monster over by assuming the title
of friends Of truth" it is clear that those
"friends" are ashamed of their true colors
We are told that my letters are "personar'
and not respectful, TO this reply that
humbly asked for eight" and in lieu of get
ting it, | had the door rudely shut in my
face, and was saluted with the loving
names of "skulker aboltioniSt, milk k-and-
water democrat, infidel, and latter day Trim
| ity;" all which, when rendered into plain
English means ''liar." After obtaining the
| insertion Of such language in your paper,
by what right does Mr.. Fowler turn sharply
round and complain that the tone of my let
| ters are not 'respectful?" | say that few
men are so personal" or so wanting in ere
spect' to an opponent as this same Mr. Fow-
Ter. In the course of the discussion he Of
fered an insult to Mr.. Taunton so gross that
he (Mr. IT, declared he could continue the
subject no further, with Mr. F. as an oppo-
nent, without sinking every feeling of self
respect; and after Mr. F. was so far brought
to his knee rs to make an apology as public
ly as the insult was given, he is think, the
last man on earth who ought to raise any
question on the subject Of etiquette. For
this | may justly remind him of his own
words, "Oh consistency! what jewell"
Mr.. F., before entering into the general
question, lays down the proposition that
God is absolutely interchangeable in his mode
of operations; that any law which he may at
any time establish, he can never again re-
peal This think was generally understood
to be his views.
1t is truly a matter of wonder how man
after having been hushed into silence most
signally, on some given point, should repro
duce the same thing again, without noticing
the objections which have been raised against
it; and seemingly unconscious that he had
ever used it before.
As have shown in former letter that
Mr.. F amply exposed the error, and in that
letter added also some suggestions of my
own, showing that some things which were
divinely forbidden in olden times, are not
sinful now and that something's which were
Divinely permitted, nay ordered, are highly
sinful now and for the doing which, we in
flict severe penalties, even to the penalty Of
death-to all these proofs Mr. f. has offer
ed no reply. ask, is that the way to seek
for TRUTH"
To refresh his memory, / shall offer few
more proofs that God annuls as well as en-
acts; / do this, not because think slavery
has been enacted and annulled, but in order
to show to what absurd shifts pro-slavery is
driven.
In Deut. KILL The Jews are forbidden
to wear garment composed Of divers ma
terials, as woolen and linen." Now, if this
law WAS an expression of the Divine mind
revealed by Moses, then of course it was sim
ful to disobey it-if it was NOT, what are the
distinguishing marks by which he traces the
Divine will, in any portions Of the scriptures
pro-s'avery may quote3
To disobey the above quoted law, was Of
course at that time sinful, and according to
this theory it must be sinful no~. Query
Does he wear garments of the forbidden
kind? have seen him do so--is it sinful
| Again, the form of Government which
God gave to the Jews, was Theocracy, or
a government by himself through his proph-
t.k. "a n l. c. II A.