Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1860-05-05
TALK IN THE SOUTH.

rience while in attendance upon the Democratic
Convention
[ had a long conversation With on Alabama ire-
eater, q very good humored, sincere sort Of gentle
man. lie gave a good deal Of information az to
the duty Of the North in the present ALARMING
crisis The South, he said, was upon its knees,
begging the North for God Almighty's sake to let
her alone, but could not occupy that posture
much longer. l ventured the suggestion that it
was news to me if the South was in q very humil.
iating attitude. l had thought she was standing
SO perpendicularly that she leaned the other way.
Then he explained to me the condition Of things,
and his heart seemed to ache with emotion when
communicating the dreadful wrongs which the
South had 10 long and patiently borno, and which
she could not by any possibility upon Gods earth
continue to endure any more forever. He almost
excited my sympa;hies by the overwhelming pic
ture of the distress and forbearance Of the South,
under the insults aud aggressions of the domineer-
ing North. You men Of the North must stand up
together. They must stand up for the equal
rights Of the South. They must throttle the mon.
ster of fanaticism at home. l stated that l believ-
ed in letting the question of Slavery in the States
severely alone; Of allowing the people Of the Ter
ritories to settle the Slavery question for them
selves, without Congressional Interference. That
| was in favor of obeyins a Fugitive Slave law
and carrying out, us l understood them, the com
promises Of the Constitution. l was in favor also
Of a better understanding between the people oil
the North and the South-perfectly free trade and
freedom of Intercourse between them. l believed
in law and peace, and was against the follies OF
i'm practicable agitation. Now what was |, as o
citizen Of Ohio, holding these conservative views to
do My Interlocutor said | muet aid in casting
out fana,icism, and to do that l must bold no inter-
course with Niger thieves, give them no %counten-
ance socially or politically, and rally the conserva-
tive forces of the country against item. Stealing
was stealing; niger stealing was the worst soft
OF stealing. 1t was a great deal worse than horse
stealing. Now, Southern gentlemen did not as
s%ociate with horse thieves; Northern men must
not associate with niger thieves. There was the
question in q NUTSHELL. But the niger thieves, ]
remarked, comprised a very small proportion Of the
population Of the North. His remark would indi.
cate tina: he believed them to be 10 the majority,
lie insisted upon it, that the Northern people gen
orally sympathized with the thieves. A young
Southerner from South Carolina, AS ardent as a
Southern sun could make him. endorsed every
remark of my friend with emphasis, and was i'm
mensely gratifed with the success of the analo-
gies drawn between horse stealing and niger
stealing. lie considered that irresistible, and one
Of the most admirably clear and compact srgu-
ments ever made. l assented to the force with
which the case was put, but presumed to indicate
the possibility Of the existence Of honest men, whC
did not believe slavery the best thing that thu
contact of the races of men had produced. Peopl'
might believe slavery to be wrong, and yet not b,
radical. It was very difficult to obtain even
qualified assent to this proposition. On iuquir.
as to what was the test of Northern soundness o
u principle on the slavery question, l discovered j
u to be an eagerness to return runaway slaves t
i their masters, a solic:tude on the subject of catch
J ing negroes, and q willingness to give the exten
o sion of slavery over the territories and lands ye
g to be conquered, all the aid and comfort to be dc
& sired from a Government active in the service, an
an acquiescing public sentiment. Slavery mus
e have free couIse to run and be glorifed; and a
who placed straws in it's way, were guilty
constructive treason and should suffer. l sal
that from the best information l could Obtain
such q line of distinction as this doctrine woul
draw between sound and unsound men, woul
place a vast majority Of the Democratic party
the North on the unsound side, and herd the
with the Freesoilors. ! was now subjected to Il
process Of proving that a Democrat could not be
Freesoiler. The thing was impossible and a6sur
Why, God bless your soul what is Governmel
for? To protect property to be sure. PrOtecti(
ie of property is the end of Government. Gre
O. heavens, tax property and then not protect
NJ Slaves were property. and the Shareholders mu
r., have the protection Of Government. The Dem
in cratic party was based upon the idea Of carryiI
lis out the fundamental principles Of Government.
IL Its seminal idea was affordiDg protection to Pre-
ay erty. Consequently a Democrat could not be
Id Freesoi!er, for q Freesoiler was against The p
m lection Of property by Government. ! was oil
to ged to suggest that | had understood that the id
ey of a Democratic Government was the protection
his human rights-the vindisation Of the rights
dr. mao, and that the protection Of property was 8
1t ondary to this. l was getting upon delic'
be- ground here, however, and being somewhat sba
IL y interrogated-the phrase rights Of man havi
zen a reasonable sound disposed Of this part of
u subject by a g%littering generality or two, capa
ION like all the National Demo cratic platforms, of
icn ing construed two or three ways. The CONVEX
ed ton turned on the growth of the Southern Stat
TO and the question of intercourse between the No
ian and South. | inquired what my inteIlocut
inc thought would be the effect upon Missouri, X
Mr. lucky, Maryland, and the other Northern 81
up States, If they should become free States. Lee
ISL out the question Of the justice Of slavery, {
led take a look at it from the dollar and cent point
mr. view. The response was that those States, X
lucky & Co., would increase in material veal
In but that the effect would be disastrous upon
cal North. She would suffer terrible losses from
raj emigration of NAL farmers and mechanics.
'M | asked, why not by a liberal policy toward n
Oh lhern mechanics, draw this emigration, and
.ec- the power and wealth it would give to the ex
hr. lency Of the peculiar institution ? Why did
ooi the whole South do this! Why suffer the So
The by a restrictive policy, to fall behind the NORTH
can material Development, when it could Obtain
ma full share Of the European emigration; which