Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1860-08-18

tion to the matter, which we have copied on cur
first pogo, and wish to call the attention Of our
readers to a few points therein presented.
While We have no disposition to say a single
word which would seem to detract from the honor
due Mr.. Giddings for what he has done in behalf
Of freedom, bis political nfinities have more than
once led him to place himself upon the side Of the
stakeholder. His efforts TO crush out the Liberty
party movement in order to secure the success Of
Henry Clay, and consendiug that such was the
dictate Of a wise ansi'slavery policy, is yet remem-
bered by the handful who sustained james G.
Birney. His defence Of Judge Gholson and advo-
cacy of his election to the supreme bench after he
had been stripped Of the character of slave eman-
cipator, aud stood convicted by overwhelming
proof of being a slave seller, is fresh in the minds
of all. And now we have a letter in which be
atten pts to whitewash the deeds Of Lincoln, and
by assertion rather than by proof, to establish for
him q reputation which be and his conservative
friends would be sorry to have fastened upon him.
Mr.. Giddiugs refers to the fact that Mr.. Lin
coin has avowed his belief in the principles Of the
Declaration Of Independence ! This amounts to
about as much as the avowal Of such belief ON the
part Of Stephen A. Douglas CT ninety'nine hun
dredths of all the politicians Of all parties in the
Northern States. A similar announcement was
made in regard to Judge Gholsou; and however
important Mr.. GidJings may consider il that a
Republican candidate has pronounced the Shib-
boleth of party, tho thinking portion of community
desire some better evidence of q mau's anti.slavery
character than a confession of political faith whose
formula is as meaningless as is the reading Of the
Declaration Of Independence at a 4th Of July NICE.
ting of political hypocrites. Mr.. Phillips, instead
Of con;enting himself with this, goes to the politi-
cal record Of Abraham Lincoln, to which his
friends had referred all e~nquirers who wished to
know where he stood. 1t would Of course be un
just to quote Paul the Prosecutor to show the
standing Of Paul the Apostle. But while we have
the testimony Of Mr.. Lincoln's friends, that on
the question Of slavery he is to-day where he was
twelve years since, neither Mr.. Giddings nor any
other person presents any proof Of his change; on
the contrary, Mr.. Lincoln has himself within two
years put forth a declaration Of sentiment which
directly contradicts some of the assertions in Mr..
Giddings' letter.
The items of history which Mr.. Giddings has
presented touching Mr.. Lincoln's action in rela-
tion to the Mexican war and the territorial organi-
cation Of California, Mr.. Palfrey's bill against
slavery in the District, his own bill in relation
70 it and Mr.. Colts bill against the slave trade,
are all interesting, and they possibly have a bear.
ing upon the point Mr.. Phillips made, but we
confess our inability to see it,
When one is called to pass judgment upon a
simple question of policy, i, is necessary to know
somewhat of the surrounding facts and circun-
stances bat when a bill is presented involving a
moral principle {, it needs not that its an,ecedents
be enquired into, or the question asked as to its
probable result unless the doctrine be FIRST adopted
that the end slrctiios .he means If the bill he
IN itself right or wrong, no one need &c beyond its
+ own re ord to decide its character. And what
ever may be the rule Of judgment applied BY
statesmen of all parties the people will insist up.
! on judging their representatives by the bills they
present, advocate, and vote fUr-all or either.
They so Judge Douglas and johnson, and Breckin-
ridge and Lanes and why should no: Lincoln and
llumlin DO tested by the same rule? 70 do other.
wise, removes judgment from the people. who are
} not presumed to be acquainted with all the sur
rounding facts and circumstances by which politi
clans seek to Justify themselves for the violation Of
principle. If Il momber votes against q Homestead
Bill, the fact that he did so is far more important
to his constituents than bis reasons for doing it.
If another votes to legalize slavery in Kansas for
two years, the fact that he voted for slavery, is not
destroyed 10y his Plea that he did SO in order to
=, obtain the power to afterward abolish the system
there. If yet another votes to establish a Fugitive
Slave Law in the District of Columbia, the deed
in itself is the same, no matter what ulterior o.
ject was in view.
The charge that Mr.. Phillips represents-
though unintentiOnally-the Fugitive Slave Law
proposed by Mr.. Lincoln as Deins the one now in
force elsewhere, will seem a little singular to any
one who remembers that Mr.. Phillips gives the
date of the bill as lS49, and it is fair to presume
that every body knows that the law of 80 was pass
ed The subsequent year. And besides, Mr.. Phil,
lips quotes the law proposed by LIucoln, and COM
pairing it with the one after adopted, says il is
'cOrSe than Mason's, How any one with all this
before him, can construe it into such a charge is
indeed marvellous. Mr., Giddings says the law of
'93 had become a dead letter. Perhaps so; and
this may have been the reason why in Mr.. Lin
coins bill the authorities of the District were
empowered and required to provide actiue and
efficient means to arrest and deliver up to thor
owners these fugitive slaves. And Mr.. Giddihgs
further says, that the power to pass a Congression-
al law for the recapturs OF either in the District or
States lis a usurpstion.' This may possibly be
true. What then shall we say. of Abraham Lin.
coin, who used the power in lS40, and in 1858 de
clared, the people of the Southern States are en-
titled to a Congressional fugitive slave law What
then shall we say of Joshua r. Giddings, who
a few years since voted for Dunn's bill, extending
the law of 80 over Kansas and Nebraska. Mr..
Giddings in branding such action as a usurpation,
proves his candidate and himself alike usurpers.
The bill proposed by Mr.. Lincoln in which is
included the Fugitive slave clause quoted by Mr..
Phillips can hardly with any show of ~propriety be
called a bill for the abolition of slavery in the
District of Columbia. 1t was a bill providing for
the gradual extinction of slavery there in the
event of certain contingency, which was about as