Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1860-11-03

W.T. Coddlng, aud put up with Mr.. Beckwith, one
OF 'he most respectable and Influential men Of the
city. No one knew, beforehand. ,of his coming.
and there could, therefore, be no previous prepar.
atoms to take him. Tho cars were all said TO be
ut Horizon; hence there was supposed to be no
speedy means Of conveyance there. Mr.. TAYLOR,
che deputy Marshal, it was understood, had ad.
Tsed against the attempt to re-arrest him at Rip
on, and had declined to have anything to do with
IT. MRS. Beckwith, who knew him we'll, as
sured my brother that he was favorable to liberty,
and sho did not think he would turn kiduapper if
he knew he could be successful. As the Wide-G-
wakes were coming to wait on Mr.. Coddiug to tho
meeting, and as Mrs. Beckwith wished to 20 in
season to get a good seat, she, at the suggestion of
her husband, proposed 70 my brother to walk with
her ard her daughter to the church, before the
Wide-AwUkes came, lie asked if he should take
his gun with him. They all said no; there was
no danger. Thus assured is it strange that he
should consider himself safe in that community 7
After the meeting his company thought it not
best to wait for the marching of the Wide Awakes,
MS they would not form till after the meeting had
dismissed, and so they proceeded home, and had
nearly reached the house when two stout men
slept up from behind and seized him bl both arms,
between the elbows and shoulders, so that he had
no chance to draw either revolver or bowie knife f:
1t wasdark, no moon, and he could not see them d;
he did resist all in his power, and kept them sharp.
ly engaged for some time, and tore down, as the
marshals say, twenty feet of picket fence to which
he chung as they dragged him away and thrust
him into tho wagon. And this you call 'roturn-
ing at tae request Of Deputy Marshal Taylor
Now you may say be would not have been arrest
ed if he had not gone to Berlin, for it is easy to
forsee events after they occur, but l submit if, in
all The circumstances, he had not reason to suppose
himself safe from arrest that night, and whether
nc is deserving of the severe censure you pass
upon him while you have none to bestOw upon his
kidnappers,
Sd. To the first part Of your third charge-that
his indiscrctions have challenged a re-arrest oil
the lime-I answer it is not true. You were the
first to publish the falsehood-caught up and pub
lished by most Of The press Of the State-that at
the first meeting at Ripon my brother defed the
marshals present, and dared them try to take him.
lie neither saw them nor knew that a marshal was
present until the attempt was made to arrest him,
and at no time has he ever dared the marshals to
arrest him, or in any way challenged their atten-
tions. To the question why he did not correct the
mistatement, he replied that the disposition to mis-
represent add malign him was epidemic and must
have its run, that while he was correcting one
false statement the presa would start a dozen more.
For weeks he kept his place of abode concealed
lie has declined to speak when called on at public
meetings, has never proposed a meeting although
frequently requested to do SO, and those meetings
which he has addressed, or been urged to address,
were not Of his own seeking but we're gotten up
by friends who wished, and had a right to hear
him. lie had kept quiet and sought to avoid pub
licity, holding that the spinal weakness of many
Republicans would be cured by Lincoln's election.
To the third part Of your third tharge-that he is
now reaping the fruits OF his own fOlly-I answer
the same charge might have been brought against
all the opponents of d~espotism who have been i'm
prisoned for Liberty the world over. Had my
brother never opposed the Fugitive Slave Act, or
had he been willing to acknowledge it to be law
as you do in the article concerning him, or asked
pardon for refusing obedience to it, he, doubtless,
might be released. But all the concessions to
Liberty wrung from the unwilling hands of Des-
potism have been brought about by just such re-
sistance a, he has made, and by such suffering as
he is now OK experiencing. Such men were fools in
the eyes Of the prudent of their own generation,
lat posterity has always reversed their judgment.
and done justice to the memory Of those who dared
and suffered for Liberty.
Allow me a few words further on topics sug-
gested by your article 1t is not sufficient that my
brother is imprisoned and treated like a brute
treated as no prisoner condemned for murder or
the yilest Of crimes is ever treated in this country
-CorbicGcn to see o friend, a book, a paper, or to
know anything Of the world, mere than the dead.
Not only are you careful net to express any posi-
tive regret at the event, but you say "if the rear
rest 10 to be regretted, republicans have no concern
or responsibility about it; it is his business, not
theirs he should have left the country, as we
told Linn to he should not have allowed himself
to be taken, his folly and imprudence in this, and
more particularly in another instance. have put
him without the pale of Republican sympathy"
This is the sum and substance of your statement;
this is the way you attempt to shuttle OH yourself
and the Republicans Of Wisconsin all responsible
~ for The great outrage upon his right and the
right Of a sovereign State, which they suffer TO he
committe with im2unity before their eyes. The
priest and the Leyite who passed by the Samaritan
fallen among thieves, wounded and half dead, had
a far better cause for their course, than you have
for thus delivering over my brother uncared for
and uucompassioned to the tender mercies Of slave
catching Judges, Marshsls and jailOrs, for the Sam
a:itan was the natural enemy of the Jews, between
whom there we're no dealings and no intercourse.
The common business, the common c%ivilties of life
were not interchanged between them, but the Re-
publican party is pledged, as it never has been to
any other principle, to defend my brothers. rights
to Liberty against the unconstitutional judgment
under which be is now suffering.
The Republican Legislature Of 1859 (see House
Journal for March, 1852 took up this specific case
after the decision of the Supreme Court at Wash
ing;on upon il, and passed resolutions denouncing
their decision in this case as leading to a complete
dospO.ism, asserting in the strongest terms the
Anatr;nn of QLntas Rinhts in nnnnsitinn 10 the as.