North Branch democrat. [volume] (Tunkhannock, Pa.) 1854-1867, 1863-10-07
COM MUNICATIONS.
Eor th- Democrat.
REv'D III. BRows>coMBE


M e DEAR SIX In ytar
very meek and gentleman, reply .t"mv sup-
gentlenauly one of prior date, you see
fit to raise personal Issue rather than t.
discuss III. question prp.'o$el have
regretted from the outse' that YOU sh"uli
aus aialy thrust your .thaial infaencs- in'p
this question instead Of argument. Thl>, SIR,
is what understand b. preacaing oneS->elf !;
and III the legal profession IL il Regarded as
quite nnpr ,fe>s'onal shah nrr, thtrei re-.
declare my private opinion "r belief IN the
slavery question, Notwithstanding yonr pat
roi,zing exh rtatipn, To do s',. - fteu rrpea,
ed. j am not quite warn enough, To seek I"
rest question OF tins kind ",. the counter
balancing opinions "f ur>elf and IN, .rlf,
outstanding yonr char.e> II IA dI>p .>u i.u
To" exhibit my legal re anl lp.Icat acu NJ
aud a. You attribute this t"my crwIri Co,
will add, that deeu. il uruna e, Ifmy sells"
Of plnprety would not So dictate, that rhe
salnr mi>tnc thai prevented FalIstaff from
striking the heir apparent, should also re
strain me Ia thus particular | cannot see
that Your repeated declaration OF your cpn
vciIuns Is necessarily Conclusive on tie sub.
j, CT acc 'mpanied "a il is with the ast,und
ing cuniesslnn that yen are nui su ignrr-
AMI" a. to suppose that you are ''intal.bie."
should really like {, know by what system
Of TX ended Undue Ion you arrived al this
al d
mere j pplns over the br'm when The vessel
was dlsbnrse.l, that i es nni s, truly deu"Ie
the pressure that Is wItnIn, a 'hu Tn'h II
Continually % Eng "Ilt at tv'r ~ p'Ie. ! am
of the Republican,, while IND. r>tns you A.
:" the man tor The lInr>--ihe right man ~ IN
right place." dlS,. adj that, III rhe>r tIrIIe>.
The people d. n'' car S much ahrur vat
God has d.creei as what men ar d"irg."
Still | am inclined IL think that there are
spme exceptions to this. | tr INK tie public
would have m"re regari for the teachings of
the Bible, than for am opinion that tveu yUu
SIR may entertain For myself, al lraS,,
must say, that | appreciate the assumptions
uu winch y'ur tx.."rtaiiun- are ba Led, and
hat the ,xh"r;ai onS III, n.tlvts pass b,
me as the ,dle wind wnich respect not." |
h pc YOU will have the gnnl sen>e, sir, after
having gwen the chtIengr. 10 proceed With
the argument OF deslst with your exlorta
tIpns. @
But You are ast"nlsh'd at my audacity III
presuming that" III "wnuld stullif," your.
self accepting proposition that would Re.
qnre you Ito prove negative" thnk
Ehier, you vii. come safely ont Of this aston
lshment on moments reflection II Is just
as much of all affirmation to say that SLAYER
is inconsistent with the B bic, A. il is 10 say
that 1t Is cDnsi-te 1t. Atiif m:pl,i.t4I', -
Is much easier tn prove il, as yon can point
directly I" the contradiction, while, If n IN
Ing were said on the suhjrcr, il would still br
c"psistcni, and yet t" prove it, would reqn'rr
the citing at every text. You say II is tie
same uest,on that B'sh"p II .pKrns dis used
He states Ihe que>ti III: ''Whethcr l. rs a mrr-
al eNII-a positive sin, IT, hold a human being
in bondage, &C." d. you n" wonder NOW.
that / am not astnnlshed az your audacrty IA
con-entIng to accept y"ur proposition t" lis
cuss a question that would rqnr' me I"
prov,. n nc..riyr'-rhat- II rs not II AIN I" huin
a human being IN bondage SIN is ftans
grrssiaa ot the law. H"w easy then to show
it. But how prep strr0us To und, lake tn
show that there is n" rransgression. Til
would certainty b. r. curing a uian tn pr. W.
thai he Is not guilty. SuIl am Mt asr,umi
ed, Elder for I rec.Ilect thai il was dt n'ie
designed t" upify pOatr profession "f whom
BuIler wrote:
"He would distinguish AMI divide
A hair 'twixt south and south west SIDE
On either Of which, he woulI dispute,
Change hanls, an still "ontute'
The difference between iweellelre and
tweedlpum is certainly a v. ii <uhi..,
fnr V6u 30 talk abnnt. And while y.,u are r>-
,rtlng me To s. lay aside the LAWYER" re
turn the encourage rnent v"u ex'rnde To me
n your carl" ry again, SIR, Ihere is yer
hnre in gour Case"
In Regard Ia Your reference 10 The slave
trade, gambling an rum->elling, IT is sniff
Gent to say, that all the legislation upon
these snhj"ctS Is resf' ictire; and that there
fore the legal Implication is, th,t they are
wrong wh'le the provision IN the CO. s.iIu
ton requiring the return Of fugitive slaves is
proteetjrp aud raises an opposite preSnmp
laws. fed. raj and state. respectively, while
this latter Is restricted tn a few Individuals
Wmh"ut our law. every person, II disposed.
cnutl engage IN rhqm Thf> DOS Mt at
pear to answer vnnr purpose. Elder, hui
You saw, 8" say 7, "trv again, sir there is
yet hope m y"ur case"
Yon say that nv review e y"ur sermon
was an "nnslaucht" on vou Z" uncallri f,r
opJ tbo+ ba oo,,;n,,