North Branch democrat. [volume] (Tunkhannock, Pa.) 1854-1867, 1863-10-28

0tn QlDsTf IL no ne IouuU III nig n6uQs nc
shall surely bs put to DEATH" Paul elaasss
msn- -stealers, That is, those who buy, SELL, or
held nan az slaves, except to free them, With
murderer Oh fathers and murdcrsra Of moth
ers." :
Bishop Hopkins and his abettors of Amer
| lean slavery, are welcome to the company
with which PaA classes, them.
+ Yes, sir, the public will judge Of the merit
of our relative pos sitions, they will pass their
verdict upon the character of the man who
has neither tho courage nor the frsnkness to
give his private opinion. or belief ON the
slavery question y a..
The new dodge Of i" declining either to
censure or approve" the system of slavery.
"until the arguments are considered" and
at the same time refuse to consider the ar
guments, is worthy Of the man of your posi-
ton
still insist upon it, That you ask me to
Gove negative, and your reference to Mills
logic does not disprove my position. Why
did you not show from, his logic that the
word Inconsistent" is affirmative in sense 2
Your supposed analogy does not relieve you
frop your embarrassment. ~, + .- ...-.
81 care not, therefore," you remark, !" If
Bishop Hcphins was attempting to prove a
negative" &c. The legitimate inference
from the words is, that the Bishop really
does attempt to prove a negative. But does
ho Tn INV laat Iattar 7 eho-aI ~rost oo1
elusively from the Bishops own language
that he does not. And if you did not pos
sess more vanity than honor, you never
would have made the foregoing remarks.
beg here to introduce additional testimo-
ny, that the Bishops argument is a6lrmsa-
tire and not negatire.
DR.. Thompson in the Christian Advocate
and Journal of the 18th inst, in referring to
Bishop Hopkins letter, says: " Some months
since Bishop Hopkins Of Vermont published
tract to prore slavery divine instsi,u
tion." -, ...~..,
Bishop Potter and a. large number of his
ministers in their "pro,est" employ the
words, "in defense oofsoat herhT Slavery" {.
ReY.M. Van Saaat- who has come to the
aid of Bishep Kahkins, rsnafks: He," that
is, Bishop Hopkins, also prores conclusive
|1y,;Sy abundant authority; both sacred and
profane, that slavery is an institu ton that
has has been recognized in all ages of the
world, established yaesitive law in the
0ld TsstAnsat, aad sdaittsd as. an ins,itu-
.ss.t,.: ,,sa fsn God kssSSF Saviour and all the
viii you now. have: the honor to confess
that the Bishep diees not attempt to prove a
negative?
/ do not profess to be jurist, but I am
inclined to the opinion that with all your ls-
| gal lore the yeriest iyro in the science would
DO ashamed Of your skill in attending to ex-
pound il.
r. ! dosnat Claim that the. sanctfty of nv
cloth exemtps ne from just criticism, but
do insist upon it that if you had any self re.
spect, or high regard for truth, you would
not charge tne with being an abolitlonist as
that term is technically used.
Ifhowever preaching against slavery, and
Fi5ssitsng les legal fahd 'Tighteous extirpatiop,
constitute me one, then gloFy' in" the name.
am not very particular as TO what an
called, if I am only on the side of truth and
Righteousness.
The denuhciatons uttered, and the threat
enings made by you and those Of your stripe
against US ministers, are impotent to deter
fro hat
| am thankful that we are not dependent up
on traitors for life, or the means of living
] am grateful that there are loyal men enough
In the North-democrats and Republicans
to support the Gospel. But if we cannot be
supported unleas We compromise our princi-
prls-truckle to politicians, or obey the be-
hests of pro-slavery tyrants then we will
follow some other vocation, or starys.. We
wish it to be distinctly understood, that we
are free meQ in the pulpit, that we are nel-
thef'to be fiightensds Or gagged That game
sir, is being pretty well played out, in this,
Fand other places. ="
1 was not taken by surprise when saw
the so-called testimony in your letter, in the
which you attempt to prove that I charged
Bishop Hopkins with misqnoting scripture.
| deemed it probable that either you, or
some of your plant tools, would have no
scruples Of conscience about swearing to the
above. | knew that was dealing with an
unscrupulous lawyer, who would stoop to al
most anything TO carry his point right or
wrong. .. .... .... ...-
Well sir, have you convicted me of false.
hood Let us see. The only reply which
| have made to your charge is in my last let
ter, namely, lyon are mistaken when you
say that | charged7the Bishop with misouot-
ing scripture" Now sir, does the word
f" /" mistaken" include, or convey the idea of
falsehood? Ihave. never affirmed, or dc MED
in my letters, that did Il or did not say that
the Rishop misouoted SCRIPTURE. You have