Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1863-12-11
To the Right Rev JOIN HENRI HOPKINS.
Burlington, Tt
THE BISHOPS REPLY.
BURLINGTON, Vt, Msy 2, 1863.

---Nia4l Ailnl1lrIes NArlstlaD lAWVerH ana LnrIS-
tan statesmen one hundred years ago. with
r" exceptions which only proved the rule The
Constitution Of the United States, as I firmly be
heTe, made no concessions on the subject which
were not warranted by the Bible And there
fore while ] should rejoice IN the adoption Of
any plan Of gradual abolition which could be &C
cepiei peacefully by general consent, I cannot
see that We have any right TO interfere with the
domestic institutions Of the South. either bv the
law or by the gospel. With this brief introduc-
ton, proceed TO the very serious question which
your friendly application has submitted for dis
cussion.
Your faithful servant II Christ.
JOIN Il HOPKINS,
Bishop Of the Diocese Of Vermont
Here VIZ notice, in the first place. that
though the request Of the Philadelphia men
to Bishop Hopkins is Of the same general
tenor as that Of the New York men. which
LED to the Bible view of slavery" dated
Jan. 80, 1851. there Is one difference be-
tween the two. The last said. We
therefore respectfully ask YOU to favor US
with your opinion upon the scriptural au-
thority for slavery, and the constitutional
position Of The oonfsnding parties The
clause which We have put in italics, does not
appear in the Philadelphia request. Most
likely 1t was thought that, as the times are,
the Bishops answer would do better as an
electioneering document, If the seoesk part
OF 1t was left out. In the next place it will
be noticed that in the Bishops answer given
above, he begins by telling the Philadelphia
men that ms pamphlet published in Jan.
1861 is at their "servioe N MS original
form" &c, 1.-THE italics are ours). thus in
substance reasserting to them its opinions
throughout, and giving them leave to make
use of the whole if they saw fit. Proceeding
then.as he says" to the very serious question
which your friendly application has submit
ted for discussion, he follows with the very
language, paragraph for paragraph, Of the
letter of Jan. 80, 1861 from beginning to end,
leaving of only an introductory sentence,
one of mere courtesy, and emitting the par
agraphs IN the latter part of it, written in
direct answer to request which was not
repeated In the letter from PhiladelphiA,
and Of course called for no answer.
Whether, under the circumstances, that
omission makes any material change in the
position of Bishop Hopkins before the chris
tian and political public, VIC leave every one
70 judge for himself
We add for public information, that "No.
{ Of the papers from the Society for the diff
fusion Of Political Observation-Disclosures,
Prof 5. F. B. Morse Secrao-y, VIM. Nc
Murray Treasurer ,Loring Andrews; Office
Of the SOoiay. No. Is, Park row, New York
c. Mason, corresponding Secretary to
whom all communications may be addressed -
is entitled bible view Of slavery" and
agrees verbatim with the letter of NAV ?.
1868 to the Philadelphians, save that it
has no Introductory remarks. 1t is however
signed your faithful servant in Christ
John H. Hopkins, Bishop of the Diocese of
Vermont Ii has no date