The Osceola times., 1877-08-04

taken into consideration wha, com.
mon rule exists smong mcny Evi'
IDENTIFY there is no such rule, and
therefore, no means of certainly
determining what Is right. II such u
rule exist d IL must be proved To bc
binding otherwise there would be
no moral obligation. The only
satisfactory concluslcn on the sub
irc, ~ ,ha, which refers moral obi
CATION 10 the will OF God. "Oolira
iion," says Mr. Warburion, "ncces
sarily implies an ob,igcr, aud tn,
oligcr must be different from, nnd
not one and The same with th,
obliged. Moral obligation, ,ha; Is
the obligation OF free agent, fur
ther implies n law which en- joins
and forbids; but law Is the impo
sition OF I'M intelligent superior
who had power to exact obedienc,
thereto" This law-givcr is God
aud he has prescribed n course Di
action That is, 10 gIorify Han in
orwilh onr Yirib and bpcii'l rhich a..
Ws. This we cannot do without
strict CONFORMITY 10 his will foi
whatsoever is not Of faith Is sin
In all our ways we are To acknowl-
edge him as our law giver aud raj
or. Our Savior says he that IL
tot for mo Is against me; and he
that ga,hercth not with me scatter.
eth abroad. Therefore we repeat
there can he no medium ground
aud according to the scriptures and
your own confession your associa
lion is against religion and morals;
Is OF the wcrld. The fact Of the
Drama being found in all civilized
cities does not argue that it Is NOR
ally right; II it did, upon the same
ground we could justify grogshops,
gambling houses aud all the vile
institutions which are common IN
civilized cities, but entirely un
known in savage and barbarous
countries. You say sir. that the
ministers of OsccoIa did not take
TO themselves yonr abusive Ian
guage. you know better sir. In or
dor to screen yonrscii you told one
of them that you dld not intend Il
word Of il for him and your asso-
ciatcs told another you did not in.
tend il for hin. You did say sir IN
reference to ministers IN "fhe csm
muai,y" that their "villilications
and ana,l.cmas were "morc beft
ting BIllingsgatc and the Five
Points than Christian Pulpit =
and yet you try to squIam out Of il
and make as fyou had forgotten
about using any such language, and
even say you could scarcely recog
20 your own handiwork,'
though ! wrote it precisely in your
own words. Tbs Is all have to
sav IN reference to tho Dramatics
Bro. "; and as to the balderdash
yol have thrown at me, allow me
to say sir that it's well received.
only so far as yon misrcp, cscn,cd
nay article, which mi>rcprcscntat on
/ have referred TO. only aimed TO
defend the ministers against your
vile aspersions and not TO make an
attack upon the Drama,ics. They
were morally obliged according to
your own confession to oppose you
There are but two employers in the
neral world one is the Lord the
other the Devil. If not working
for one yon must be for the other.
The Lord is on the side of religion
and moraliiy-you say sou have
them not in your programme and
yet in the lace Of all this you refuse
TO accept the epithet emlssary OF
the devil" but snow, aud for all
time to come, indignantly and def
antly, hurl back into the teeth OF
whomsocvcr may dcnounce ns, the
cpithet thus applied to us, with the
word false branded upon it Gcafif
mfS will not lie yet you say the Os,
ccola preachers have done It after
acknowledging them to be gentle
men. You have fatty contradictcd
yolrsclt. You are in n dilema from
which yoa cannot cxtricate your
self. o. sir ! pity you! Well may
you sincerely regret having raised
this controversy (for had you not
written through the Times it would
not have been raised) for it must
result disasirously to you. As TO
myself; you said ] had no part nor