January 9, 1864

Macomb Eagle

For the Macomb Eagle.


By G. W. Pisel[?]

A shout went up wild, long and loud,
By old New England’s shore,
And echoed through each valley proud,
But gathered more and more: –
A cry through Freedom’s [?] skies –
O God! that fiendish shout
That bloody cry, “No compromise” –
would Heaven had crushed it out!
It steeled the arm of traitors nerve,
It crushed the Union party,
It brought up every foe reserve,
It bled our country’s heart
And deeper cut the Union’s bond,
And wider made the gap,
Which, while we listed to the sound,
Our blood had just [?]

But now another shout goes up,
Along Atlantic’s shores,
And sounds o’er every mountain top
To where Pacific rears.
It swells along the azure shores
It echoes from each hill
Our eagle gives his joyous [?]
So glad, so wild, and shrill!
Our people hear it’s echoes still!
Along the bloody ground,
Through air made thick with shot and shell,
And then they swell the sound.
It rings along Europia’s sk[?]
O’er plains where monarchs reign, –
It is the shout of “Compromise,”
That ends our country’s pain.

Our people tremble – oh, my God!
So eager with desire,
To once escape the chastening rod
of war’s destructive ire.
The weeping women of our land
Look up with tearful eyes
Their sons and brothers all demand
A peaceful compromise.
Fair Liberty casts off her w[?]ds,
And smiles in light once more;
Pale Union smiles (while yet she bleeds)
As hopeful as before.
The sun of Heaven breaks thro’ the gloom,
And gladdens weary eyes,
And everything wears bright bloom,
As if for compromise.
Go, hurl the traitor clamor back,
That cry, “No compromise,”
Nor weaken flesh upon the rock
To writhe ‘neath Freedom’s skies;
But let religion’s voice again
In accents still and small,
Sing out with “Peace, good will to men,”
And praise the Lord of all.
Let banners wreathe Columbia’s halls,
And float above her plains,
Let garlands gay festoon her walls,
And music swell her stains.
Let North and South come round her board,
And take common store –
Let East and West with one accord
In peace join hands once more.


From Scott County.

Methodism and Politics, Volunteers and “Traitors.”

Correspondence of The Macomb Eagle.

“That the man who opposes mixing in politics and religion at such a time as this [?] be suspected. – M. E. Quar. Con.

So reads a resolution [?] at a recent M. E. quarterly conference, and such is the animus which pervades the whole M. E. Church, and means proscription and coercion.  It means that you must be loyal – to what, the Constitution and laws?  No.  Is not that a league with hell?  It means loyalty to the emancipation proclamation and all the proclamations which may be issued by “the government” in connection with slavery.  It means loyalty to the spirit of John Brown, which is marching with great strides over this once fair and happy land, crushing in its tearless and remorseless manner the spirit, nay, every vestige of Liberty, and directing in its place the foul and unclean standard of Despotism.  In this unholy work the M. E. Church in all its relations, officially and unofficially, its lay members, its preachers, and its press, bears a large and influential part.  They put me in mind of the declaration of our Saviour to the Pharisees, “Ye compa[?] and [?] to make one proselyte, and when he is made ye make him two-fold more a child of hell than yourselves.”  Again, “For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves will not so much as touch them with their little fingers.”  This is most expressly exemplified in their recruiting operations. – They will not volunteer themselves unless they can get an office, nor let their sons volunteer if they can possibly prevent it.  But they want volunteers; Democrats are invited to volunteer – “if they don’t, you will be conscripted.”

A most striking example of this took place in our village on the night of the 23rd of Dec.  An army officer was beating up for volunteers.  To this end he employed the services of a half-witted lawyer from Winchester to aid him.  This couple have been or are holding meetings in every precinct in the county. – The meeting here was held in the M. E. Church.  In this they were aided by all the principal members of the Church; that is, they did the singing and cheering, and one of them (a local preacher) assisted in the speaking.  The lawyer was the principal speaker.  He was a Democrat, he said, yet he denounced the democrats as disloyal; nay, they are traitors, he said, with arms in their hands to fight against the best government under the sun (meaning of course Abe Lincoln), sneaking off to resist the government by tearing up the rails on the road near Manchester. – To prove it he read a fictitious letter from a Democrat to a friend in the county, pretending to relate the number of Democrats who went from a certain precinct to [?] in the Greene county raid.  “You are traitors; and I won’t want you to stand up beside me to vote in the next election.  I don’t want you to vote beside a white man unless you will take the following oath.”  Here he [?] the oath appended to the latest proclamation.  “You are traitors – K. G. C.’s” and here he pretended to unveil the secrets of that order.  After talking in this strain for an hour or more, he wound up by asking these traitors, the K. G. C.’s, these copperheads, to volunteer, our Methodist friends cheering out vociferously the while.

Now came forward the d[?]lity captain. – After giving in his experience in the army, he went on to state that he was a Democrat, he was, “but you are traitors.  Who was the first to violate the Constitution?  Jeff Davis.  Who next?   was, “but you are traitors.  Who was the first to violate the Constitution?  Jeff Davis.  Who next?  You!” he shouted at the top of his voice.  After abusing the Democrats in this style for half an hour now, he called for volunteers.  Our Methodist friends sung patriotic songs, ridiculing copperheads and Vallandigham, shouted, laughed, and beat the drum; but it was no go.  The ugly traitors and copperheads would not come forward – nor the republicans either, of whom there were was a goodly number present.  But no – they, the patriotic, the very crème de la crème of loyalty, could not go – they have enough to do to “support the government.”  These are the men who lay heavy burdens , etc.  These are the men who love to mix their religion with politics, and who call upon others to fight the battles they have no stomach for.


Oxville, Dec. 30.


The Speech of Garret Davis.

            It is scarcely necessary for us to say a word in commendation of this truly American and Democratic speech.  It places him before the country as a representative man, while the principles he advocates are the ones to rouse the enthusiasm of the people to an irresistible degree.  Mr. Davis shows that the brave men who, [?] hazarding their lives in battle, had the bad fortune to be made prisoners, are now cruelly let to suffer the tortures and distress of a long imprisonment, solely on account of the devotion to the negro by the abolition authorities at Washington.  Lincoln and the rest of the conspirators against the Republic, for the sake of forcing their negro equality theories upon the country, are willing to see thousands of brave white men perish from exposure or disease which are more or less inseparable from the condition which they are placed.  A more cruel, inhuman and wicked proceeding, as is remarked by a contemporary, was ever before insisted upon by men claiming even half civilization.  Nothing but that malignant philanthropy, now so much in vogue, which kills the negro race by inches under the pretense of benefiting it, could rise to the [?]minence of this official barbarity.  It is only a wonder that the friends are relatives of the men now kept in prison, in order that Lincoln & Co. may worship their African fetish, do not [?] in a body and demand instant compliance with the ordinary rules of civilized warfare, which require an early exchange of prisoners as in accordance with the interests of humanity.  The Abolition journals have generally studiously suppressed the fact that our soldiers are in Richmond for the sake of the negro, and not because the southern authorities refuse to comply with the cartel of exchange, as was instituted.  When Lincoln put negroes in the army, he sought to change it without agreement, and now refuses to exchange unless the cartel is so altered as to acknowledge the equality of whites and negroes!

But this speech of Mr. Davis is worthy of remark in another important aspect.  His vindication of constitutional citizenship deserves the keenest praise and the most unqualified approbation.  No man on the floor of Congress has more boldly or powerfully hurled into the teeth of the Abolition lunatics, the fundamental heresies of their creed.  Taking his stand on the immovable rock of truth, that this is a WHITE MAN’S GOVERNMENT, he shows that the negro must and ought to occupy a subordinate position – that the races are not and cannot be made equal, and that the object that the abolitionists are trying to accomplish will, if successful, be a monstrous and wicked revolution and an overthrow of the principles upon which our Government was founded.  Mr. Davis, evidently comprehends that the gravest and greatest issue ever presented to the American people is now upon them. – It is no less that this: WHITE SUPREMACY VS. NEGRO EQUALITY.

The abolitionists are every day narrowing the issue down closer and closer to this point.  And when we take a wide and philosophical view on this question, we will see that even the war is but an incident – perhaps even an accident – in this great struggle.  For thirty years, at least, the contest between White Supremacy and Negro Equality has been going on in this country.  As long as this contest was confined to the press, the pulpit, the forum, there was no civil convulsion, but as soon as the party which was the embodiment of the Negro Equality idea got into power and undertook to carry their theory into practice, that instant resistance commenced.

From the view of the subject, how simple the method to get out of this difficulty.  We have only to elect a President who represents the views so ably presented by Mr. Davis, and that moment resistance will cease, for the White Supremacy is again restored. – The southern people will not shed their blood except to resist Negro Equality.  The hatred and bitterness the war has engendered will then be the only thing in the way of a restoration of the Union; but as that has only a menial existence, and is not a material or social necessity, it will not, of itself, stand in the way of reunion.  The great issue, therefore, overtopping and overlapping all others, because it includes all others, is whether this government shall remain as it was founded, one in which the WHITE RACE shall be the ruling, governing power or citizenship, or whether negroes shall be placed upon an equality with them in all respects.  There is no middle ground, as some timid people vainly imagine.  It is WHITE SUPREMACY or NEGRO EQUALITY!


            → Secretary Chase in 1844 published in a Cincinnati paper “the liberty man’s creed.”  In it he says: “I believe that slavery in the United States will not survive the accession of the liberty party to power for a single year.”  Also that this abolition of slavery “might as well be done in four years as in forty,” and “I believe that I will do my share of it.”  This liberty party begat the abolition party, which begat the republican party, which begat the war for the purpose of destroying slavery.  Mr. Chase has stuck to his text.  He has passed from one party to another, just as a piece of property descends to the next of kin under the law.  He is now doing his “share” of what he proposed to do twenty years ago.  So are they all doing their “share of it.”  What do Chase and the rest care, even though the people sweat great streams of blood in their terrible agony?  The country may become impoverished – public virtue become destroyed – official honesty be known only in history – regard for law fade into a vision of the past – the foundations of our Government become undermined – our constitutional rights swept away at the breath of an usurper – and every mother in the land becoming another Rachel, weeping and mourning for her children slain in this cruel war.  What cares Secretary Chase or the rest of the infernal conspirators for all these things, if only he and they can do their “share” of destroying slavery in four years?


            → A contemporary tells a heap of truths in saying that “President Lincoln declares in his proclamation against the Union which George Washington approved of.”  This represents precisely the issue before the people of the United States, whether Lincoln shall be sustained in destroying this Union, or whether the Union which Washington approved shall be sustained and Lincoln defeated.  Which do the people prefer – the old Union as forged by Washington and his co-patriots, or its overthrow as demanded by Lincoln?  Lincoln’s Union is one of negro equality, caused by bayonets, bathed in fraternal blood, rigded with graves, and full of hatred and malice.  The Union of Washington, which the Democrats labor to perpetuate, is one of co-equal states moving on in peace, joy, prosperity, and concord, sublime and beautiful as the planets in the firmament.  Are you on the side of the Constitution, or on the side of Lincoln?


            → From the solemn and oft-repeated declarations of the leaders of the republican party, there can be no doubt that they do not want the Union restored as it was, nor do they want the Constitution as it is obeyed or even respected.  They urge the prosecution of the war, but not a termination of it, in order that upon the ruins of our Liberty they may erect a Despotism.  They do not propose to change the Constitution in the form and manner prescribed, but they seek to overthrow it or trample it under foot on the flimsiest of pretexts.  When these things are sanctioned and these republican leaders upheld by the deliberate voice of the people, then will Liberty and self-government have fled from our land, and our boasted Republic be but a scoff and byword among the nations.


            → The violations of our Constitution by Abraham Lincoln are no less criminal in Abraham Lincoln than in Jeff Davis.  That instrument is the palladium of our Liberty.  If one man can violate it and go unwhipt of justice, then another can, and the contagion spreading will in time turn our well-ordered system of government into a frightful reign of anarchy, wherein the weak will fall a prey to the strong, and the poor become practically enslaved to the rich.  The practices of this administration are leading to this result.  It must be rebuked and defeated, or we must bid a long farewell to our country’s greatness.


            → The loyalty of the Democracy is bounded by the letter of the Constitution.  They profess no more – they desire no more.  Whatever is outside of this has no connection with true patriotism.  Loyalty to any officer of the Government may be and in this day almost invariably is disloyalty and treason to the Government itself.  This is emphatically true, when, as in the case of Abraham Lincoln, an officer wilfully violates the plainest principles of our Government and sets himself up as superior to all law and all Constitution.  The Democracy propose to elect a man to the office of President who will not spurn the authority by which he may hold his power, and who will use that power to advance the interests of the whole country.  They propose to elect a man who will regard the Constitution as the pillar of fire by night, to lead us from the task-masters of abolitionism into the promised land of white men’s government.


            → The desire for the preservation of the Union is strong among the masses of the peeple.  They way to attain the object is clear enough.  But it is not the way pursued by the administration, which withdraws every plank from under the feet of the Union men in the South, and drives them to the wall of abolition proclamations and confiscation acts.  The way to restore the Union is to make friends of the white people of the South; but Lincoln adopts every measure which can make them enemies.


            → The emancipation proclamation has not conferred freedom on a single negro, nor has it changed one rebel into a Union man.  It has been powerless to accomplish any desirable or good object, but it has been fruitful in mischief, giving thousands of men to the rebel armies, and postponing indefinitely all hope of a return of the rebellious people and the consequent ending of “this cruel war.”


            → The administration prefer the aid of negroes to that of white men in the southern States, and the consequence is that neither white men nor negroes are helping to any extent to destroy the rebellion.  The white men of the South could readily put down the rebellion, and would do so were they not threatened with robbery and destruction in such an event.


The Macomb Eagle.


            The Eagle now addresses a larger number of subscribers than at any former period of its history.  This is due to its steady and faithful advocacy of the great principles of our Constitution, which is the only bond of our National Union.  The year 1864 will be one of the most important in our history; upon its events will determine the preservation of civil liberty on this continent.  To the lawless acts of Mr. Lincoln’s administration, its violations of the Constitution, its wicked proclamations, its arbitrary and illegal arrests, its banishment of citizens without crime and without legal trial, and to all the measures which have the effect to prolong the war and postpone the return of the revolted people to the Union, THE EAGLE will, as in the past, oppose with whatever of ability it may command.  It will labor without stint in the good work of rescuing the Government from the hands of the imbecile, corrupt, and faithless rulers, who have so afflicted and burdened the people. – The continuance for another presidential term of the present administration will dispel all hope of a re-Union of the States, and will accomplish the destruction of white men’s liberty and white men’s rule in this country. – To avert the threatened evil and to secure the inauguration of the era of Peace and good feeling, there is no means more powerful than the circulation of Democratic papers.  They should reach every family in the country. – Those who love the Constitution, and who would hail with delight the return of Peace and our former Union of mutual interest and prosperity, should take the matter in hand at once.


is published on a large sheet, printed from clear type, and is furnished at the low price of $1 50 per annum.


            Any person sending $7 50 for five subscribers will receive the book entitled “Southern Wealth and Northern Profits,” by T. P. Kettell.

For ten subscribers and $14 we will give a copy of Dr. Van Evrie’s celebrated work, “Negroes and Negro ‘Slavery;’ the first an inferior race, the latter their normal condition.”

For fifteen subscribers and $20 we will furnish for one year “The Old Guard,” a monthly journal devoted to the principles of Re-union and Peace.

We do not offer these inducements for clubbing because we could make anything at it, but because we desire to do all in our power to aid in the circulation of sound political knowledge.

The members of Democratic organizations have here an opportunity of doing good and getting paid for it.  To them and to all Democrats of McDonough county we appeal for aid in this great contest.  Come up to the help of the Constitution and your country against the mighty enemy of both.

Address letters to                                                                                THE EAGLE,
Macomb, Ill.


            Terrible Snow Storm. – At the time of going to press last week a most terrible snow storm was prevailing.  The snow fell fast, the wind blew furiously, and the cold became intense.  It was the worst day to be out of doors that “the oldest inhabitant” has any recollection of.  Out-door work was generally suspended, and men were glad to have a shelter and a fire where they could, in some comfort, watch

“The pelting of the pitiless storm.”

            New Year’s morning dawned clear and the coldest of the season – the thermometer sinking to 22 degrees below zero.  The wind, which blew “great guns” all night, had piled the snow up in great drifts, in many places [?]ing the fences and blocking up the roads. – The trains on the railroad found themselves snowed up promiscuously, at various points on the road.  One that stuck in the drifts just above this town was not moved till Saturday.  At other points on the road we believe they are fast yet.  The snow still lies as the wind left it – the cold keeping up its reputation for severity.


            →There has been no train nor mail from Chicago since Wednesday night of last week.  We are consequently without news, and are in happy ignorance of all that is transpiring in the great world outside of Macomb.  We can endure this blockade for two weeks, but not longer.  At the end of that time all our present stock of war material will be exhausted, and we shall have to surrender unless a new supply can be received either by the under or over-ground railroad.


            → The family of Dr. Gillett of Blandinville have met with a serious affliction.  Several weeks ago the doctor went to Ohio to attend a course of medical lectures.  On Wednesday of last week one of his children died.  A friend came to Macomb and telegraphed the sad news to Dr. G. at Chicago, and in response received a dispatch stating that Dr. Gillett had died on the same day with his child.  His body started home, but owing to the snow-blockade has not yet reached his bereaved widow.


            → The managers of the railroad have been untiring in their efforts to “raise the blockade” which the snow-king has laid upon their business.  Hands have been kept shoveling away at the drifts, and engines that were foot [?] ore have been in severe service opening and keeping clear the road.  This storm has been beyond all ordinary calculation for this latitude, and astonished the railroad men as much as anybody else.  The public may be assured that regular trains will run as soon as human effort can accomplish the result.


            Accident. – The train from Galesburg on Tuesday ran off the track between Macomb and Bardolph.  On the same day the train from Quincy was broken up a short distance above Macomb.  It resulted from the breaking of a wheel under the locomotive.  The passenger car was thrown off and turned on its side.  The only serious injury was the dislocation of the shoulder of a brakeman.


            How Long. – Prices of groceries will undoubtedly continue to go higher and higher as long as the war lasts.  Whether the war will continue a long or a short time, no man can tell; but most people think the end is not nigh.  It therefore behooves those who can to buy as much as they can of those articles which they will have to consume within the present year – and they can buy them at the grocery house of J. Hoover, on the west side, at about the lowest rates to be found anywhere.



Prof. Morse’s View on this Question.

            Amid the rapid tendancies of churches and political parties towards Abolitionism, it is refreshing to observe that some of the purest minds in the North are contending for the truth. – Rev. Mr. Van Dyke, President Lord, Bishop Hopkins, Prof. Morse, and Dr. Seabury have all written in defense of slavery.  A cause which can reckon such men among its advocates, in this hour of frantic fanaticism, need not despair.  Their efforts are the more admirable in that they abandon the weak tactics so long employed in vain, and boldly aver slavery to be a Divine Institution and Abolitionism infidelity.  And although we do not expect any immediate good result from their exertions, and think it likely they may be called to suffer as well as labor in the cause of truth, yet they are sowing good seed, which though it die, will live again.

Prof. Morse styles the pamphlet before us ‘An Argument on the Ethical Position of Slavery in the Social System, and its Relation to the Politics of the Day.’  It is an attempt to prove the rightfulness of the relation from an examination of human nature as that nature is expounded and regulated in the work of God.

In the outset, while admitting that error will occur in this as in every other question of human interests, and that it is not strange that ‘the mere man of the world and the self-seeking politician” should fail to solve the problem, he declares it to be ‘indeed a marvel that men of Christian principles and education, and especially that men occupying the high and responsible position of teachers of the religion of the Gospel of peace, should use the influence of their talents and position to give consistency and lend support to the loose and anarchical ideas of a godless fanaticism.’  ‘Where,’ he continues, ‘has the sense of decency fled, when the Sabbath is made the day and the church the place for partisan orgies; when flags flaunt in solemn mockery above the pulpit, and the Psalms of David overflowing with the elevating praises of God, are exchanged for the vain-glorious, self-flattering gasconade of heathen songs to a mis-called liberty, on the plea of a vaunting patriotism, while the Gospel of Peace has been cast out of its proper temples, to give place to a religion whose Bible is the Declaration of Independence, whose blood-stained God is Human Freedom, whose Saviour is the National Flag, and whose Devil is Slavery.’

This is his solemn indictment against the apostles of what this paper has aptly styled ‘The Satanic School of Religionists.”  Would that this severe invective might have the effect of opening the eyes of these deluded fanatics to the truth that a boastful patriotism is not exactly the same thing with the religion of Jesus Christ.

The fundamental postulate of the essay is, that ‘civil institutions have of necessity a theological basis;’ in other words, civil government is appointed of God, and it is only from His will that we can learn its nature and authority.  If, then, we misrepresent God’s will, we cannot rightly estimate the relations of society.  But the will of God in the matter may be studied in two methods: either as directly revealed in Scripture, or as mediately exhibited in the nature of man.  The former view has been recently presently presented in this journal; the latter is followed by Prof. Morse.  He starts with the question, ‘What is the nature of man?’  Rigidly confining his answers to the utterances of Scripture, he points us first to the primeval glory of man of whom alone all of the creatures it was said, he was created in the ‘image of God,’ and then tells us of the awful catastrophe by which he lost that glorious likeness, and became antagonistic to his Maker.  The radical disease of his nature is the spirit of disobedience; the great work to be performed in him is the ‘dethronement of disobedience and the re-enthronement of obedience,’ as ‘the law of his mind.’

Our author here gives a most impressive statement of the work of Christ, as designed to teach men the lesson of submission to the will of God; and although some expressions may seem to refer to the mission of the Saviour too exclusively to that object, and to overlook the essential task of satisfaction to the Divine justice, made by the death of Jesus, still it remains true that in its effects on man’s own nature (which however is only one and a secondary one of its results,) Christ’s work is designed to implant in the lawless soul of man the spirit of subjection to God’s authority.  The example, the precepts, and the grace of Christ all combine to urge him to obedience.

But ‘man from his very nature dislike restraints; he would at all hazards have his own way, and hence it is that no appeal takes a deeper hold of his passions and instincts than an appeal to his love of freedom; it was the original bait of the tempter, which lured man to his ruin; he did not comprehend that slavery to God was mans’ highest freedom.  How shall such a nature, set on fire by a word that kindles at once all its fierceness, be curbed and repressed within the bounds of reason?’  Man ‘needs a system of restraints, and God has wisely and benevolently ordained a social system for him, perfectly adapted to that nature.  What, then is the social system which God has ordained?’

In reply to this pregnant question, Prof. Morse upholds the four great relations existing among men, viz: 1. – Civil government, or the relation between the ruler and the ruled.  2. The matrimonial relation between husband and wife.  3. The parental relation between parent and child.  4. The servile relation between master and slave.  He shows that these all agree in certain essential particulars; c. g. they are equally ordained of God; they are alike regulated in His word; in each there is a superior and an inferior authority on the one hand, and subjection on the other, and that obedience is the great lesson taught in all.  ‘In the relation of civil government the ruler is superior and the ruled are inferior, and obedience to the ruler is commanded from the ruled.  In the matrimonial relation the husband is the superior, ‘the head,’ and the wife the inferior, ‘the weaker vessel,’ and obedience to the husband is commanded from the wife.  In the parental relation the parent is superior and the child is inferior, and obedience to the parent is commanded from the child.  In the servile relation, the master is superior and the slaves the inferior, and obedience to the master is commanded from the slaves.’

Thus these four great relations of human life stand side by side, equally approved of God and equally rightful among men.  The argument from Scripture having been so recently exhibited at length in the columns of this journal, we will not repeat it here, but proceed to remark that with the declarations of God’s word and the practice of God’s church during the whole period of inspiration, agree the laws and customs of men in all ages of the world’s history until very recently.  In every country and in every age slavery has existed, precisely as civil government and the family have existed.  Not only barbarous tribes, but the most polished and enlightened nations have recognized this relation. – The Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Gauls, the Saxons, and the Normans, all held slaves, and they held them without any more doubt of their right to do so, than of their right to establish civil government, or to marry, or to rule their children.  The greatest legislators and philosophers of antiquity, Solon, and Lycurgus, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, all approved and regulated the institution.  These master minds of the ancient world, reasoning upon the principles of human nature, discerned this as one of the lawful relations of mankind. – And from the advent of Christ until less than a century ago, all the light of the gospel failed to indicate that this conclusion was false.  The Saviour himself, who corrected whatever else was wrong in man, apostles, divines, martyrs, synods, councils, philosophers, statesmen, moralists, all accepted slavery as being equally of God with civil government, marriage, or the paternal relation.  Thus, the universal concurrence of mankind in every age and among every people, under every system of religion, the practice of the most civilized nations, the testimony of the purest churches and the holiest men, all stamp this relation with the seal of truth and right.  Not until after the middle of the eighteenth century did men begin to question its lawfulness and to put forth the dogma that “slavery is sinful.”  Now against the little period of slavery that has since elapsed do we put the whole history of the world and of the church, the constant teachings of Scripture, and the universal opinion of mankind in favor of slavery.  And whence did this skepticism arise?  Was it from a deeper study of the Scriptures, which contain the only rule of duty given to man?  Rather did it spring from the bloody atheism of the French Revolution, and to this day bears on its features the impress of its parentage; it is now, and among us, the same cruel, false, and devilish spirit that it was when it sat perched upon the guillotine and dabbled its foul talons in the best blood of France.  It now broods like a vulture over this wretched land, and fattens on the carcass of a ruined country; its eyes glitter at the sight of burning dwellings, sacked towns, devastated fields, the carnage of battle, and the prospects of famine; the sweetest music to its ears is the scream of the wounded charger, the groan of the dying soldier, the shrink of the polluted maiden, the cry of the orphan and the widow.  Can it be that this monster is never conscious of its wickedness?  Does it never suspect itself to be the foe of both God and man?  Does it never hear in its troubled dreams the voice of Inspiration and the voice of a common humanity mingled together in a solemn protest against the frantic shouts that drown them both?

It is evident that the whole burden of proof rests upon the anti-slavery dogma; we have the presumption entirely in our favor.  God and man, revelation and history, the laws of heaven and the customs of earth, agree; opposed to them stands the abolitionist.  Let him prove his cause!  Let him bring forth his arguments!  Whence will he derive them?  Not from the Bible, for as though conscious that the word of God is against him, he already calls for an anti-slavery Bible and an anti-slavery God.’  Not to history, for all the past is to him a chaotic mass of ignorance and error.  Not from philosophy, for he despises reason.  Not from the opinions of mankind, for he appeals from these to his own perverted instincts.  His sole source of authority is the mutterings of a debauched Priestess, whom he styles, ‘Freedom,’ but who bears the same relation to true liberty that a raving, murderous maniac does to a good and wise man.

Prof. Morse rightfully regards the question as mainly religious, and as only secondarily political.  ‘What,’ he asks, ‘is the tenet declaring slavery to be a sin, preached for over thirty years in abolition pulpits, but a setting forth of a religious belief?  The believers in these two antagonistic tenets form two violently opposed sects.  And can there be two religious sects in more perfect antagonism than one believing and maintaining that to be sin, which the other believes and maintains to be established by God?’  This must be our apology to our readers, if any be needed, for the space we have given and the severity with which we have handled this topic in the columns of this paper.

We believe abolitionism to be infidelity, and we oppose it as we would any other rank and ferocious form of irreligion; as we would oppose Socinianism, Mormonism or Atheism, were they like abolitionism, sitting with brazen front and reeking hands on the ruins of apostate churches and of a country drenched in fraternal blood.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: