best—the most unsuspecting—the most charitable—these very qualities rendering them the easy victims of design and imprudence: the history of the world proves, not only this, but also that demagogues are the first to fly from the commotions, which they themselves create; and thus leave their poor innocent victims to suffer the vengeance of an outraged and insulted community! They stand their ground while the weapons used are merely words, and "rotten" eggs, &c.; but when recourse is had to leaden balls, and swords of steel, they generally take good care to make a quick retreat, leaving their deluded followers to have the glory of martyrdom!

Liberty is a glorious term—so is Christianity—but under the sacred garb of both one and the other, the

foulest deeds have been, and may be, perpetrated! Under the name of Christianity, the holy crusades, in which thousands were slain, were instituted and carried on, by Englishmen! And under the name of Liberty, men, women, and children were, in 1793, slaughtered by Frenchmen! Be not therefore carried away by sounds—by mere words.

Slavery is a horrid term! But why? Not that bondage or slavery is uncommon, or rare; for there are few, very few men, white or black, on the face of the Earth who are not SLAVES! He who commits sin is the slave of lust—so says the Bible—Let God be true, and every man a liar. Who therefore is not a slave? Was not Buonaparte, while he was the Emperor of nearly all Europe, a slave to his god—ambition? And is not the covetous man a slave to his idol—gold?

The principal reason why we abhor so much the term slavery is, the base cruelty with which some tyrant slaveholders, for there are wicked slaveholders as well as wicked husbands and masters, have treated their slaves. Hence we are very apt to use as synonymous terms, slavery, cruelty, tyranny, and oppression. Moreover it is the interest of certain persons so to use these words, for the purpose of getting more ready access to the hearts of good-natured men and women. Does any one really believe that a man cannot treat his slaves kindly, tenderly, and affectionately? If any one thinks it possible, then let not, for the future, the terms slavery and cruelty be inseparably

united. But if he thinks it impossible, then it is evident the testimony of some thousands of disinterested, good, and religious men, who have visited the South, and who have most solemnly borne testimony to the kind, tender, and Christian manner in which numerous slaveholders treat their slaves, must be rejected! If all this is to be rejected, then let the doubter, who is so charitable towards the coloured population, exercise a little of that charity, "which rejoiceth not in iniquity," and is "without partiality," towards his white fellow citizens, and ere he slanders them, or encourages those who bear false witness against them, pay the South a visit, and judge for himself, with his own eyes, and his own cars. Methinks he replies, "but I have it from those who themselves have witnessed it!" Witnessed what? Is it that all the slaveholders in the South treat their slaves with cruelty and barbarity? Oh no, perhaps he says, not all, but many of them! Many thanks! This is fully admitted, and much regretted; but this exception proves the very proposition with which we started, viz. "that slavery, and cruelty, ought not to be used as synonymous terms!" Again, fresh he is no doubt to the charge, with the thrust, "but this fact of many of the slaveholders treating their slaves with cruelty, shows there ought to be no slavery!" Avast, friend! is the abuse of a system a just cause of condemnation? Do you say it is: then the system of apprenticeship—of guardianship—of matrimony—Liberty—and Christianity themselves, ought to be condemned, for they all have been abused—all have had the most cruel—tyrannical—and Satanic acts, committed under their names! Therefore, according to the very argument by which you would have slavery condemned, you would also

have liberty, matrimony, and Christianity, banished from the earth!—You cannot get out of the dilemma—there is no possible alternative—if slavery is to be condemned because it has been abused, so are Liberty and Christianity! Out of thine own mouth thou art condemned!

A total recklessness of truth is a remarkable feature in the arguments adopted by the advocates of Abolitionism; while they give no credit to the statements of those differing from them! they unblushingly assert that all slaveholders are tyrants and cruel! Does truth require falsehood to make it conquer? Ought not those preposterous misstatements open the eyes of the public to the real character, and motive, of those men?—The cause of God they cannot be advocating, for his cause requires not the weapons of Satan! Error invariably stands in need of lies for its support.

That there is great cruelty in the South, no one denies; but is there no cruelty in the North? Are there no cruel, tyrannical, husbands and masters in Philadelphia or in Boston? Are no acts of oppression committed north of the Chesapeake? These cannot be attributed to slavery! There is, rely on it, a deeper, a more concealed, a more galling slavery and bondage, to which these evils are attributable, even the slavery of the soul to sin and to Satan. To this one, and the same mental slavery, both cruelty and tyranny in the South, and in the North, are alike referable. Therefore attributing these detestable evils, cruelty, and tyranny, to corporeal slavery, is not only unphilosophical and unscriptural, but fatally erroneous; for it leads us to attack the effect, and not the cause.

The Author, while listening last week to the Abolition

Champions in the late "Pennsylvania Hall," was forcibly struck with the strong similarity between the mode of argument adopted by them, and by the champions of Infidelity in the late public discussions, between them and him, in New York! They commenced their addresses with high-sounding words about liberty! oppression! tyranny, &c.! Having by this mode (and they know the value of it!) got ready access to the hearts of their audience, and made a favourable impression, so as to make the females whisper to each other, "Oh what a fine, good man, that must be," &c.(!) then they depicted, in the strongest colours, the horrors of slavery—next they issued forth a tirade of slander and abuse against all slaveholders; and lastly they proceeded to undermine the character of every man opposed to them—the credibility of every witness bearing testimony against them—and the motives of all men, except themselves! Moreover they invariably attacked the abuses of each system (as if a system were answerable for its abuse) holding up to public odium, what every good man from his heart must condemn, viz: oppression, tyranny, and cruelty; thus