Rule Of Decision: For The Signal Of Liberty

At 8ome futuro day, and ihat not far distant, it will be a matter of wonder and astonishraent that on so important a subjct aa thit of enslaving our fellow bejngs, men oould be found engaged in one of the most diabolic traffics Ihat ever disgraced a nation, and that thoso who havo exarnined the subjeot, and in our legislativo Halls, from yeaf to year, have ?o ong dejwfcad the question, and that more than ■half a cofitury elapsod before the nation becamo convinced of its enorraity, and of their duty to abolish it at homo, and aid n sauppreosing it throughout the world. The question is so simple that by a atrict applicatico of the Golden Rule, no time is left for reasoning or doubt. Tha reason is that men do not ngree ns to the rule of decisión to the test by which the question should be examinad nnd decided. Ono talks of right to property, aeeming to forget that the system originated ia and bas beeo continued hy theft and robbery. Oae talka of safety, affecting to believe the slavea are all demons ia humaa shape, furgetting to refer to the effect of eraancipution in the Brilish West ludia Islands. One talks of policy, npparently unconscioua of the fact that they are capable of taking care of themsclves. Another talks of a different order in the cale of creatioa,un willing to believe ihat "God toade of one blood all the nations to. dweil npon tho face of the Earth," 11 of which aro vorthy considerations, but uot the primcuy one by which the question should be examined and decided. Ia deciding tbe queaiion, referenco should only be had to the moral law : is it right - is it consistent with that declaration of our Savior "Wbatsoever ye would that men should do unio you do ye even so unto them." This question is in practico postpoaed to all Qthers, and by many who acknowiedge thfcoretically its primary claim. Il is, theo, easy to account for the dlay and opposition by which the question is met. To ihose who examine elavery by the standard to which all queseóos should ba referred, tho task of deciding is sjhort. Whetber it ia coDistent with the christiaa law for one man lo keep another in bonyiage without bis consent, and eompel hirn(io labor for tbe othsr'sadvantage, admids uf no more doubt than that tro and ti?o make four. Is it neceaaary, then, at this enligbtened period, to provo elavery incompatible witb christianity, whea ao ona doubts it whoknows vrhat Christianity is, or what it requires? It is easy to. estímate, wilh the greatest precisión, thei duty on all oiher Bubjects, but the system of elavery ie contemplated Uirough a veij that habit has suspended before their ayes,.and so deaso as to iutercept the viow of its moral feature?, as they ure presonted to the view of tliusa vho examine it without acy inieiveaing medium, wiiti no other Ijght than the light of truth. To all those the best advicar wa offer, is, to go back lo first prinoiplea,which aro few, and rea6oa therefrom.. Tho foandation of ll our relatire du?ie is beaevolea.ee and love, wbichistbe fulfilling ofthe moral law Charity prompts us to acts of kindaess, tencerness and fellow-feeling for all our rco of wbatever color and under all circumsiaaceR ia which they may be placed. Da you suppoe that petüon who seizes a man in 1 rica, and draga hiña shrieking nnd trembling (o a bJ&vv. vee?el, eeils liimtoa slave dealer for sordid gold, who imraures hiai into tho hcld chnined liko the beauté of prey, and traneports him to ona of our southern slavo cnarts, there sella him to a planter for ffthhy lucre, and by him is chained and hand cuffed, and drove to sonie inland dielrict. wbere he is doomed to drag oat a miBerablo existance, labor vrithoul wageí , and whera tae only hope of relief is by doath - think ye that the persons thus engaged ara aciog upon the principia of heoevolence and love? All are ready U answer NO. Or do you Í t&Ooo wb.o thus trafiic in the odies and sotils of men, wouM think them eelvei justly denlt by, were they to be so usedt NO. Then the queBtion is Êetlled Ihatby the Golden Rale none has a right to hold his fetiow iu bondage. Yet wc are met by those who eay to ns, that the preoept of our Holy Religión must be i ded, and we are asked is it safe to emancípate? Il U' always safe to do right, ond we should so act without looking forward to oonsequdn cep, alwaya bearing iu mind that if we da right, God will overrule it for the ultímate ]íood of all concerned. It is a fact that eau not be 6uccessfully contradicted that if it is wrong to hold our fellow beings in bondage, it is rigkt to let them free, unies ive are 10 live ia sin"tliat graco may abound," a position which the aposllePaul wag unwiümg to admit, and exclaimed "God forbidl" If then it be eo, Ihat slavery cannot be sustaine!i by the moral law, how can any person yhohas been guilty of so proes a vioiationcf human rigbts, stand ocquil'.ed before tthe bar of God, at the Judgeïnentof m-. great day, or how can we apologise foi: him who has winked at it, or in any waj advocated the systcm, or apologtsed for those who buy and scüs sla ves {or ihc B?.ip yfgaiü, and have dono it too, without,fin)í.pro8pect of pecuniary or other iin,only :for lbo sake of popularily. We 'x agaíj faow can such espect to bc ac'iJitted ai the day of final retribuían iion we'bavo it dcclnred aa sacrad Iruth .oat ;'io 1 iim thal knnwoth to do good ant ils.li it ín"., to himit fssin." If, i!ei;i, theposition be fully establishec ihat slavcry ie incompatable with the req.uirementsof the Gospel, the only nlter- native leít s to emancipólo their elaves instanter, and as far as in our power, to dlleviato iheir distresses, amoliurate iheir condiiion, and ín all respecis treat them like MEN,not as brutes, and raise the 8tndard of respectability; which being done, you will find among ihem men nnt a whit behind their white brethren in acieniinV skill, stern integrity, ütjifbrtti morality, deen piety, and sound statesmnnship.