The Liberty League

I have perused with some care, Bro. Geo. VV. Clark's commutiiration of 7th July last. pulilished in the Signal of 31si ult., and sincerely hope he will not dnem it a trespass epon those.cerv just rules, wliich oceupy the fint part of liis letter, if 1 tnke the libsrty, n the spirit of kindness, to dissent from some of his preniises, and consequently from the conclusions he has deduced from them - and I bope he wil] not be ofiended if I say some of his conclusions are not justified by his premises After his vory kindly introduction, ho proceeds to say - "Let us (speaking in reference to the schism between the Liberty Party and the Liberty League) be influenefd by :io selfish considerations ro party spirit, but moet and candidly and fairly discus j the principies in difl'erence bclween us, in tlie liglilwe nowhave, ntend of the darkucss we once had, and ollow tlie teachings of trnlh nnd rigit, raher t)an blind c.r])''d i rnr.;, and shuflling worlJIy policy." Nüw, it is to he noted hnt the aliove remarks are made by Br. C-lark , as llie apologist, if not defender of he Leigiie : And nlthough the Liberty artv liave no right(and I presume claim none) to díctatelo tlie Lengue.orany otlier iiarly or individual, w.liin. and hoic tliey sliall act; vet does it not occur to Br. Clark, as a rotber singular perioA, af.er the Longue have put their footdown in n very decid' d manncr, and act, cilculatftd, at least to discourage, an e (Fort at discussion fop anj' practical purpose, to urge1 the Liberty pnpty lo meet and cqndidly, and fairly discuss principies?" llave the Liberty League, by thcir action, par-l licularly at Macedón Lock, and the nddress lhere adopted, shown such a freedom ffom "party spirit,'" such a benevo!ent fbrbearanoe, as to have the right ;o assutne the position above lakon ? And ia it true that the Liberty Party are, ar have been, pursuing a course of blind ! pediencyl On the contiviry, is it not ; glanngly true, that by their single haarted devotion to ngreat, overwhelming principie, thoy have been branded as impracticables, enlliusia-its, fanatics t Whjr, I.Tothor Clark, let us endeavor to unrierstand rach pther, nnd speak intelligibly. Let us understand wliat is principie, and what is expediencj' - ond I presume we shall ngree that that is' principie, in reference to our dutif.s and actions, ihe omission of wbich, would be morally wrong - or on the contrary, the doing of which, wlien prohióiled ly the great law of love, would be also roerally wrong. - We shnl! a'so agree undoubteJly, in the proposilion, that matiers of expediency are ihose, the doing or omission of which. do not necessarily nvolve any moral accountabiliiy. Now sir, if I am right in thee propositions. pleae (est the Liberty Party principies, and the Liberty League 19 atticles by them - and you can not long hpsilale as to which party are founded in principie, and wbich, at least inpart, in expediency. And here, I wish it i distinctlv understood, that as questions of mere expeJient-}-, 1 should probnbly be in favor of Legislalion, when the proper lime comes, with the League on mo-t of ti.e 19 anieles. Btit to rrmke mere expediency questions the foundation of a politicnl pofty, wouid be to return, in nnoiher form, to Whigisrn and ('Psuedo) Demorracy. But I must haslen to notice anollier passngf, as follows : "But you say tlie Liberty party was not firmed to look afler tne rights of all men:" - "That i'p, it was not formed to do ihe dulies of civil government, but simplv and solply to overlhrdw Slnvenj." W'fll, if tliis v:as r.nd is the solc object of the Liberly party, for one, I confess I have lived thus far under a very great mistake. I have hiiherlo labored under the belief ihat it '■tvos formed io look afier the rights of all men" - and ahhough U might not necessarily, by that nnme, or in that particular form of orgnnization, ever hold the power of the Dotion, its great fundamental principies of equal liberty and pqual right and justioe, would in sonie form rule and savk the land. But again - "Admit forargument's snke that t was not formed for any oiher purpose l han toabolish chattel slarery - what then 1 The temperance Society was nol formed with any design of abolishmg the use of wine, leer, or eider," - !'nor did tho friends of the temperance cause intend or expect to carry the question to the ballot box." This all may bc - but I confess I have never seen any evidence on which to form such a conclusión. On the contrary, I have always, in niv simplicity, suppoKcd the orgnnization of temperance societies was for the express object - the one idea object - or united, concerted nction for the promotion of temperance. and (he overthrow of infemperance, and all the legión of wocs and curses legitimately formed in its train : Precisely as the organization of the Liberty party had for its object the establishment of uni' versal freedom and equality, and the overthruw of slavery, opjrpssion and wrong, and all the untold miseries snd outragp. legitirnately growing oufof the foundation wickedness. The asserlion tbat the friends of tempcrance did not intpnd or design to carry the question to ho bal lol box, so far as my experience and obeervotion are concerned, is to a great extent, at least, a mislake - for. many yenrs sinc?, that proposition was discussed in the ternpernnce societies, in lyceums and elsewherp, and more than one town made t o ballot-box question more than a dozen years since. But supposo all this to be oiierwise - what comparison is there between a society whose original object was onlv moral suasion, and a politica! party basfd upon the principie of ballotbox action ? O ui" position benrs a relation to the old tnornl sunsion anti-slavery movernent - similar to the present and former temperance movements towanls each ether, on our friend's own hypothesis. Our friend proceerls (o ask - "Do refonners go baekwards and downwards ; or vptcards and cmcards?"' 'The 1 pies laid down and ndvocaled all nlong by tlie Liberty party, from !a incipient formalioii until tlie presenl limo, load naturally ani legitimntely 10 ide poMlionnow takon by tliose engaged in the tifw movement." good iVieml will, I hope, excum mo, f 1 say tiie obove J but bis opinión, unlbundcd in any Ipgitimnte conclusión tú be drawn from :iny of bis premisos - and perm 't me lo say, also unfounded in facl or 'reason. Nay, so far from piogress or evidence of progress, it apppars to me the new movement is aban duning the great foundation principies of tnor.il righteousness for mere exuediency - mere dollar and rent que-tions - ahout wliicli, I will venture the prediction thai the "new movement," will not be able to ogreo for EVBJ oxe y kar. Agiin says our friend - "And even though wc did not at the out set, slurl right,are we therefore to continue wrong!" Why certainly not - uothingcan be clearer than tbat if we started wrong, we ouglr. at oni.-e to changa our ground. - Bnt has our fiend ihown ihnl "e did not start righti Rather, is not bis position a mere begging of ibe queslioti without fact or re:son ? Agnin avs brotlier ( lark - HShall we only look af.er ihe liberty of i!ip black man who is in chams, and neglect ollier poor and degraded and oppressed black and white men?" Most cenainly not - and J am yot to loain, tliat the Liberty party, orany member of tliat party, ever proposed so i-evol:ing a course - and stili j more, that the tondency of their movement is in the remotest degree in tha direction : On tho contra ry, it is incontrovertibly true, we .ihink, ihnt the bare alolilion of chattel slavery in tiiis nntion. would do more thnn 11 ollier things together, to produce that eqnali:y of rights and privileges in al! classes nnd with all color?, whicii is undoubtedly, the g'-ent object of all good men. Aga;n, in closing, I must be sllowed, however reluctantly, to disngree wilh our fripnd in auothcr conclusión bc liasarrived at. [Ie says "J.ib was not exetcttj a mie idea man," and quote a number of passa: ges of scrïpture, as Ilustrativo of bis as sumption, which seem 10 me conclusicly to prove hirn 5o be mis!n!rn. Fur if 1 understand the cbaracter of Jot, as devrloped in the passages qtioted, there is a most singular and beautiful evidence of sing!encss of henrt, of one-idenism, in his earnest and pf-rsevei ing eílorts torio good lo all, lo establi.sh jutice nnd relieve the onpresserf and misftrjbla ot' any elnss : In oiher wordí, a sublime illu.Mration of tl. e snme one-ideaism of love and bnevolence. which charactpri.ed the blesed j Savior's mission on earth ; and which, if j I am not deeftived, is the very foundation stoneof the Liberty party mnvomenf. And now let me assure friend Clark. tbat although we may disngrep, as to the ! best mode of act ion for the removal of ' the gre'it and p-srilous evil of slavery. 1 feel, with him, a sirong desire, not 10 hinder each olher, if in the great lead'ng principie we ngroc - therefure let us agreo to bear and forbeir, reraembering that every club 'e mny Ibrow at encb. Mlipr will knock out the braios of more than one trodden down elavc. Cextrf.vii.le, lOih Aug. 1847.