Independent Nominations: For The Signal Of Liberty

Many Christian men are much opposed i io supporüng by iheir votes, men whose nomination for office has been obtained ixelusively on the ground of thcir altachiient to the cause of universal liberty. - Fhey object to this manner of sustaining m enterpnse, which they admit must be 3ustair.ec), in order to overthrow onc of the jreatest of human evils; at the same time? hcy have no objection to the nomination jf the same persons for the same situation, lor to supporling them vvilh their votes, if he nomination be not made vvith the avowïd intention ofcarryingforward this great ïnterprize . Hcre lies the great difficulty. I'hey recommend lo all to do every act svïth refercnce to sccuring obedience to ;he laws of God, and all the moral and in:ellectual intcrests of men; all but nomiïating men for office and voling for them: hese acts, they say, should not be applied ;o ihe direct and absolute promotion of any reat moral enterprize, although every othsr act of a whole Ufe may, laudably bc deoted to the accomplishment of that same snterprise. Yet these men believe in human government, and in the propricty of hoo&itig by their votes the men wiio mako iheir laws, and that wholesome laws are ibsolutely necessary to sustain ihe moral iharacter of the naiion; and they are the men who utter unceasing complaints igainst Iaws that legaüze immorality - Fhey do not object to using eíForts indi- rectly tu secure the nomination and electionoftnen of the respective political parlieB who are in favor of morality and religión and equal righis; but vhen a man is nominaied and supporled publicly on the ground that he is fully and absolutely committed on these points, and will certainly carry them out to the extent of his ufficial powers, and he is personally true in every good word and work, and ba is brought forward for that situation because he is such a man - they are almost horror 3truck - they say the whole proceeding is wrong, unwise, impractible, fanatioal, no Scripture for it, &c, but beyond all othër ihings it is insisted that the whole moral enterpnse will certainly be corrupted hy being comvdnglcd xpith political strife. - Let us examine the propriety and validity of the objection. 1. I inquire who it is that will be thus corruped. Is it the anti-slavery voter - he who has stood his ground through reproach and obloquy - proof alike to allui emonts, threats, ridicule and loss of rcputation - when he is seen boldly marching up to tho ballot box to deposite his vote for a good man and truc - has he been corrupted ? What sijjns of corruption can you detect in him? líe has been tried in tho furnace - ever} moral principie tested,and he appears at the polls victorious over every temptation - livixg out his profcssion.p. Will the persons votedfor become corrupt? If they are not elecied,. every one knows that by consenting to become candidates, they have cut themselves oiFfrom all popularity orcommunion with the other parties, and consequently all temptations from such sources have ceased. II they are elected by the straight forward profession and praciice of anti-slavery principies, how will they be thereby corrupted after their accession to office? - Have Presidents Harrison and Tyler been corrupted, because they have been successful candidates ? Will the great multitudes of the politica nartizans become corrupt by hearing aniislavery principies and feelings discussei throughout every village and town in the land, and by seeing them aclcd out a the polls? We do believe they will be influenced thereby, but the effect will be to lead them out of the corruption of their own parties to the adopiion of such rules of action as conscience approves, and Guc commands. 2. I enquire wheiher Ihe political insti tutions of the country will be corrupted by the success of this polilico-moral enterprise. Will justice be dispensed in out courts with a less impartial hand? Wil the efficiency of the army or post office de partment be diminished? Wll Congress bc any less wise, or impartial, or the mem bers quarrel and fight duels more than they now do, mercly because they are abolitionists? 3. I inquire what is the nature of this "political strife," which hns frigh tened so many. Analyze it. Gel down uto tíe merits of the case, and ysu will find the sum of the whole matter is this: I hold to certain political and moral sentiments which I wish to see prevail through the nation: and in selecting our rulers, I vote for men whose views are consonant wüh my own. But my next neighbor holds to opinionB the very reverse of mine, and he accordingly supports for office men who think as he does. Aiter discussing the merits of our principies, we go to the polls peaceably togelher, and deposite our votes, and the candidates who receive the greatest nutnber are duly elected, and there is an end of the matter. Now where is the corruption engendered by this "political strife," which must necessarily corrupt every cause it comes in contact with? - Is my vote necesssarily corrupt? Havel destroyed or broken down, or surrendered any one principie or porlion of the antislavery enterprise, by voting for a man who will surely act out those principies in all their length and breadth? Where is the scar, or wound, or blemish, or injury, sustained by the anti-slavery causo by this "comminging with political strife," this "dabbüng in the dirty waters of politics''? There is none, nor ever wtu,nor ever willbe. Thcre is nothing whatcver in ihe jbjection. And any person who will exexamine the suhject thoroughly, whatever inay bo his present belief, will join with me in saying, it isone of the absurdest noiions that ever entered the head of a