Newspaper Page Text
my antimis6ionary brethren to shew niei
wherein it lies, ns I do believe that I do lie
open for instruction. But when they will
abuse us for every thing but gentlemen, forj
Wing candid in our sentiments, docs ■ I orig
inate from love ? And when pious, order
ly, prayerful members ore expelled Irom fel
lowship, for no other transgression than the j
zeal they have for Christ and his cause and j
their desire to propagate the gospel, broth- j
ren, does it appear like the spirit of the j
meek and loving Jesus, or has it the appear- j
ence of something else ? The fmits of the 1
•Spitit are love, joy, peace, long suffering,
gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, tem
perance ; and if we live itt the spirit, let us
also walk in the Spirit. Yet 1 can say,
brother Baker, the mission cause i3 gaining
in this section. Many were to run to and
fro and knowledge was to be increased, and
if it is not spiritual knowledge, ! am de
ceived, and 1 do hope that I shall have your
prayers, together with all who may read
this, if I am deceived, that the God ofhea-j
ven may shew me wherein I am wrong,
and if right-, that he may increase my faith,
and establish me, and enable me to hol'd out
faithful m thtr fmt, frtr iritftirtft fliittl fl fS 101 ~
possible to please God. I saw a piece in
the Index, previous to my taking it, written
by Brother Bennett—it would meet my ap
probation together with many others in this
section, if you would publish it again, as
there are numbers who wish to sec it. and it
might, perhaps, do some good. We arc
here a small flock ; small in our own eyes
and in the eyes of others; the majority ol
us being recently taken from the world’s j
wilderness, do desire instruction from you |
in your paper and that your prayers may j
ascend to heaven in our behalf.
It. T. S. j
We are so much crowded with matter
that we cannot at present republish brother
Bennett's letter, but will do so, in compli
ance with the request of bro. S. and others,
as soon as we conveniently can.
Editoii.
For tlic Christian Index.
The Psalmist untl Abolitiouism—The Under j
Current—The Editor's spirit—The infill-!
eucc of the Index.
Bro. Baker —ls your Gilt objection to
the Psalmist, (in your Reply to bro. Peek)
had been stated as an opinion merely, I do
not know that I should have noticed it at
all. But as I observed in my previous com
munication, you asscit it as a fact, “with
out any qualification"—“that its circula
tion is calculated to increase the influence
of abolitionists, and consequently llteiryw/c
----cr to injure us."* I lam happy now to be
informed that you only meant to express an
opinion. For, though I respect your opin
ions very highly, yet from this opinion I
must beg leave to dissent, notwithstanding
the confidence with which you re-assert it,
and the mathematical Jlourish of a “Q. E.
D.” with which you back it.*2 For thus
dissenting, I oiler the following reasons :
First, our intercut forbids the possibility of
such iullucnee being increased in the South
by the circulation of the Psalmist or by any
other means. lit noticing an advertisement
of this Book some time back, you informed
us that intercut was a powerful principle,
(l do not quote your language, as 1 have
not the paper before me) perhaps stronger
than any other, except the love of Christ.
Abolitionism is so directly opposed to the
internt of the South, that it seems to ine j
the most preposterous idea imaginable, that!
the name or names of any man or set of
men could possibly increase the influence
of Abolitionists among us. *3 Secondly. Ad
mit your conclusions, ami I am driven there- •
by to the following results. By circula
ting Banyan's Pilgrim’s Progress and Ho
ly War 1 promote the practice of “Open
communion”—because Dunyan was an
open-coin m unionist. So of the Writings of
Robert Hall. Again, by circulating Dod
dridge’s Rise and Progress, and Baxter’s
Saints’ Rest, I promote the error of Peotlo
baptism—for Doddridge and Baxter were
Peodobaptists *4. If your conclusions are
just, I am barred from the circulation of!
uinetenths of the leligious Books now in ;
common use. And I must go to my Libra- i
ry, and burn three-fourths of the Works it I
contains. Finally 1 may ask, why you ‘
have not, upon the same ground, opened i
your artillery against Way land’s Moral Sci-!
ence/d (the text book of Mercer Universi- i
ty)*li and Fairy's Philosophy, and almost I
every work of tbs kind ? And how is it;
that you have recommended and still re-’
commend “The Christian Review,” edited, j
if I am not greatly mistaken, by the same
Smith who is one of the editors of the t
Psalmist, and who has been guessed into j
an Abo ilionist, whether he be one or not.*7 j
2. “The Under Current.” I rejoice to
he assured that you had no relctcoce to
your Georgia htethren in the expression to i
which 1 took exceptions. I still think,
however, that your language fully justilied
the construction l put upon it. As it is
those •* Abolitionists in disguise at the
South,” however, to whom you allude, 1
will leave the matter between you and them.
Only adding, that I would be glad that you
would somehow “leak it out” who they
sre, or how w e may detect them.'*B
3. “The Editor’s spirit.” You will te-:
me.nbei, that “faithful are the wounds of a
triend, but the kisses of an enemy arc de
ceitful.” In your reply to Bro. Peck you
have litis language, “We are sensible that
we have passed the Rubicon, in the opinion
of some ; hut we arc driven across it by
Bio. P, We expect no forgiveness for this
front our hrclh.en—we ask none. We can i
do as well without it as with it.” 9 In No.
31. in your remarks on llro. B,*s article in
defence of the Psalmist, von cay, “ we
know that some of the frietidsol the Psalm
ist represent that all hi era it/ men approve
ti, and that.-no gno'i man opposes jt. That
is as much us to say, if you do not approve
I it, you can have no just pretensions either
i to literature or goodness.”*lo You seetn
j to be apprehensive that the cry ol “rash,
’ imprudent, excitable,” <fce. will be raised
against you. I quote the above passages to
show you, that you are at least in danger ol
giving some slight occasion for such aery.
! *ll. And why tell us, the friends of the
| Psalmist, in your 371 h No. “ You might
j ms well cease your firing, for to sanction the j
| Psalmist, as it is, while living, we never j
| will.” Well, my dear brother, suppose it j
| is a-settled matter that you never will sane- i
j lion the Psalmist, is that a sufficient reason
why others should desist from advocating]
it ? We think it hardly liberal to he told, i
j if we wont talk on your side, we had bet
ter not talk at a11.*12 And hardly respect-
ful to be assured, that we “are unwittingly j
playing the very part which toe more sub
tile of the Abolitionists would have them
(us) play.”* 13
4. The Influence of the Index. Time
and circumstances may disclose that the In-j
dex has unwittingly exerted the very in- ]
licence which could have been desired by j
the dlboltionists of the North and the Uis
unionists of the South.* 14 Do you in
quire how ? I answer, by alienating the
feelings of our northern brethren, and excit
ing needless prejudice and distrust in the
South. I need not be told here, that the
northern brethren are already alienated. I
know better. It was the purpose of the
Abolitionists to have displaced all southern
men out of the late Triennial Convention j
and Am. Bap. Home Mission Society.— ]
Nothing hut the fidelity and friendship ol ]
northern bretbicn prevented them from ae-!
compiishing their wicked purpose, and sav- j
ed our denomination from a similar catastro
phe to that which befel the Methodists.* 15
I,ike men of God they stood firm to the
Constitutions'll} of those Societies and to
the Bible ; and the Abolitionists were foiled
at every point.* 17.
Jo conclusion, Bro. Baker, allow me to
say, that I am second to no man in appre
ciating your ability and fidelity aa a Chris
tian editor. And most deeply should 1 re
gret to have you retire from your present
position. And though l may honestly dis
sent from some of your views, yet for your
self personally, 1 feel llic warmest Itieml
] ship, and most earnestly wish you prosper*
i itv and happiness.
J. If. CAMPBELL.
Clinton, Sept. 29.
NOTES IX SKI.F DEFENCE.
*1- We would respectfully inquire of |
brother G. whether he is accustomed to
preface every expression of his views with 1
“l am of opinion”—“l think”—or “I be
lieve ?” Is it customary with any one to
do this ? U'c arc of opinion that it is not.
f Ve are of opinion that bro. C. and others
affirm, “without any qualification,” what
they confidently believe to be true and be
lieve admits of proof. Ifc arc of opinion
that bro. C’s article affords evidence of this
fact, as far as he is concerned. He affirms,
vvilliout any qualification, that w care‘at least
in danger of giving some slight occasion
for such a cry”—(that of “rash” <fcc.) “/
know better ” —that is, that those who say
that “Northern brethren are already aliena
ted” affirm what is false. “It was the
|iurpose of Abolitionists,” die. “Nothing
but the fidelity and friendship of Northern
brethren prevented them”—“They stood
firm to the constitution,” die. ‘‘Abolition
ists were foiled.” Now here are assertions
that are not qualified with “/ am of opin
ion,” or any similar phrase. We hare no
doubt bro. (’. confidently believes all that]
he affirms ; but we as confidently believe,
that iu some of them at least, he is mista-|
ken. This, in our subsequent ’notes, we
may attempt to shew. We believe that
j bro. C. is quite as much inclined lobe
dogmatical as wo are—we say not more so
—therefore we give no just ground for of- 1
fence, wc hope.
*2. Allow me to remind you, my good
brother that we may sneer at an argument that
we cannot disprove, and that one may “flour
ish” the sword of the tyrant, or the whip
j of the flagellator, as well as the pen of the
pedant. We tlo not intend to charge yon
with doing cither.
In the demonstration of our main propo
| sition, we appended to each of our minor
1 propositions, or postulates, and to the de
duction, queries like these: “Is not this
irue? Will bro. C. deny this?” Now if
hro. C. wished to meet the subject fairly,
ho should have shewn wny our pustulate* •
should not be granted, or that our conclusion
! was not a logical deduction from them.—
! This he has not attempted to do.
I ‘3. We would remind hro. C. of a few
i facts. I. A majority of our population
1 are probably non-slaveholders. 2. A slave-
I holder may become an abolitionist without
, sacrificing his worldly interests. As evi-
! deuce of this we may refer to the ease of j
Or. Beeman, and others that wc could ■
l name. 3. Persons often adopt opinions
: without first considering oi understanding \
: their hearing on their pecuniary interests. |
•I Opposed as abolition is to the interests oil
slaveholders, it hus prevailed over those in
terests in some States, and what it has es
! Ice ted once, it may etfect again. 5. When
an enemy is prowling through a country,j
those who apprehend the least danger are !
j generally the most insecure, as was the j
lease with the Trojans, to whom hro. liar-,
vev referred.
■l. The disparity in the two eases is so
manifest, that wc are surprised that one I
who is so quick at discerning even the ap
pearance of a discrepancy, as is bro. (J.
| did not discover it. We objected to the
Psalmist, that its circulation tended to in
crease the influence and popularity of Mr.
Stow, mi abolitionist, and thus tended to
increase his power to injure us. Mr. Stow
is a living man, ready to seize upon any
advantages which we allow him, and to ex
ert any influence which we may help to
give him, to effect the abolition of slavery.
He will not deny, we presume, that he feels
himself bound to exert //the influence
which he can command against slavery.—
But Bunyan, Hall, Doddridge and Baxter!
are in the “lone grave slumbering,” where !
they have neither powerto help nor to harm ]
us. Again, they were men who appear
to have been, as far as we have had aa op
portunity of becoming acquainted with their
characters, men of correct moral principles.
We do not say that Mr. Slow’s principles I
aie not correct, but we do say we have not
the evidence necessary to inspire us with
c nfiaenee in them; while, on the contrary,
there are things that are calculated to ex- j
cite distrust. We can never confide in \
the. moial principles of that man, who wll
denounce one’s acts today as flagrant violt
lious of the moral law—as of a kindred
character with) murder, robbery, &c.,cnd
to-morrow take him to his bosom as a friend
and Christian brother; or who will aSsaii
a brother's moral character aml_ re fuse him
an opportunity of defending himself. A
gain, Abolitionists seek to invade our leged
rights; Pedobaptists and Fre# Commu
nionists do not. Abolitionists ‘esort to the
use of means to effect their object to which
Pedobaptists Sec- would scorn to stoop. —
We have pointed out four distinct points of
difference. I. In the sta.e of being of
those to whom reference is made. 2. In
their moral principles- 3. In their objects:
and 4. In the means to which they resort
to accomplish their object. But did these
differences not exist, to render the cases
parallel, the question should he between
adopting a hymn look compiled by a Pedo
baptist and one compiled by an abolitionist.
We should be for rejecting both. Would
bro. G, he for recommending to theVlmrch
cs generally the adoption, as a standout \
hymn book, one that was compiled by aj
Pedobaptist ? If not, we would ask, in ini-!
notion of his own mode of icasoning. why
then recommend one compiled by an aboli
tionist ? Docs bro. G. believe üboution
ism tobe more innoxious orsciiptural than
pedobaplism ? If he does we must beg
leave to dissent from him on tlii* point too.
We are happy to find that the principle
upon which our objection to tl.o abolition
tendency of the Psalmist is based, is sanc
tioned by the editor of the N. Y. Baptist
Advocate, in his comments on the debate
between Messrs Gainpbcll and Rice, lie
says, “The soundness of Mr. Rice on
fJOtfirtt Os uviuigcNvttl
the pious reader to look with favor upon
his specious reasoning in favor of his er
roneous practice.” That is substantially
our argument. We contend, that whatever
tends to prcposscs one in lavor of Mr.
Slow, tends to predispose one to “look with
favor on his specious reasoning in furor
of his erroneous practice ” and views. —
We are confirmed in this opinion by find
ing that some who condemned Mr. Stow,
as severely as ever we did, have already
become his apologists!!! Here then is
the testimony of a Northern editor and the
evidence of facts in our favor.
*5. We answer, for several reasons. 1.
Because it is not issued by a Society, in
which we of tlie South have any pecuniary
interest or control. 2. It is not published
under the sanction and at the expense of
the Baptist denomination in the United
( States. 3. It is not issued or intended as
a standard denominational work. These
| being facts we have no right to object to its
publication. 4. It is not a work that is |
likely to be circulated generally. Its eireu- j
lation u til be confined principally to those j
whose minds, have been cultivated and j
whose principles have been established.— i
As to its use in our Southern Colleges) we I
have hut two remarks to make. 1. If it I
contains poison, when it is put into the !
hand of the student, ptofessors are present I
with the antidote—not so with the Psalm
ist. 2. The most effectual way to guard i
; our voitth against the influence of aboli-
I J O
i wi< wuUiUii uu<l onulyio ll \& JtfX ft* i
cip/cs upon which it is based, and expose
| the incorrectness and fallacy of those priu- j
| eiples. Bro. C, pursues this course in ex
posing errot. He gives the strongest argil
i meats of his opponents, without fearing
; that liis hearers will thereby, be converted
to their erecd—Why* Because lie has
i the corrective at hand ; and he proceeds to
apply it.
“*(?, We omit the personal application |
which bro. C. makes of remarks that have
appeared in the Index on Dr. Wayland’s ;
work, ptesuming that, on mote mature re- j
flection, bro. C’s own good sense will con
vince him that it is not lair, kind, or cour
teous, to make a personal application of tiiose
temarks, which is not warranted hv any
thing that has appeared in the Index, and
wliish the author of the articles to which
he alludes has trot authorized him ; to make.
Bro. C. we feel assured, will not complain
:of this omission ; as we prescribe no rule 1
: for him by which we are unwilling,to he j
j governed ourself. We never intentional- 1
iht apply die remarks of an anonymous
writer to a responsible person. Bro.
will remember, that in an instance in which
vve did it unwittingly, we made, in our
next paper, the amende honorable, hv giv-
ing, in the way of an apology, an explana
tion of the circumstances which led to our
unintentional breach of courtesy.
*7. We would inquire of bro. C. wheth
er we have ever said a word about Mr.
Smith’s abolitionism ? J It really looks, ray
brother, as though you are very anxious to
; criminate us, when you saddle us with the
I sins of another. Pray do not this, for we
i have sins enough of our own for which to ]
j answer, you yourself being judge, without!
] being held responsible sot those of others, j
I We certainly shall not recommend the Re->
] view when it falls into the hands of a known
abolitionist.
*B. We profess no knowledge of the
] means of detecting concealed abolitionists,
and therefore cannot designate them ; but
the fact that there are such in South
none, we should think, would deny, who
. read the public papers. Even in the Index,
j extracts have appeard from the lelteisof
some of them, copied from Northern pa
pers. We recollect publishing an extract
from the letter of one, said to reside in
Georgia, who, after condemning slavery,
expressed the hope of being able lo make
arrangements, in a year or two, to bid a fi
nal adieu to the land of the slaveholder.—
We cannot but consider the demand of bro.
C. in this instance, most unreasonable.—
Instead of calling on us to furnish evidence
of the existence ofdisgtiised abolitionists in
tit a South, he calls on us to tell who they
are, and how to detect them! Does not
bio. G. know if they could he detected
they would not be allowed to remain in the
South !
*9. So said we, and so say we still, and ]
we arc of opinion that bro. C. helps to fill- 1
fil the predictions that we made relative to ,
the course that would he pursued towards |
us—or rather against us.
*lO. We have proof of this in black and i
white, from the very best authority.
*ll. We more amused than offended j
that bro. G. should write its a lecture on ]
j “the editor’s spirit.” We very much j
j question w liethcr bro. G. has any more i
| teputation for mildness than we have.— !
But what has “ the editor's spirit ” to do |
with the merits of the Psalmist?
“12 If it be liberal to insinuate that we j
have so said or intimated, we know not j
what llliirality is.
*l3 Whether it be respectful or not the |
commendations bestowed on bro. G. and !
others attest the truth of our remark.
*l4 Why then do they denounce us and
extol you ? Wc have always advocated, i
in the Index and elsewhere, union on fair, i
J i
erptilablc and honorable principles. II bro.
G. desires it on othei principles, we must i
utrtet mim nun, even triongn ,ic 0,.,, tie j
viewed as one of tlie “Disunionists of the!
j South.” We confess we would sooner see I
the community seveted into its integral
, parts, and the univcisc itself reduced to its [
original atoms, than sacrifice one moral
i principle ; and we arc unwilling to believe]
; that bro. G. and tile is from us iu this.
*ls Bro. G. was not aware, wc ptesume,
. of the recent movements of the Home Mis- 1
j sion Society ; nor was he probably aware,
j at the time of writing, that it had b en do- j
termmed, by members of the Board of For
eign M issions, previous to their receiving
intelligence of the death of Rev. Jesse Bushy
head, the only slaveholder in their employ
j men!, to request him to resign, that they
might tree themselves from what they con- ]
sidered the guilt of countenancing slave
holding. This is evidence, is it, of “the
fidelity and friendship of northern brelh- j
ren ?” When we are convinced that s/ace-:
holding is sinful, we will cheerfully con-j
cede that “Jiite/ilij” (not to the Constitu
tions of our Societies or to that of out Gov
ernment, but to Cod) requires them to eject’
slaveholders ; and that true “friendship”
should prompt them to help to free us from
j this sin. But we are yet to be convinced
■ that slavery is sinful, or that one can serve ;
! God and Mammon, or remain neutral in a
’ case affecting his moral actions. From
such “fidelity and friends*hip” may we ever
be delivered. We have, in our possession,
| a letter from prominent brethren at the!
| North—brethren to whom the deuomina-1
I tioTTTs"under lnmi T |e*iti“ OMHgWIWmc *
! —in which they assure us, that NINE-!
I J
TENTHS of the Baptists at the North aiei
! Abolitionists.
*l6 They violated the Constitutions of j
two of the Societies, by permitting the sub
ject of slavery to he discussed at their meet-;
; mgs.
* 17 The Abolitionists considered that they
had gained a signal victory, in forcing the i
j Convention anil the 11. M. S. into the dis
cussion of the subject of slavery, and boast- ;
! ed that they had gained more at that Con
i vent ion than they had gained in ten years j
j before. The results which have followed !
I shew that their boasting was not vain.— I
llow sttange is it, that a little better than a |
year ago, brother C. censured severely
these faithful friends at the North, when |
they were at peace with us, hut now that \
Ithcyar ecaslingusojf, he becomes their ad ;
voeate and clings to them with astonishing
I tenacity !! We have had much more inter-1
jeoutse, we expect, with Northern brethren
| ilia.i bro C. has had, and our present situ-.
j ation, as editor, enables us to leant more of I
the state of parties at the North and South !
than he probably lias the means of learning.
We know much more about the operations
of our Northern brethren than we have ever
thought proper to disclose; and we have
disclosed more than we ever should have
done, had it not been rendered necessary,
in order to defend ourselfagainst the attacks
of the advocates of the Psalmist.
In conclusion, we would most cordially
reciprocate, Bro. G., your kind expressions
of friendly regard, and assure you, that it
never offends us far a brother to differ Irom
’ us in our views ; hot let tue ask you, my ;
] brother, for your own sake, not for mine, j
j to review your article impartially, and see j
’ if it does not savor more of a personal at
tack on the editor than a defence of the j
Psalmist. What argument have you ad-]
duced in favor of the Psalmist? What ar-;
gument of ours have you fairly met ? You j
have confined your remarks to one out of j
some eight or ten objections urged against j
the Psalmist. Examine the tendency of
those remarks, and see if they do not all
tend to criminate the editor —to prove him
inconsistent — dogmatical — intolerant —
pedantic — illiberal — disrespectful—of a ]
bad spirit, &c. instead of disproving his ar
gument, or vindicating the merits of the j
Psalmist. If you doubt whethe* they have !
this tendency, ask some faithful friend—a :
| favorer of the Psalmist if you please—to j
t examine your article carefully, and tell you
| faithfully, whether they have the personal
S tendency which we have represented then:
to have. In our view, Tlicophilus is the
only opponent that has met the subject fair
ly. While wc ditler from him in Ins views,
I we must say, he discussed the subject fait -
; ly, in a gentlemanly manner and with a
] Christian spirit, w ithout casting personal
reflections oil us, for which he has our
tlmuks.
I-br the Christian Index.
Bro. Baker —l arrived home yesterday ]
evening from the Liberty Association, which I
was held at the Gentral Stand, (a camp-!
] ground) 15 miles north of Lafayette. I]
have been blessed w ith the privilege of at-j
tending every meeting of this body since]
39, and I can truly say, the present session j
’ was the most interesting l have ever wit i
■teased. I'here w ere several circumstances 1
which made it so. The harmony and broj
j thcrly love w Inch characterized all the pro- j
! c edmgsin the Association—and indeed im- ]
| portant subjects were discussed touching |
! the interests of the Zion of our God—espe- ]
: eially the spirit ol missions which seemed]
to pervade the most entire association. Wo j
have had two Domestic .Missionaries tiding j
the past year, and the Lord has blcssetl |
them, particularly in establishing churches
iu those destitute parts where they found a !
sufficient number ol Baptists, and they have i
thereby laid Hie foundation for gieater use- i
fulness hereafter. But in nothing was there j
a giealer manifestation ol the presence ol ]
the Lord than in preaching the w ord at the ]
stand. The Spirit of the Lord was upon j
his ministers, and the word preached was I
made the poower of God to the salt ation ol i
sinner--. 1 left the meeting going on. 1
will say no more at present. 1 herewith
send you the report of the Committee on
Education. 1 intend to send you a copy ol
the Minutes so soon as they conic out.
Report of the Committee on Education.
Youi Committee on Education beg leave
to report. We rejoice to see the increasing
interest that is now felt on the subject oi
Education generally, for truly anew era in
the history of our denomination has arrived;
for already we see schools of a high chat-!
acter and Colleges springing up yearly un
der the direction of our brethren which
promise increasing usefttlnes in ahnoslev
ery prut of our land, and lire Baptist now
stands on a level with other denominations
ill point of literary attainments.
Therefore, Resolved, That we recom
mend to the patronage of our brethren, the
Howard College, at Marion, and particular
ly the Theological department, under the
direction of Bro. Hartwell; and the Judson
Institute, under Bro. Jew ett.
Resolved, further, That we recommend
with pleasure to our brethren the Brown
i wood Institute, near Lagrange, Ga., under
lire. O. Smith, and the female Academies
; under Brethren Bacon and Fleming, at Lu
‘ <-rati"e ami owwiwm, wb , as tnsmtmtms
O O
] worthy of their patronage and as holding
out high inducements to Brethren in Eas-
tern Alabama. \V. 13. J.
Society Hill, Ala., Sept. 27.
For the Christian Index.
Doggerel.
It was once proposed by a write) of vile j
sounding doggerel, to furnish an original i
peice of poetry to be read and sung at the t
weekly meetings of a ee tain Society.— |
The presiding otticer, asked the obliging j
bard, “what would be the measure of Ins
verses.” “Measure” replied lie, Yes, re
joined the officer enjoying his amazement.
“How many feet do you have in a line !” !
“Feet,’, said he in perfect consternation,!
j “feel! Oil, I dont use Let, I dont write I
that way.” The poor fellow was scared’
; off, aud the Society was not bored. But:
! alas, sot the poor editor of the Index and !
his readers, who are perpetually annoyed 1
!by the unliarmouious jingling of some 1
rhyming correspondents. What “way”!
•do they write ? Can they not be scared •
I off? Your hints are not taken, Mr. editor;
j they suppose “you do not mean them.”— ‘
I Something decided must be done.—lnvite j
the critics, those literary dissectors, to try
their hands at poetic anatomy. AViiat a
glorious set of subjects the Index would
afford ! Try, sir, and after a few skeletons
have been shown up, I warrant you, they
will be frightened away.
If poetasters are not “frightened away”
by the above, we know not what will
frighten them. The misfortune of it is,
that in frightening the‘daws’away, you
frighten the dear little‘canaries’ too. A
mere versifier is like a certain character
mentioned Prov. V 7. 22—“'Though thou
] shouldst bray (him) in a mortar among
I w heat w ith a pestle, yet will not his foul
i ishness (doggerel ?) depart from him.”
For the Christian Index.
Slavery.—No. 11.
111. Dues slavery hinder the increase of
; public intelligence? It is admitted, that the
] standard of intelligence is not as high as it
should be in the Southern country. There
are some in slaveholding, as well as in oth
er States, who cannot read and write. But
is this one of the effects of slavery ? Noth
! ing can be more easy than to show, and
that too by facts, which cannot lie, that its
tendency is the very reverse of this.
It slavery produces ignorance among the
w hites, it must follow, that where it has the
! siruogtret tumhoW liter© ta tlie greatest
] amount of ignorance, and so vice versa. To
test this, let us recur again to the different
geographical divisions ol Georgia. (And l
coniine my observations to Georgia, be
cause 1 have had no opportunity ol becom
ing personally acquainted with the physical
ami intellectual features of the other South
ern Stales.) Let us compare the Ist ami
2d divisions, as maiked out in ‘No. 1 1’ of
this series. In the first, —the strip of land
on the seaboard—the large majority of tho
population are slaves : while m the 2d, —
the belt ol thin pine land back of it—there
ate very lew slaves comparatively. Now,
if slavery tends to produce ignorance, it
] must follow , that there is less intelligence in
] the former than m the latter. The fact in
the easels, that then; are, perhaps, none iu
I tlie former but w hat can icad and write, and
i a large portion are liberally educated, while
] the latter contains within itself nearly all
; tlie ignorance with which the Slate lias been
reproached, in the Island 2d divisions,
i therefore, which are emphatically, the slave
distncls ol Georgia, tlieie are very few, if
any, (quid tin ne aie none with whom 1 am
1 a qii.uuied) who cannot read; while in thoso
,] divisions ol the Stale where there are very
I lew slaves, unhappily, too large a number
i cannot read. ’1 hese facts do not seem to
| tavor the idea, that slavery tends to hinder
: the increase of public intelligence.
It is asked, why then, is education not
I more generally diffused iu the Slate ? I au
| swer, not because our people and legislators
i have not been alive to its importance , lor
] no Stale has made greater exertions, or re
| sorted to more expedient* for the aceoin
j pi slnncut oi this object, than lias Georgia.
! This has been evinced by the various at
j tempts of her Legislature to establish a sy
] tern ol common schools, and the numerous,
i and successful dibits of her citizens to
found colleges and high schools. All her
I plans to organize a general system ol com
] moil school instruction have faded, because
|ol the sparseness of her population. Is it
] asserted, that shivery prev. nts tier f.om
] toeing- densely poj dated, and t ms, in
cideutally, pievcnts public intelligence ? I
answer, tl ibis be true, it must lollow that
tlie population is the least dense w here
slavery has the strongest foothold ; but the
inverse ol this is true. In the bell of pine
land, tile population is sparse, because the
land is poor ; and so sparse is it, that you
can ride sometimes for five, ten, and even
twenty aides without seeing a •clearing’ in
the ini’ runnable [line forests. Hire and
there, along the margins of the watercourses,
and in other ierlilu situations, population is
] to lie found ; but all other places are thinly
settled, and w ould have been, though there
had never been a slave upon earth.
\\ hcrever our population is sufficiently
dense, schools are organized and sustained,
and, m such places, tlicio is as much intel
ligence, on an average, as is to he found in
the most favored Northern State.
\\ e have a greater number that cannot
read and w rite than they have in Massachu
setts, but then we have also a greater num
ber, in comparison, who are liberally edu
cated. .If the one fact, therefore, be held
to the discredit of slavery, the other should
be adduced in its praise. Georgia lecls
more interest iu the cause of common school
education, and has done more for the in
struction of her children, than New Jersey
or perhaps Rhode Island, it her connec
tion with slavery has prevented her from
; accomplishing as much as Massachusetts,
, .J. . . ... I r. i : * %*..-•
Jersey to full behind her ? If slavery has
made her less succi ssful than Massachu-
s. its in diffusing education generally among
her people ; what lias caused her to excel
Massachusetts in the number of Iter Colleges,
and her liberally educated men? To insti
tute too a fair comparison between the two
States, it must be borne in mind, that Geor
gia was settled more than a century after
Massachusetts, and that she has but recent
ly come into possession of a large portion
of her territory. Who will say, that she,
a hundred years hence, will not have pass
ed far beyond the position now occupied by
Massachusetts ?
It would seem, to those who look at the
subject without prejudice, that slavery, by
affording an opportunity to command lcis*
j ure lias a tendency rather to promote public
intelligence. Thus we have shown briefly,
but we hope satisfactorily, that it is injuri-
I ous neither to national wealth, public order,
nor public intelligence, and therefore not a
I political evil.
Is slavery a social evil?
These numbers have been extended far
j beyond my original intentions, and I shall
, be as brief and compendious as possible up
on this part of the subject. In the previ
; ous articles, under the head of its moral and
: political influence, I hope I have succeeded
in showing that it is not injurious to civil
j society ,* in this place, I shall content my
self with suggesting a few reasons to show,