*The chief instrument in this nefarious business has been the Colonization

Society. Mr. Elliot Cresson, its agent, came over to England some years ago, in a Quaker's coat, to beg money to further the device; but the Abolitionists and not least the Society of Friends, -discerned the real character of the

He pro

scheme; and though they wished well to the colony of Liberia-taken by it self-yet they refused to be parties in upholding slavery and proscribing the free coloured people of the United States of America, as pests and nuisances in the land where they and their fathers were born; and who are only good enough to be expatriated by Mr. Cresson and his colleagues, as if they were convicted malefactors, to the shores of Africa. Some years subsequently Mr. Cresson tried another device. cured a black coat, and in that garb came over to England, and called upon our bishops and clergy to request their money and influence to aid his design of extending to Liberia the ministrations of the Episcopal Church. The proposition sounded wisely and humanely, to those who did not know the character and objects of the Colonization Society, and the discarded drab coat of this zealous Episcopalian; and some subscriptions were obtained, with what results Mr. Cresson will perhaps explain at his leisure. When asked why the United States, with millions of unoccupied square miles of accessible continent demanding cultivation, should send denizens of its soil to Africa, the only reason which he could assign, was, what some of the company who witnessed his embarrassed explanations construed into

portion, this insurrection impressed on a few pious and reflecting minds a conviction both of the moral and political evils of slavery, and of the duty of combined action for its total abolition. In 1832 the New England Anti-Slavery Society was formed, and the succeeding year witnessed the organization of the American Anti-Slavery Society. Auxiliary associations sprang rapidly into being, funds were liberally bestowed, presses were established, and publications, pourtraying the abominations of the system were widely scattered throughout the land.

"This agitation both alarmed and irritated the slaveholders; and while on the one hand they endeavored to intimidate the Abolitionists by their murderous violence, they appealed to the selfish passions of the Northern community, by promising their votes and their trade to such only as would aid in suppressing the discussion of slavery. Immediately, our contending factions and our commercial cities rivalled each other in demonstrations of sympathy for horrence for Abolitionists. The clergy; their Southern brethren,' and of abyielding to the blast, generally observed a prudent silence, while a few, to prove the Abolitionists for their violence and their freedom from fanaticism, assailed rashness, protesting, however, against being considered the advocates of slavery

in the abstract.'

"On the clergy of the South, however, a more onerous task was imposed. The Northern movement was a religious one, impelled by a belief of the sinfulness that Southern consciences should be of slavery. Hence it became important encased in mail, impenetrable to antisuch a panoply was consigned to the slavery missiles. The fabrication of ministers of Christ, and significant hints shrink from the work. A meeting of were given them that they must not

"You mean that you free-born white Americans cannot condescend to place yourselves on a level with an inferior race of animals." The millions of men, women, and children, whose skin interpolates between pure African black and the tint of European families, prove that though American slave-owners would blush with shame and horror if a white man were honestly to marry a coloured woman-and such a violater of United States decency would be outlawed from society, and be liable to be tarred and feathered, and "Lynched " to death,they do not blush, but consider it an ordinary usage of society, that black and coloured women should be their unwedded paramours.

slaveholders in Mississippi, after resolving that any individual who should circulate anti-slavery papers in the State 'is justly worthy, in the sight of God and man, of immediate death,' voted 'that the Clergy of the State of Mississippi be hereby recommended at once to take a stand upon this subject, and that their further silence in relation to this subject (slavery) will, in our opinion, be subject to serious censure.'

"This pastoral admonition from the Lynchers was received with due reverence by those to whom it was directed. Presently two Mississippi Presbyteries passed resolutions in favor of the Christian character of slavery. A Mississippi divine published an elaborate vindication of the system, and a Methodist periodical in the State announced that it would recognize the right of man to hold property in man.'

"In other slave States the clergy were suddenly aroused to a new energy in vindicating the divine institution of human bondage. Presbyteries, Methodist conferences, Baptist associations, individual ministers, were busily at work descanting on the sin of Ham, and the curse pronounced on Canaan, discussing Hebrew servitude, and proving that negro slavery was not forbidden in the New Testament. As a specimen of the fulminations launched by some of these servants of the Most High against Abolitionists, we may cite the peroration of an address to a meeting of slaveholders in South Carolina by the Rev. Mr. Postell, of the Methodist Church. 'Shun abolition as you would the Devil. Do your duty as citizens and Christians, and in heaven you will be rewarded, and delivered from abolitionism.'

"In this mighty rivalry in preaching smooth things to the slaveholders, the sects' were not permitted to gain a triumph. On the 27th November, 1836, the Rev. George W. Freeman, of the Episcopal Church, ascended the pulpit of Christ Church, Raleigh, North Carolina, and announced to his delighted hearers the good news that the slavery of white men and of black men, of the wise and of the simple, of the learned and of the ignorant, was sanctioned by God, and approved by Jesus Christ and his holy Apostles. This commissioned ambassador of the Redeemer proclaimed, that no man nor set of men in our day, unless they can produce a new Revelation from Heaven, are entitled to pronounce Slavery wrong;' and that Slavery as it exists at the present day is agreeable to the order of Divine Providence.' After employing the morning of the Lord's day in expounding the divine rights of the slave

holders, he devoted the afternoon to proclaiming their duties. The slaveholder was reminded that he was under a moral obligation to punish his slaves when they deserved punishment; but he must not be too severe, nor chastise when in a passion; nor ought he to overwork them. He is bound, moreover, to have the slave children baptized, and orally taught to say the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments. It is not necessary,' said the man of God, that they should be taught to read;' but, nevertheless, the master was declared to be as responsible for the souls of his slaves as for those of his own children! Such are the duties which spring from this Scriptural Institution; duties which, fortunately for the master's convenience, involve no regard for the marriage of his slaves, no respect for their conjugal or parental rights, and impose no restrictions on the sale of men, women, and children in the market; at least, no obligations of this sort were adverted to by the preacher.

"It was, of course, important that slaveholders generally should participate in the joyful intelligence imparted to the congregation of Christ Church. The news might be spread by the press, but what assurance could be given that the gratifying declarations made by Mr. Freeman, a private and obscure Presbyter, were authorized by competent ecclesiastical authority? The sermons were published under the imposing title of The Rights and Duties of Slaveholders,' and bore the following imprimatur from the Bishop of the Diocese:

"Raleigh, Nov. 30, 1836. "Rev. and Dear Brother-I listened with most unfeigned pleasure to the discourses delivered last Sunday, on the character of slavery and the duties of masters. And as I learn a publication of them is solicited, I beg from a conviction of their being urgently called for at the present time, that you will not withhold your consent. With high regard, your affectionate friend, and Brother in the Lord, 'L. S. IVES.' “To the Rev. George W. Freeman.'”

"This letter was obviously written, not for its professed purpose of overcoming Mr. Freeman's reluctance to appear in print, but to let the slaveholders of North Carolina know, that although their Bishop was a Northern man, his conscience was thoroughly acclimated; and that bold and startling as were the doctrines of the Raleigh preacher, they would be maintained in all their length and breadth by Episcopal authority.

The Church in North Carolina, by

this authoritative publication, far exceeded all the 'sects,' in the slave region, in her fearless championship of slavery in the abstract,' and as it exists at the present day.' But the diocese was not permitted long to enjoy this proud preeminence. Her sister of South Carolina quickly shared it with her. The society for the advancement of Christianity,' consisting of clergymen and laymen, with the Bishop at their head, seized upon Freeman's pamphlet, and reprinted it, imprimatur and all, as a religious tract for gratuitous distribution.

"The Episcopal Church at the South was subject to the jurisdiction of the General Convention, and what security could be given that a body embracing Northern as well as Southern delegates, would not repudiate the doctrines of the Raleigh Sermons? Lynch law could indeed control the Southern pulpit as well as the Southern press; but the consciences and the characters of the slaveholders were assailed from the North. There the Dissenters were gradually abandoning the cause of human bondage. Under the strong pressure of public opinion, and in utter contempt of the well-known sentiments of the Church of England, and indeed of the moral sense of Christendom, could it be hoped that the Northern section of the Episcopal Church would, in General Convention, tolerate, much less approve of, the extreme, ultra pro-slavery views of the Rev. George W. Freeman? All questions of this sort were most explicitly answered by the last Convention, as appears by an extract from the minutes of the House of Clerical and Lay Delegates:

"The following message was received: House of Bishops, Oct. 22, 1844. The House of Bishops inform the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, that they have nominated the Rev. George W. Freeman, D. D., rector of Immanuel Church, Delaware, a missionary Bishop, to exercise Episcopal functions in the State of Arkansas, and in the Indian Territory, south of 36 1-2 degrees of parallel of latitude, and to exercise Episcopal supervision over the Missions of the Church in the Republic of Texas. Attest, Jonathan M. Wainwright, Sec'y.'

"On motion of Rev. Dr. Tyng, the nomination of the Bishop of Arkansas and Texas (as above) was unanimously

assented to.'

"It was not enough thus to elevate the reckless defender of slavery to the high and holy office of a Bishop in the Church of God, but he must be selected as an apostle to Texas! There was, indeed, à peculiar significance in this

selection. The odium in which the people of Texas were held by the Christian community at large, arose not merely from their general profligacy, but also, and chiefly, from their conduct in relation to slavery. Taking possession of lands belonging to Mexico, they re-established slavery upon the very soil from which it had been recently banished by that Roman Catholic government. To secure to themselves the unmolested enjoyment of their human chattels, they raised the standard of rebellion, and with the aid of Southern slaveholders erected themselves into an independent Republic. Having thus, as they professed, achieved their own liberty, they adopted a constitution rendering the bondage of others hopeless and perpetual; and outraging alike the dictates of nature and of justice, ordained that no free mulatto should ever live in Texas, thus dooming their own colored offspring, for all time to come, to slavery or to exile!

"The Southern slaveholders were exceedingly anxious that Texas should be admitted into the Union, for the double purpose of strengthening the slave interest, and opening a new market for the benefit of the breeding States. For the same reasons, in addition to the odious character of the Texans, the proposed annexation was resisted by the almost united moral feeling of the whole North. The question of annexation was agitating the nation when the Convention assembled, and the selection of Freeman as Bishop of Texas was virtually, whether so intended or not, a repudiation by the Protestant Episcopal Church in General Convention assembled, of the moral objections urged against the admission of that Republic into our confederacy. The Church sent to the Texans a man who, she knew, would confirm and strengthen them by apostolic instruction and benediction in those great principles of their constitu tion which had excited the execration of the Christian world."

Such being the temper of the United States Episcopal Church in General Convention assembled, it cannot be wondered at that no Episcopal bookseller would disoblige his patrons by printing Bishop Wilberforce's humane, scriptural, and pungent appeals for the abolition of that blessed "domestic institution"-slavery.

The American Churchman goes on to shew what the system of

Roman slavery was which the Bishop of Texas makes our Saviour and his Apostles sanction, so that "no man or set of men in this our day, unless they can produce a new revelation from heaven, are entitled to pronounce it wrong.

We need not describe

to classical readers the horrors of Roman slavery, which, though not so terrible as American, have left wide and deep gashes in the page of history. They will not have forgotten the broad collar to prevent the victim of tyranny lifting his hand to his mouth, lest he should eat of the grain which he was grinding; the fork or collar, at once a mark of disgrace as much as an uneasy burden; the fetters and chains used for punishment or restraint, and in some instances worn during life;-the chained porters at the gates of the rich citizens ;-the labourers worked in irons;-the cruelties inflicted upon those who sought to escape their bondage; the amputation of a foot; being made to fight with wild beasts; being branded on the brow; losing nose, ears, teeth, or eyes;-or being crucified, which was very frequently the fate of a slave for trifling misconduct, or from mere caprice. Such was the slavery which the Bishop of Texas tells us neither our Lord nor his Apostles disapproved of. The Romans had also slave-hunters; as well as their Christian American brethren, who advertise as follows:

which slaves were obtained; one of which was by capture in warfare. Thus Livy informs us that after the fall of the Samnites at Aquilone, about 36,000 prisoners were sold; and Plutarch, that 150,000 of the people of Epirus were sold for the benefit of the army under Paulus Æmilius; and we learn from Cicero, that when Pindenissus was taken, the inhabitants were made slaves. Hence, should a Mexican force make an incursion into Texas, and carry off the Bishop, his wife, and children, and sell them to different masters, under whom they should be compelled to spend their days in unceasing toil-condemned to all the misery and degradation of Roman bondmen,-the Bishop would have the consolation of knowing that the treatment he experienced is in perfect consistency with that Gospel which he had himself preached. The American Churchman proceeds:

"There were four other modes of

acquiring slaves particularly interesting to us; because, having been copied by us from the Roman law, we can have no scruples about their lawfulness: for had they been wrong, Christ and his Apostles, according to Bishop Freeman, would have condemned them.

"1. The sale of children by their fathers with us the privilege is confined to the sale of children by a slave-mother. In the Bishop's diocese, this privilege was nearly converted into a necessity, by the constitutional provision which required the bondage or expulsion of every mulatto child.

"2. Selling persons convicted of crimes. Among the Romans, persons convicted of certain offences were sold as slaves, doomed to bondage. Similar laws for and their posterity after them were converting free negroes and mulattoes into slaves are in force in several of our

States. Thus, in South Carolina, if a free negro entertains a runaway slave,' he forfeits ten pounds; and if, as must generally be the case, he cannot pay the fine, he is sold. In 1827, a free woman and her two children were converted into slaves under this law, for

sheltering two fugitive slave children!

"3. Debtors sold by their creditors, By a law of the late territory of Florida, approved by Congress (!), when a judg4 T