Rev. Mr. West's Seventh Letter

i This week we close up the controversy ihto which we have been le-id by our remarkson the position of the General Assembiy. We, ns well as our cm respondent?, have treated of the matter so fully tlTat little more reed be said. This last letter is lont, but we hope ! every one wül read it. Mr. West expresses a delicacy about attribuiing to us the anthors!:ip of tlie articles on this subject that have appeared in our paper. líe need have no scmples about it. All the j : editorial articles have been tvrillen ''primnrily" l : and exclusively by one of the Editors of the j ( Signal, and they exprees the views of both. ! ( In conducting this controvertí}', Ihose who i have read tbe whole af it have don IiÜek.s í.Ii serve'd thai Mr. West has kept as much noncommittal as possible. He has avoided laying down broad and distinct principie?, and fullowing tliem out to their learitimate sions?. If he meiint to say that all the plavehold 1 ers-now in the chureb shouid be retnined, wl.y i did he not say so in the beginninjr, just as weil j as to wnde tiirougli seven letters, nnd then argue for it, without directly asserting it. - Could he not say in bis fin=l letter as well as j , his seventli, that all "compnlsory ilavery" was not 'vil'.ainons'''? Yet for snyinjr i'nat lio jnstified Drs. Hill and Ely on lv.s(involuntary" scliome, he thoup-ht we might be LT"ilty "of slnnder in its worst fonn!' Bnt we dfl ïmt complain. Every writer is en'H!o;i to clioose his oivn mode of expressing is honghts. Wc" rnake the crooketf tilines alraif, but shnll conc'nde wit!) one or two brief reninrji?. In this discussion, wp have not assnilèd Mr. West personally. We hnve ncvo.r impopned hts motives. We have not. inümated tint thst liis inientutns in evcry every -case had been uprjpht and honorable. Bnt we are obliged to repeaf, that we consider Jus principies as here developed to be fundamentaily Vronras dang-eroup- nny', as abominable. He is the practical apologist for'every slave holding - church mcinber.contènding that it is not wrpiig to hold his fellow citizensin "cotnpuliorysiaverv, that it rnny be done 'invohintarily, and that 'the fellowshipf the eaints' ehüuld be extended to snch persons now, as it was in theapostolic times. Thus, as we formerly statcd, would be received into . ever y Christiair church ón the globe, and nlthongh Mr. West labored last winter Por two honra to ehow .that 'sla ver v tramplbs on thb claims of ■jiír Gospbl,' by this sclieme of Jiíf, it woulrl be protected by the bro"ad eliield of Chrístinnily. Be3dep, we befare stafedjthe Bibe saya nolhinw of negro slavery ; j and'when the principie is once csiablished i that it is right tp enslave a man, Cliristians will be found enslavinr each o! her without reference tp cobr. What fellowehip can we have fwr a Christian abolitionist whose j ciplés will allow him to reduce vs to 'compulsory slavery' whenever he deenis it for our good, or for tbe glory of God? Finally, we cannot but think Mr. West is insensible to'l he true position he occupies.- We Imveshowo that while he claims to be a germine anti-slavery man, he takes ground in oppositjon to every anti-slavery lecturer,paper, pr society, in the vtforid, so far os our knowiedgeextends. He has placed himself between '. the contending hosts of God and the Pevfl, and is vainly crying, peace, peace,' when there neilher is nor can be peace, except by the utter defeat of one of the conflicting i líes. The battlc cannot be etayed by such' í trifling topics of compromiso and negotiation I:ts he -proposes. The contest wiü be decided on its main issues; and the eflbrts of Mr. West j and those who act npon his plan, will do but üttle bvarda varying the final resulí. Of one thing ve aro ve4! óssuredj tliat if a!l abolUionista should adopt his principies atho basis of their aclion, it would 'take a niillion such to j libemte a single slave. ''