Liberty Discussion In Adrian: Reported For The Signal Of Lib...

Diinnjr the pmcoe diners of tlie State Autilavery Society at Adrino. its members perïnitted all person.i present, to pariiripate in iti discust-ioTiB. Som g-entletnen of the villagv, whobelieved tliat mor&I stiasion was llie Only proper mode for anti -tííivery pfiorr, contostfid tlie policy nnd propriety of politica) ogsnizütion. A delmte oji t!io subject comtnenced on tlie first rreeting pf , the society : it was adjoiirnoil til! the foilowintif eyeniog and thn resumed. In the coorse or'tho procedingfa, iom {rontleman snid the Lilicrtv pnriy wpre nfra'd to meet t!ipr oponents.- Tliï, tpgetbcr with the fact tliat theguestion coul(] reoive bui partin] flebaté (hjring1 .Ur pressinw buflineas of the annuul moetinar, indnced Uvo of (he Society'e Momberu, Air. Trend wel!, of Jackson.and Stewart o!' Detroit, .n rcmiin it) Adrián and continue the discussion. The Society adjöurncd late in the evcninor of the 1 It!) Jannary. In ilie íiillojvinrg fotenoon, some gentlemen of Adiian 6tnted tn Mr. Stewart. tliat looit Lyceum was to meel that veiling, and ihnt ts tnembers woulrl postponc thfcir prepared subject, in order to introduce the Liberty qneetion: t.hat their mode. was to . commence by a rppert on the rebated quetion, and requested Mr. Stevvnrt to prepare uch report, as wouïd present l:is views, and ío Busiain it by 8Lttm$hít-i,At 7 o dock P. M. of the 12th, tlie Lyceum tnct, Mr. Stewart rena hig report, whlch yon will finó in tfe Expositor: rhc dobate was !!b ernlly 3u! tnirlj' thrown open toall: it lurned ltoyethcron tlic poücy of a ilurd party organizatlon: each üpftkr waa rostricted to tn mir u!e tt n time, and o speak but twice. The rpport atated íhe ohjecft of the third party: defended thein: staíed t!ie neccsíity of eepsrate orpanization, ond 6ustaincd t. It nae, ii & word, n vindication of íhe Libortj' party. and ti-aa esifrned to sustoin their principias nd orjanization, beyonri refuláion,: whether it did or not 11 foei, every reader must jiuige for himself. It onened íhe nintier of debate, and contnine:! the áffimníive posilions of the party. Therefore thrriitífpqiifrit remsrks of its defenderg were limiiod cliieÖy tonnswer ing the nrginnetitu addoced on the hegatívé, nd if Liberty readers tbink the delender's nrpiiinets omitfed 6ome of their pnv.'y's s'ronj1 positions, a perusal of the report may (?iácio? tbera.Mr. Stkwaiit oponed the ilebale and presented a concibe surmnary of the roporl: he dwelt pon the indisputable necc-stiy of political efiVí. of some nktuterthé objecis to be accompliíhe.I were now truorally admitted to bí unoxceptiwnable: they were crented by legielation, ar.d must bo disposed of in (he me way: they wouíd endure forcver, unles thus operated npon: moral efíbrt alone conld never reacli them: la beefTeciive it must ppeak throunfh legfislation. Sal legislotinn could be hadonly thioug-h some poluical organizifion - thst of the whigs- or of the democrats, or a third party: thtis he quéstiptl revolrpj itsel into the simple enqoiry vvhether tho Wh or Demucrutic ftrpanizítión oouJd or would effec the Liberty objects. The Democrnte !a! ever arrayed ihemselveí in bold and perpetual hostilily: tbis iiosiility was arowed in every net nd speech: tli;s dipposed of one brarsch ofthe question. Mr. S. dcubted tjoth trie ability nd tlie wíl I of Whigs: to his mind íhp report preseiíted unanswerable èvidenco ofbotli: he would nol recapitúlate them. Bat ths Liberty party had tried the VVhigs pnd been deceived or disappointed: their coiiouct to tHo pmiy Imd resulted either from treachery or inbiüty: be it whbh it might,the resnlt was the same and fatal. This disponed of :he secon.ci branch of íhc question. Wint tiien remr.ined for the party, but abnntlonmpnt of object, or a sepnrate organizaiion. The ch.iroh, the people, the state, Ihe nation, the Demncrnís, ihe Whij;?, and Congress had álike reptilsedthp Liberty effort. Nöthing reniaiñed forit, but an sppenl to the penple.Mr. Bakkk, of Adrián, a Jawyer of hicrh tfcsppctability td talent, replied. Professiona! duties had preven1 el liim from ronaíder ínfrthe subject during ilediy: he could bu reitérate hte opinión of theprpreding evcnidíf. !! deetned moral action Miffic'en : in time moral suapion would cure ihis evil. Sec ite efiects in temperance: wliat would have bccocne of temperance, if it had been politically "ganized. We are bound to do the grcntes; pood, to tlie reatest poesible nutnber, in tho hortest timo. The Libnríy Party conld do thji only by moral suasion and by workintr thronjh on of the other píirtiei?, netead of mnking them enemies ss they were now doing. The present umon of moral suasion and pelitical effort tended to make a political eburch, aad tpwardti a unión of churca andState. Í3(je Gerrit Smiths conduct, the great political lenderj and the etindny preacher of politics. Mr. B. lipre fouml his roediíated argument would exceed l)? 10 minutes: he had biit enterad oh t, and as he conld not conclude ■ f, bepged the unused portion oí bis time miohí begiven to Mr. Millard. Mr. Treadweli,. of Jackson, follotved. Morel 8dion was th? proper remedy for a mere moral evil. Snch was temperance: but morfil acíifin ncver would cure political ovil: where lítemperance had extended is evils to aífecí üs politically, as by its inflictions through the license system, we had in the late temper'ince meeting sought a politicnl rcmedy. We askcd the lesrislature to undo where it had bound- moral suasion alone was insiifficient !o effect this. So io slaverv, we aeked Con jrress to uuño, where it had bound elavery lo the hatiori by ti enactmentc. As lo the miifjn of moral suasion and political efFort, they '.veré distinct: the parry cousited of indivnoc, - in iheir indiviiluol cnpnciiy, they used overy mora! effort for their endeí: so did every rrmn of every pnrly: as voter., thoy cnst their iiaHots in accorrlpnce with their senticuents ÍTow hnd clmrch mernbers voV;d to stis';iiu politicolly, what they oporated upon alo morally and by prayr: yet none dreeded church nnd stale as tho con.scqupnce, nor did ihfir unión enpiic. Gerrit Smitli lectyred on fhe SaLbath on moral and relifrious subjecis r-onnocted wíth sln.very, bnt 11 found in the oíble: it .vas bnt tiio lnyman doinjr wliat the minister oflerj did on tliis and óthér subjccU: ihis minister too votei!. and thmigh a minister, do one t lioiifrht of church nm? state.As to the good to be done Mr. T. went into statements to show the nature and evils of slavory, both morally and politicatly. The latter consisted of soms of the usual statistics. They were powertul exhibitions: we regret our inability to commit them to paper. Mr. Miljard, of Adrián, a member of the Bar in the first standing for professional respectability and ability, is a gentleman possessing a happy command of anguage, with good manner, anddelivers íimselfwith eloquence and effect. He said, the odds were greatly against the Liberty party, and all who joinedsink hemselves. It asserted, thát it was the duty of every one connected with the other parties to leave, and to join the new orgnnization. Before the modest demand could be conceded to, it was the duty of the larty to convincc them, that it wculd secure the greatest good for the country. - ow thoold parties believed tneir principes to be e?sential to the welfare of the country. V hatever the new party mightsay. a vast majority of íhe oíd parties were conscientious, and were deeply impressed with the surpassing imporíance of their principies: they could not abandon 11 these to certain destruction: yet this vas the result of íhe new organization: íoy had one idea: all others were shut ut. Ho was a Democrat: he believed ie perversión of the public land sales to tate use, was wrong and dangerous. He id not want again to see a U. S. Bank oodthe Jand with gambling - with disonesiy - with ruin. He did not want a irifF to confer riches on a favored class t thc expense of every other. No one ould belièvethat thegrëat parties would abandon thcir principies for such a party as the new one. If they succeed, what are they to do? to abolish slavery in íhe Territories: but does that lessen the numberof slaves or ainount of slavery? -Scarcelyat all: a few fhousand will be emancipated. but the millions in the States will remain slaves: their masters asperiiy will be increosed: their condition will be worse, and on the whole, there will be an increase of human suffering. The impression existe at the Souih, that thenew party will override the consiitution in zeal toabolish slavery in the United States: the impression, even though erroneous, only exnsperates the South. Moral means are the onty proper means: if slavery be so bad a system, as is said, it will die out of itself - if the new party succeed, the unión will be dissolved: the South will not hold on, The report spoke of the compromises necessory to effect the Union. He thought it undervalued the erabarrassment of the country: the confederation had failod: there was no power in the nation: there ware many rival States and interests: all these demanded conciliation: the compromise should not be treated with contempt: it resulted from necessity and wisdom: these still threw their sanction around ils provisions.Other gentlemen replied, taking the affirmative: no notes were made of alien speeches. Rev. Mr. Tomlinson also spoke on the same side, with strong ëffect and replied exclusively, to many of the last speakers arguments. His remarks were evidently well received by the very crowded audience. The reporter regrets u's omission to take notes. He was followed by Mr. Ward, of Adrián. Mr. W. believed in the laws of God, and of the country,and of conscience. The report made very iuvidious sectional lifferences, because of greater patronage o the South. He was pleased that the outh had it- did not envy them, If oneof his neighbors receivcd from government more favors than himself, he would not grumble: it would give him satisfnction. This shewed what the new party wanted - the loaves and fishes! The north should pul] the mo.it out of its own eyes, and see what it had done te the Indians. The gentleman then Went into the Bible to show that sla ves were held under God's sanction inJewish times - that th ere were two classes of slaves: thal one class was held in more severe bondage thaniheothers, and were not included in the Jubilee emancipation - that God's laws were immutable - what was once just, was ever just: and if just then to hold slaves, and it is just now.Mr. Stewart replied.so farashecould in ten minuíes. Mr. Millard had stated his political principies: he was a Democrat. Mr. S. would ask him, did he believe the Declaration cf Independence to contain actual truths: did he believe its assertion of the rights of man? if so, why not joinMr. M.to vindícate it? which of his (Mr. M's.) party principies would he barter for this liberty one? Again, did he believe that property should be represented? no! why then not go for his belief - ?which of the Democratie principies would he barter for this? Did he believe in Ihe valué ofthe right of petition - of Jiberty of speech? - did he believe in taxing a man without giving him a represcntation? - did he believe in sl.ivery - did he believe in State rights? - was he averse to great corporate rights - to privileges to the Cew at the expense of the nation?: if so, how could he oppose the party, whosought but these objcets; nndwhich out of the catalogue would he barter for the whole Democratie code? He was not invited to join a party, whose sentimenishe disbelieved, for be believed them all, - nor to give up one of his present opinión?, for none of them were prescribe:!: on the contrary, he could. in the new party, best carry them, for they were but details based on the gfeat principies of the Liberty party. When thé revolutionists were in the field, no one charged them with the sin of one idea, - that idea was Liberty, it was all they cared for: - they would have deemed it pollution to them to have canvassed about a Bank - or a Tnriff. They knew that whoever could win liberty, might be trusted with these details. So said the Liberty party man: be assured whoever is deemed worthy toecute their great principies can take care of theTariíFandCurrency. Mr. S. waged no war on Whigs or Democrats, - but after al), just look at theirallegations, - all had heard the gentleman'sstrong expression of the importance of Democratie principies: hear the party, and they assure you the country is lost, if these principies do not prevail: then hear the WJiig's solemn and anxious declaration: if these principies do triumph, the country is lost! nay. it is lost unless directly the reverse are in the ascendant. Hear the country itself on the issue - sometimes it decides for the one - sometimes for the other - it is ever divided. If a man is tried, and six of the Jury are for acquital, and six for conviction, no one can feel very certain either of the guilt or the innocencs of the tried: but if Jury after Jury has thus sat, undeciding, doubt is lost in the conviction that there issive or important in the matter. Thus have the Whigand Democratie principies been tried. Candor will admit that ifeither of them containedthat important vitality claimed for both, the country's infelligence had long since found it out. Try the liberty principies by that test: the vote in the Free States would be unanimous. all in the room knew it - no one would cast his vote against them, on a direct issue. Mr. S. would submit the whigto a like catogory. Let him point out in the list what Jiberty principies he would barter for Whig principies, and which of thelatter he would substitute: was he a tariff man? - he was! for What purpose? to protect free labor, and northern interesis,and the great nterests of the country! indeed! did he mean by free labor, merely that of the manufacturer, and by northern interests, that of the vnanufacturer only, and by great national interests, that of the manufactureronly. Were there no free laborers, or northern interest, orality m the farmer- the mechanic- the merchant - or the professions? was the manufacturer the sole depository of these mattcrs, and was whig proiection of free labor to opérate by raising the price of goods the manufacturer alone sells, and all the country buys. He called on the true whig to unite for free labor of eveRY KIND. As to the Bible arguments of Mr. Ward, he would ask would the gentleman advocate the adoption of all the oíd Testament recorded - its polygamy - its massacre of wholc vanquished nations, and the raany other peculiarities of a most peculiar people, in remote ages? lts code[ ' - was one of stemness: "an eye for an eye - a tooth for a toolh": should these be our rulo, undera new dispensation of love and mercy, wbich said, "if a man smite thee on oneche.ek, turn theother" - if he ask thy coat, give him thy cloak also - whose precept was to love mercy and do justice.and do to all as they would be done by, was the slavery of remote barbarity, and cherished only by a code of unparalleled severity, to live under modern refincment, side by side with the lovely principies revealed. as suited to the new ages? But this was granting tliat slavery did exist in oíd times: vould the gentleman take the bondige of the Jews: would he, as did they, arm the bondsman - send him to ilght bis master'sbattle - marry him to his daughters - permit him to flee when he would, and thus cut oiT all title to recapture, nipping the very essence of American Slavery, its property cliaracter: and would he lastly give a jubilee every 50 years, when liberty to all the inhahitants wasproclaimed. Ifhe would do thus, he might find a parallel in the Bible for this new bondage in America. As to his satisfaction for the Southern nscendency in the nation, that was mere matter of taste: Mr. S. confessed his taste was of another character.The debate wns here acjourned tothe next evening. The room wns filled to its extremities, and the most exciting interest was feit in the discussion. Jannary 137. - The defanie w as renewed ín the Bap isi Chnrcli - the time Pur Bpeckinjr was extended to 15 minutes. The report was read a srcond time'. Mr. Bakek commncecl in the nepative. It resled on the third party to prove the aflirmativê; nntil ihpy did eo, they foiled; their aüesration was this. thot when they surroeded they would abnlisii Slaverv in the States bv mora! suapion - theycouid use stiasion nov- politica] organizjJiion is not the proper tritíáe by which to carry out either moal or religieus objectsit wns evident from their uniting mo ral and politica! action, that ihe yiarty was tendinjr fost o a Dolüicn] cbureli; pre thpir Sunday movement?, íhry wpre iñjürb)rs:on, Fee what t had done in Temperotice Abolition was no fort hor stivanced in public mimi, (han it was in 1840, befare the político! nction. Mora!? and reliojon cnnnnt be spread by politica! efibrf. The new party cnnnot rite higher in virfue than the o'-hers. lts present leaders doubUe.ss r.re honet, bui he ppeaks of the party aj it will be, if ever augmented to a imjonty. it will then be poupht os the means of steppinp into power, and will contain ns much corruption, as other parties, it cannot tlierefore claim exclusive virtue. The sin of slnvery is nol worse ihan Jiny other sin, why sJiouid it alone be attacked? Why nol oct against all other sins by politics. Movements like ihe present were common, they hnd a eertaiu amount ofswccesa, and tbon died. Ile mstanced the Mormon., theChartists in Erjrlani!, the Anti-Itfason?, the destiny of the new party was prvfipiired in the fateof Iheoihers. When thpy attain a balance of power they will in ?rme wny, by purchase nr rompromisp, fnll inio the other pnrlies. Offers wiU be made to leadirff mpn. The fa te of other psrties haviner pqnally ood principies will be theirs.- Their principies were admirable - veré stntrd in the report with great cnre, n;id no per?on could probablv be found who would proböbly disK nt frnm them. ïif. Trkadwkll replied. He shewed, rs he had done laet evening, the differcnre between the tempernnoe and the anti-siaverv moycnient. Suasion wns very good fnr mora!evils hut wholly inefficiënt for poliiiral ono He (lid not eeek to c.irry nat a re%ïous or moral object hut a poliíical one by poütiral nction. The anti-plavery now va? mneh jrreater than in 1840: the chnnjre nro?e frorn the ïiew" movenients - every one knew and admitte.l tliat. Iüs ynrly were moralista wbon moral evils poütieinns anninst poüiical ones. TJicy nevor operated politïcally on more moral evite. ronípquently thorc was no polit"ol chnrcb - rhia wns n more fancy flielit, as to tlio probable virtue of tbo party, or ifs probable ai'coes, ther uwe bppirJethe question - it was whcllier tb e liberty objrets wer rijrht; Csn, whethr tbir mof]e of accompüsliinir thom wns rijrlit. The first ponit was concceiï. To snstain llic Fecond, he would sliow tfie rrnat fnctofthe s!av interest overriding tlie nntron, so as f o aborb pvpry otlter quostioii in fnct tbis power rnslaved everv nterept in Mie nntion, nnd reiisinnce to it wns as mtieb n áíjty af? a matter of intrest to the north. and fiee labor - if ho succeeded, no one coul! questiot but that the pnrty was proceedinp in the proper mode. Ile instanred the sihmtspion of Van Buren nnd Uorrison 5 o this dominant power; tint] Van Bnren's celebrated pledgp, no one had ever heard of the veto beini? plcdged in ndvanco, nnd then it va to kill librrty. Mr. T. then went into a mimHer of sialeméiifè financial snd othervvifie. which from their niture il wat impasible to report: bnt they fully snstained bis position, and made an admirable argnmenf. ■ Mr. Mili,krd followed. Mr. Treadwell , stated Blavery to be pplf-destructive-rtbnt it i could not support itselfl We hed therefore but to !et it alone, and it will die. He would ' iladly pee slavery abolished, but what did the i newperty appet] tol To the pockets and interest? of tho North!- -a mercenary i ment, and liie old elap trap of polflirians: if i they wareto euccaed, thfi sotilh would be flamcd againet the Norih, and in the tquent Becticnal sírife every interest in the natiori would suffer. But wbat did the party seek? Their great complaint was the proper ty representaron the soutb has, but ihey couid not cure ir, it existed imder tbe constiiu Jion.two-thirds of tho Stslea were necessary to ailer the com-titution, the Southern states ivonld not consent- thus this object was palpnbly impracricable. Eut even ir we could aïier this property repreeentntion would it be right, ín view of the contract rnade wiih theSoiith, w'uich indtiend them to come iino the Union, a chonte wouJd be n breach of foith. TJienew parly were like the Chinese map: on t China nearly filJed the whole oí'it, but ir. a üttle corner stood the rest of the world. The l.berty one idea fiücd tlieir whole politica! tmp - a pmall corner was only conceded to other important intereete: but could ihey sny tht plavery in the District would be abolisiied only hy their egbrtö? No, it wa3 by their nccounl a Kinkinor inefitution - ita óoom was upon it, if let alone, ihe eouth would have retnrnerl lo freedorn, they had before them the contrnst nf theNorth. no one doubts but thaf emnncipaiiou hns been retnrded. But even fhonn-h emancipation were to be accnrnplished in the Dirtrict, wou'd t.'iat bj sufficif nt lo indure men t o abandon all their present objrcts? Such partiol omancipalion wöuld effect comparatively pmall goot). It vvonld pos: pone emaucipntion in tle Stuies; !iow much hci wotijd hiimointy gain by the mensure, which bronglit Bpéedy benefit to the few, but delaye,d it to the niass and mpanwhile deepened their FiitTerinps. Tne pnrty ?ncered nt Moral suasinn, but after tliey had gained uil they claimed, its fruit was but this despised mornl KUasion and tbroujrh it to opérate on the Southern Otates. The pretensions of the !)rfy after all were funnded upon an if: if ffiRv fcuccpedpd, they would emancípate in the State?, but this fcontained the gist of the arrumen. They sojd if wns inconsistent to pray one wnyatid voteanother: to fhew the absurdify of thi?. he would frame a syllopi?m - it wns this: To holil elavos in a sin. Every slaveholder is a sinnpr: therefore to vot? for u íílavehoWer e Fin. Now no man is othpt thnn a sinner: therefore hy thi.s doctrine it is sin to vote for any of them, and we must nevor vn'p.Mr. Stewart replied. The peníleman hod not einte.t] a trite fylloism; t should be (bus: Slavory is pin, to sustain it in any wav ia a sin - therefore to vote fr it, (mitfor the nerpettrntorj is a sin. Th. wns the Liberty doctrine. Mr. S. repn-ttecl he could net fix on his oppononts mini!, the fact so often repeated. and bo cloarly stnted in the report:, tlmt the object of the Liberty party was tn-o-fold- emancipation and norihern,or free lübor rights. in eitlier, but accr.mplishing the other, the party tvould ocbieve an enterpriee worlhy of all ccmme;:da!iw. Yet i!)e whole ircrument had been upon ihe basis, that emancipation was tbe only object; nnother point Lhat could tiot be impressed on h!s opponenis, was that pnmnc'pation in the States was laimed to foüow the party's sneers?, fronititer of two causes: Ist from the moral feel'wg thot euccos? would evidence ag-ninst t!avèry Lnd from rnre starvation. Unfetl bv the Tree la hor of tJio North. slnvery must (üe. Vet tlie last point was left untópched. Aflóther misconcrption. The party etated slavory was roiJicnlly boi?, fcif cestrnciive:' i!s opponenis (hereupon rast thetr tnunl tliat no aotion trns needeil for its eiadication, nttorly overlookinw tlie remainder of the party's nlleg-ntion, nnmeW, that the narth fcd and kept nlive this radiósily bad system, and thus rounternctcd its eelf óeitrnclive pfbpensilies. Thi.s it was which n pnrt cal'ef] the Liberiy party to action. Mr. M. hnd derided nn appeal to interest- What did the other partifK mnko the foundation of their politics? Tn'orf:Ü The frreot alledgpd iterp$ts of the country! What prnmptcd our every oction in Ii -"? Interest! It was idle to affect to deny ts xistence or its inflncnce. The eentleman said we libérty mon coold not cnro Ue oroperï y repre?entotion : perhaps wc cotild not - böt there was a conslitutional curr, nnd the ereatness of the cvi! at lenst ivarronfed the attemnt to rure. But. r;part from this, whv I sliould we con'inne, as nnw, to fned the evil. :o Ptimnlate 't loa rapidly provvinorHule by nationa] pntronaoe? Why notrai'ncr cirrumícribe f, ns nnuch ns oould legrillv - Ihis vvss the liberty cfíort - lo storve f fie evil. if it must. exist, mío ihe .mallest possiblr pze; the pffort rriight evrntuate n ts total oboliiioii. Ai any rale the goinp out ofsnvery wou Id at once cure ir, and wet claíniocJ tliat our meaí-ures would kil! sJavery. The sjenilemnn hnJ n)?osaid it woiild bft a brench offaitli wiih llié South to abolish this propriy rppreírniíitinn. Quiíe tlio reverse - jis nboliüüR wns due to tfie norlh as a mntíer oí right, irret=pect:ve of iL? violation of repubíienn prinipK Tlie fouth had got the Btraripje riht in considerntion that tnxatinn slon!d be ipon the same principie: yet she had, with thtí exception oflwo crisipes, evaded tl;e performance of lier part of the contraot and con'rivcd that reverme nhonld tnke the place of taxntion. From 1789 to 1237, the eross receipts of the U. S. Treasiuy were 719 niilüons.- üfthis sum $Gr.2.987,7fi3 were fnnn rustrir, only 812 742,294 from dirrct ínxütíon. In ternal reveniie and public land hales made up th rest of 719 millions. Returns sliewed that tlie north pnid nine-tcniliF, hut to mafe1 siire, hewottld cali it eight-tenths of me revmiue. Thus nearly al! the nntional burtben rested on the north, from eiibstiintinjj revenue for taxation, as the mode of national inenme. The power of the South had easily eflected the 6ubsiitution, and retoined it. A reform of this one sidod contract was ■ due to the north; let tlio nation keepifit would the revenufi system, but strike offthe property represente t ion. Anoiher tliin gentlemen could not fel iöto their heade wastf nt tlje one idea oí" the Uberly party coninined cvery one of the principie which genlleman themselvea fought fur in smail details, and dozens of other besides. it was not merely emancipation but n nddition, commerce, Cnance, state rights, speech thoughu, ]ocomotion, free Inbcr, every vital interest- cvery deur privilege. He raight inake a Chinese map out of these; ihere were kingdoms enough in each principiólo msk? a pretly good oizod world. ]t was ?aJd Ihe South wére returhirTg f.o frecdom ho would cüe J. Q. Adnm'e celebrated defence in 1S42, which chnrgd upon the South the delibérate design to o'estroy the haheas corpus and jury trial, and lo ext end statu ry over ihe JYorth, aad said he would prove it. Bakrr resumed his argument, fortifying ihe points he hád made at the commencemenf. Ile read the cali of Gerrit Srni'h and seventy other Jiberty men, calüng on nlj to come out f rom sin ful churches, and form a new one: whet ws llitis but a step towards a political church; ho ogain dwelt on his Sabhnth j)ciical sermons. Mr. BaKpsi 15 minutes being1 ont, Rír. Sfevort rcq-)e.ted Mr. Ilalsey of Adrián ?o illow him lo use his place. Mr. Ilnlsey consentid. Mr. S. could only sny, if the fncts síníed by the cal! j'ist read were true, Mr. Smiih and ofh:rs did qui'e rigiit. As lo the Snbbath evenings Iccurep, Mr. Baker ad-' mitied that he often listened to mnny similar discon rsee on '.he Sabbalh evening, with pleasureand pntisfaction. Mr. Baker. - I i]d not say they were the same: but very difTerent. Mr. Stewart.- T say ihey were similcr - it is for tlie 50 ntleman lo bhew llie diffi-rence: this U the first tirne I háve hpord cha! vhereligiousectsof mpn. are to charactorizp ihcirpolitifal pnr'.y. The nbjctions in tbc nppaiive had pushen the debate from the proper groiin-J. Mr. S. vsh?á o rrcal to 'lie Lyceum the mocnitude ofiho objects of he Librrty pnrty. Lost hïght he had chal!eored the other partis to state which one of tho=e pbjecta they wnuhi barter for tbe whojp of theirs - they had not replied, fhey hnd admit'ed. in t!ie words of one gentleman, that "the Liberty principies were admirable'" ihe pre.eminence and goocr.eès of tneeepiin cinles tliustaciily or cxpressly admitted, whv not mnke them ihe foundation of a jarlv, (f the olliers wf-re good for soefi purpose 'fa fortiori"' those of the Liherty party were. Then it would be rorr.emhered haw lontr ihe party worked moraly for thrse "áámirable principies" - how lontj thny waited on the Whigs - how long tho democrats repnlsed them. Whüt could the party tlo, except wbat it hnd done? But Mr. S. would no;v so far as his time permitted, present anoiher view of the subject, apart from the slavery, the financc, and the Southern domination view. He would shew how the matfer touchod the very essence of out republicanism, and tended wíth no Iaggard steps, to its overlhrow. He then readthe sèntünenfs of Pickens, McDufiiie, Clay, Leigh, Calhoun, Dow, and Randolph, shetving (hat they regarded tlie laborer as a slave infact - that no working man should vote: that govermnent could boas efíectivean instrumer.t thcugh an unnoticed one, for ensla-vjng the white laborer at the north, as was slavery for the black vorkman at the South: that the nalural eqiiáíity of man wasbut theoretic, no acfu.il truth whatever, that the slave instittUion rendered unnecessary an order of nobiüty and heréditafy rank, and in the words of Caihoun, ihat slaverywas "the most safe and stable basis for free institutiohs in the Vvorld." These were the sentimeriis of acknowledged leaders, they spoke for parties and stctes, they speke officially. Mr. Duffie's sentiments were in his Lubernaiorial roessage, and received the sanction of South Carolina, in fact they spoke the feeling of the whole South. But had they power to imprint these sterling doctrines on the nalion? Mr. S. on this point read the statements of Webster, Adams and Giddings, .ilso many extracts fröm tlieDetroit Adveriiser - all admitting cinc deploring the ovenveen ing power the South exercised on the nation. But how couM they do ít, somc might ask? to shew íhis, he reari exíracts f rom Rayner of S. C, Wise of Va., and Alfred of Ga., that the whoíe south made common cause on every queslion oí sectional interest. - Randolph had openly boasted oí the fací, and declared thal when they pleased "they would nail the north to the wail like counterfeit money." Adams and Giddings had dsplored the fact, and extraets from the Advertiser confessed it with humiliation: it needod however but to look at the fact. 100 hundred organized men in a body of 242 - ahvays at their post when interest was concerned - vigilant and intelligent, were an overpowering force for the rest - soine absent, more divided, not a few bought over by party or olher ties. and none perhaps sensible of any pscuüar northern interest. The liberty was the only of the three parties, who made these matterslheir objeets. Tha otber parties ov-erlooked them wholly, while they fought for trifles. The third party overlooked the trifles, and, fought on the others. Yet they wej-o a one ideaed party.Mr. Jones, of Adrián, foMowecL Mr Van Buren's senfiments fiad been1 misrepresented by Mr. Treadw-ell, and Mr Jones wished read írotn a boolt the ex act language of Mr. Van Mr. Treadweil here and if appear ed that Mr. Jones liad miseoneevved fb time and the occasion of the language.-- However he read the extractr although ií related another mafter. Mr Jones had several objecfions to th new party. With one exception howerever they cid not present any new argu ment - the exception was that they never could succced because they "had too tnany ideas"! the nrrmrber of their ob}ects was too great, he instanced many of thenr- Their chain of achievement was mach too long; it would stretch fron the earth to the moonr and if one end rere fástened here. how could they get the moon to attach the other. These were ííguratíre expressíons, ít was true, but the pretended objects of the party were nuwïerous encugh to stretch from earth to heaveir; they could not evei succeed, The evening was now very far afvanced. Mr. Treadwell had a number oí important facts and arguments, bwt could onl y obtain fi re minutes timo. He presented as many as possiblej all of them were pregnant wíth ímportance, and most admirably illuslraled the remarks made in the debate. From their siatistical nature they could not be report ed, like oráinary speakíng, of wíiich the swbsíance and not the precise terms are gtven,- The reporter very much _regrets inability to Jay before the public thi and the other important arguments of "Mr. Treaowell. His long experience ín the cause has possessed hím of most yalnable facts; they evidently produced a strong impression on his audience, and would be stíll more eííectíve on paper.Thus er.ded the foiirth and last night of the discussion. It was throughout of a very gentleman] ike and pleasant nature, and refiects very great credit on the Adrian community. There was none ofthat vituperation, once so rife, but now happíly, almost gone: no harsh expresdon; no unfair impuiations; but in their place were couriesy and reason, and argument. The negative arguers vere careful, even ío a paínful dpgree, lest any expression might, personally wound their opponents, still they boldly combatted with stout argutnents, opinions they warred against; they had none of that faínting timídíty, peculiar to litie minds and siarveling thinkers. They feared not to admit much ofcom mon ground, and to confess their hatred o{ siavery; their desire for its abolition - the excellence of the objects of the liberty party in the abstrae, and the honosty of its present membere; but here they broke into hostility, and with fair and manly argument, worth}' of the talenfs and standing of the gentlemen, pummel led their adversaries wiíh no small might.Candor requíres íhe fact to be stated, that the subject was new to these gentlemen: it ca me on them by sur prise, while to their opponents it was an oM and well siudied theme: the former could make little or no preparalion, bot the Jatter had all their documenfs in ready order. It is also duo to truth, to sa)' that the result of the proceedings of the A. S. society, and of the discussionj together with addresses subsequently given by gentlemen of Adrián, and Messrs. TreadweJl and Stevvart, has been a great and marked change on the subject of tho Liberty party, in the minds of the Adrián community generally. Some important converfs were made, and all present at tho discussions became satisfied that thero s a vast diflerence between the liberty DiTort, as they lad previously supposed itto be, and as they now find it in fact, that therc is in it much more of importance, thati genera] ly supposcd, and that a great deal of valuable information upon northcrn rights, &c has been for the first time disclosed. The debaters differed, very much as to the mode most eflectual for vindicating these just rights, but on reflection perhaps the negative speakers will think more favorably of an organization, which but places these rights in a pre-emincnce mutually conceded to bO due to their importance, and says that itis very umvorthy of the zeal and ability of vhigand democrat to expend noble energies, in fighting against each other for nattere, which however worthy in themselves, are confessedly much heAoyi the great objects, specified in iho report of" Mr. Stewart.On the following Monday evening, tho 15th January, in accordance with the wishes of raany citizens, the subject of the Liberty eflbrt was continuad. It wa? elt thatthe limitedtime. permitted by tfee ust rules of debato, had too muok cramped the subject, andanxiety wat feit