Anti Slavery Bugle

"The Black Laws endorsed by the Whigs."

This is the language of the Anti-Slavery Bugle, published at Salem; a paper that has much more regard for the success of its cause, than it has for truth. In closing an article under the above caption, these sagacious and truth loving editors say:

"The Black Laws have not been abolished, nor are they likely to be by the Whig party. The House of Representatives by a vote of 42 to 28 refused to wipe them from the statute book—they now go forth with the full and free endorsement of the Anti-Slavery Whig party of Ohio."

If B. S. and J. Elizabeth Jones did not know the above paragraph to be false, they do not know enough about the political complexion of the House to pen such an article. What are the facts? A majority of the Whigs in the House voted for the repeal of the black laws, and all the locofocos but one voted for continuing them; yet we are told with a cool recklessness that the black laws "go forth with a full and free endorsement of the Whig party of Ohio."

We would advise these big-souled philanthropists who prate so much about suffering millions, and make it a point to vilify every one who should think or act differently from themselves to turn their attention to the units nearer home, and see that the naked are clothed, and cases provided for that the laws do not reach.—Massillon Telegraph.

We thought that everybody understood that the action of a Whig Legislature was Whig action, and that all laws which it left upon the statute book unrepealed, were virtually re-enacted, or endorsed by it; but it seems there are some not "sagacious" enough to know this, or not sufficiently "truth loving" to admit it.

There are two things which we think are very evident. First; that the recent Legislature by refusing to repeal the Black Laws re-endorsed them. Second; that either the Whigs or Democrats, or both, are responsible for its action. Now it would be too silly for any one to pretend that the Democratic party—which in both Senate and House were in the minority—could carry a single measure without the co-operation of at least some of the Whigs, or could defeat any measure which the Whigs wished to carry. But the Whigs, without any aid from the Democrats could have repealed the Black Laws if they had desired so to do; but they did not repeal them, and we therefore necessarily conclude they did not desire their repeal, but were willing they should go forth with their endorsement, as they had previously done with the endorsement of the Democratic party. As we have no wish to defend the Whig party where it is in the wrong, or to manufacture for it an anti-slavery character in spite of its pro-slavery acts, we see these two points very clearly. And whatever the Telegraph may say, we do not think it usual even among politicians to point to what the majority of a party in either branch of the Legislature may do as an index of the feeling of that party at large. But when a Democratic or Whig Legislature does, or refuses to do a thing, the dominant party represented in that body is held responsible for its actions until it condemns them.

The senseless slang with which the foregoing extract from the Telegraph is served up, neither adds force nor beauty to its sentiments; and we pass it without other notice than to observe, that persons generally select for use the best weapons which they have or those which they can wield with greatest ease and facility.