The Liberator

REFUGE OF OPPRESSION.

From the Charleston Mercury.

THE AMERICAN TRACT SOCIETY.

Some days since, we noticed the action of the Baptist Association of Virginia, in withdrawing further countenance and support to the American Tract Society, and we have the satisfaction to-day of presenting a letter from a distinguished clergyman of our own city, which we find in the Columbus Enquirer, in which strong ground is taken for similar action throughout the entire South. We trust that this course will be adopted by every Christian denomination in the South. The Southern people are quite able to support and establish a similar society for the promotion of religion and morality in the South. By all means let us have one, free of the fosterings and impertinences of Abolitionists or of Abolitionism. Let the presses of such a society be put up in Richmond, Charleston, or New Orleans. We will then be able to keep the religious tracts circulated in the South, to the one great object of promoting true religion and the salvation of men's souls; and to select and control the colporteurs and agents who shall gratuitously circulate them throughout the South. A leading paper at the North proposes, gravely, that we of the South should continue our operations with this Society until it actually puts out its abolition tracts. A man tells us that he is about to burn down our house, and that he has a right to do it, from duty to God. Shall we keep him in the house until he actually sets fire to it? We say he ought to be kicked out immediately.

THE AMERICAN TRACT SOCIETY DENOUNCED.

The following decided expression of the views of Basil Manly, D.D., of Charleston, S. C., relative to the late action of the American Tract Society, was written in answer to a letter of inquiry addressed to him by a Life Director who resides in the city of Columbus. The consent of the writer has been obtained for its publication.

We heartily agree with this expression of opinion, as eminently wise, and worthy of the consideration of the parties interested. Self-respect, and a sense of duty, compel us to decline all co-operation with the American Tract Society, so long as the present suspicious attitude which it has assumed is maintained.

The old policy was satisfactory. The latitude now for the first time taken, a change not warranted by the constitution, or even dreamed of by the founders of the Society, is, in our estimation, the initiative of future contemplated aggressions, for which neither our funds nor our influence can be expected.

Nothing but the old policy of hands off from this subject, by the Society, will satisfy us, or our brethren in this vicinity.

J. H. DEVOTIE.
J. M. WATT,
S. K. REDD,
WM. C. GRAY,
THOS. B. SLADE.
A. M. WALKER.

Columbus, Ga., June 8, 1857.

CHARLESTON, June 3, 1857.

Rev. James H. De Votie, Columbus, Ga.:

My Dear Brother,—The late action of the American Tract Society will invite attention at the South. It is presumed that the course taken by the Society on the subject of slavery, hitherto, when its founders were alive and acting, was consistent with its constitution and design. This course has been satisfactory to the Southern people. That the Society has done good, none can deny. Why not continue in this course? If the Society intend to pursue the same policy as heretofore, why not say so? Instead of preamble, statements, resolutions, why did not the committee report, or the Society declare, in a couple of lines, that they are satisfied with the course hitherto taken by the Society on that subject, and recommend that it be faithfully and steadily adhered to? This would have still satisfied the Southern people.

That they have not said this, plainly shows that they assume the right to use the facilities they have, which the Southern people have helped to build up, in discussing the subject of slavery—at the exclusive discretion of people who claim that they have nothing to do with it.

I cannot speak for my brethren, still less for the churches of Christ; but, for myself, I say, that nothing will satisfy me from that Society, but an unequivocal declaration, that they intend to say and do nothing inconsistent with the policy hitherto pursued by them on that subject.

The Southern people are not unwilling to consider their duties before God, in the matter of slaveholding. They have studied the subject as it is—a matter of every day practical concern to them, and momentous in all its bearings and issues. If they have not yet learned their duties, they may still hope that the Creator will teach them, by methods they already enjoy. They have his Bible, and they have his promise: 'In all thy ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct thy paths.'

But God has not promised that he will teach a remote, unsympathizing people what are the separate and peculiar duties of other people, not circumstanced as they are; nor has he directed any to apply to such for instruction. When, therefore, our Northern friends undertake to instruct us in a matter in which they have nothing in common with us, we must reply—

Non tali auxilio, nec defensoribus illis.

We are entirely inaccessible to instruction, upon that subject, from that quarter, and it must not be attempted in any form.

If we can have no part in the work of that Society, henceforward, be it so. The Southern people will pursue, apart, their quiet way of love and obedience to their Divine Master, in accordance with His own encouraging word, Isa. 66:5—'Your brethren that hated you, and that cast you out for my name's sake, said, "Let the Lord be glorified;" but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed.'

Yours, truly,
B. MANLY.

AMERICAN TRACT SOCIETY.

To Evangelical Christians, and especially to the Society's Colporteurs, Superintendents, and General Agents, and to Editors of the Religious Press, throughout our Southern and Southwestern States:

DEAR BRETHREN IN CHRIST,—We feel called, in the providence of God, to express our great regret in perceiving that what we regard as a misapprehension exists in the minds of some highly esteemed brethren, as to the true import of the report of a Special Committee unanimously adopted at this Society's late anniversary.

The idea that that report contemplates any violation of the fundamental catholic principle by which the Society has for thirty-two years been governed, in issuing only what is 'calculated to receive the approbation of all evangelical Christians,' we believe to be an error not warranted by the language of that report.

The almost unanimous voice, not only of the Special Committee, but of the Society and of its friends and patrons in all parts of the country, is decided, that the Society must carry out in good faith the sacred compact in its Constitution, and must convey the messages of salvation through a crucified Redeemer to every accessible immortal being, in all circumstances and conditions, throughout all our boundaries, in fulfilment of the great command to preach the Gospel to every creature.

We believe the tenor and aim of the Report of the Special Committee to be in full accordance with this view, and that it was so understood by the Society in unanimously adopting it. That Report solemnly reaffirms, word for word, the fundamental catholic article of the Society's Constitution: and as publications are issued only by the unanimous sanction of the Publishing Committee, consisting of six prominent clergymen from as many different evangelical communions, the Special Committee have in their closing resolution enjoined on the Publishing Committee, 'that their action, in carrying out the principles contained in the previous resolutions, will be such as will tend to promote the widest and best usefulness of this Society throughout the whole country.'

We most respectfully and in Christian confidence ask our esteemed fathers and brethren in the ministry, and those who control the religious press, if they will not, in kindness and courtesy, and from love to Christ and to millions of destitute and perishing souls, refrain from prejudging the future action of their brethren of the Committee, in whom they have hitherto gratefully confided.

And in the name of our blessed Master, we would call upon ourselves and all our brethren, general agents, superintendents, and colporteurs, providentially engaged in this service, to go on in our work of faith and labor of love, undiverted by whatever may occur around us; to confide in God and in his people; to do all we can to spread the glorious gospel of our Redeemer; to trust in Him to order all events; to supplicate him to remove prejudice and open the way before us, to give us love to souls, a spirit of peace and good will towards all men, and to make our poor endeavors effectual in winning souls to Him. And may we not confide in the great body of evangelical Christians still cordially to co-operate in this blessed work?

Your brethren and fellow servants in Christ.

WM. A. HALLOCK, Corresponding
O. EASTMAN,
Secretaries.

New York, June 15, 1857.

SELECTIONS.

From the New York Independent.

A REJECTED TRACT.

New York, June 18, 1857.

Editors of the Independent:

Dear Sirs:—Some time ago, I announced through the Independent that a tract, to which a prize of two hundred dollars had been awarded by Rev. Drs. Wayland and Clarke, of Providence, Dr. Brown, of Edinburgh, and C. Stoddard, Esq., of Boston, had been sent by me to the Publishing Committee of the American Tract Society, according to instructions received by the donor of the premium. I have been often asked concerning the fate of that tract; and, at the request of my friend in Glasgow, I would ask a place in your columns for the following correspondence, which sufficiently explains itself.

It will be observed that this tract was rejected before the action of the Tract Society in May, defining the duty of the Society to publish tracts on Slavery as upon 'other moral evils.'

Yours truly,
Jos. P. THOMPSON.

New York, March 27, 1857.

To the Executive Committee of the Am. Tract So.:

Dear Brethren:—Several months ago, an American merchant, residing in Glasgow, Scotland, requested me to offer, on his behalf, a premium of two hundred dollars for the best tract upon 'The Family as Affected by Slavery.' With his concurrence the following persons were selected to adjudicate upon such manuscripts as should be offered, viz:—

Rev. Francis Wayland, D. D., Providence, R. I. (Baptist.)
Rt. Rev. Thomas M. Clarke, D. D., Providence, R. I. (Episcopalian.)
Charles Stoddard, Esq., Boston (Congregational.)
Rev. David Brown, D. D., Glasgow, Scotland (Presbyterian.)

From thirty-five manuscripts submitted to them, the Committee have unanimously selected the accompanying tract as deserving of the premium. I have no personal acquaintance with its author, and it does not become me to pronounce upon its merits. But at the request of the gentleman who offered the premium, I respectfully place the tract at your disposal, to be published, if you shall deem fit, by the American Tract Society.

Should you decide to publish it, my friend in Glasgow will make a special donation to the Society for the purpose of stereotyping and circulating the tract. Should you determine not to publish it, you will confer a favor by returning the manuscript to me as soon as your decision is reached.

The erasures in the manuscript were made by the author, with a view to bring the tract within the compass of twenty-four pages.

I am, gentlemen, with regard,

Yours truly,
Jos. P. THOMPSON.

New York, April 13, 1857.

Dear Brother:—The members of the Publishing Committee, resident in this city and vicinity, have all read, in connection with your courteous note, the manuscript on Slavery submitted by you, at the request of a gentleman in Scotland; and at their meeting held this day, were unanimous in the judgment that it is not adapted for publication by this Society.

With respect and esteem,

Your affectionate brother,
Wm. A. Hallock, Cor. Sec.

A copy of this correspondence was sent to the friend in Glasgow who offered the premium, and the following answer has been received:—

GLASGOW, June 5, 1857.

Rev. Joseph P. Thompson:

My Dear Sir:—I duly received your favor of 29th April, and should have replied sooner, but waited to see what action the Tract Society would take at their annual meeting.

You may be sure that I read with surprise and grief the correspondence, which you kindly sent me, with the Secretary of the American Tract Society, relative to the tract for which I offered a premium of $200.

After the announcement made at the annual meeting a year ago, that the Society 'saw no reason why tracts on the duties and evils of slavery should not be published,' I was not prepared for the state-
ment which Dr. Hallock makes, that 'the members of the Publishing Committee, resident in this city and vicinity, have all read, in connection with your courteous note, the manuscript on slavery submitted by you, at the request of a gentleman in Scotland; and at their meeting held this day were unanimous in their judgment that it is not adapted for publication by this Society.' Here is a document selected and approved (from thirty-five MSS.) by three eminent evangelical clergymen and one distinguished layman, written in a kind and a Christian spirit, and in an exemplary tone of moderation, on 'The Family Relation as Affected by Slavery,' and yet this is found to be 'not adapted for publication' by the American Tract Society. It is a great pity the Committee did not condescend to say why it was not so adapted. Possibly it was too lukewarm, and did not denounce fearlessly enough the enormity of that sin which is paralyzing our moral sense as a nation, and which is fruitful of more evils than all the other sins concreted which the Tract Society have found occasion to condemn in their publications.

'Not adapted for publication!' Why is it not adapted? It is to be hoped that the resolutions passed at the recent annual meeting are not a mockery—that it is not intended to shirk this great question. If this tract 'is not adapted,' I call upon the Secretary of the Tract Society to let us know the reason why; and I believe that the Christian public will either demand an honest and faithful fulfilment of the pledges given at the Society's meeting, or else insist that the Directors shall resign their trust into the hands of men who will more faithfully represent their sentiments.

Your obedient servant.