to make a mockery of truth in this way, and intended, as this Mobilian divine says he did, to apply the words "just" and equal" to chattel slavery, then St. Paul was as great a villain as the tyrant Nero, who beheaded him.

"Ye also have a master in heaven," says the apostle, meaning, as one would suppose from the context, a kind Father, a benignant God. But if the writer was apologising for slavery, as he was according to Dr. Hamilton, then he meant that we "also have a slave-master in heaven,"-in which case heaven and hell must be synonymes. If God is our master in that sense, he is a despot, and it is no wonder men every where are in “rebellion " against him. But every body that knows anything of the New Testament—a description which excludes nearly the whole race of theologians,-knows that the God of which that book teaches, is a kind Father, who cannot look upon iniquity without abhorrence. And yet Dr. Hamilton thinks God has a complacent eye for Southern Slavery; that he sees babies sold by the pound, and women by the dozen, with approval; that he made one class of his children to be owned by another; and that he, (Hamilton,) of course, is one of the owners "elect." This is "election" with a witness,—and an "election," and a "calling" which the learned divine means to make "sure.'

But the principal thought I have in my mind in this connexion is (and I ask the readers' special attention to it)-suppose Paul did mean, when he said-"masters give unto your servants that which is just and equal,"—"masters give not unto your servants that which is just and equal,-but on the contrary enslave them, hold them as chattels, and thus trample justice and equity under your feet?" Would that make it right? Can Paul, or Apollos, or any body, make it right to convert a human being into a piece of property, and treat him as a thing? No,-and if Paul had advocated any such colossal wickedness in his epistle to the "saints and faithful brethren which are at Colosse," there wasn't one of them, young as they were in the principles of truth, who would not have treated him as another Judas Iscariot.

It is high time the people were made to feel that wrong is wrong, and right is right, scripture or no scripture. And when these priests come to us and try to prove that slavery, or any other crime, is sanctioned by the Bible,-we ought not to stop to discuss the matter with them, but answer at once:-" If that is a true saying of yours, then the Bible is an infamous book, and ought to be scouted out of all decent society." Now here is Dr. Hamilton, whose influence over his people is no doubt very great, gilding over the black institution of American despotism with the light of scripture. And so he deceives their moral sense, and lulls them into spiritual death. He says (page 6)

"I take the ground distinctly and emphatically, that domestic servitude, as found among us at the South, (however undesirable it may be in some respects,) is not in itself sinful. The Bible plainly recognizes it; and the sin of slavery, (for there is much sin attending it,) springs not from the nature of the relation, but from the neglect of duty of the master !!"

Now I "take the ground distinctly and emphatically" that if the Bible teaches any such thing, every copy of it ought to be served as Paul (or somebody) served the Ephesian letters.— Theodore Weld is said to have annihilated the Bible defence of slavery. But who cares whether he did or not? Anti-Slavery stoops when she condescends to any such verbal warfare. If slavery is "weld-ed in " to the Bible, (instead of "Weld "-ed out) as J. Q. Adams says it is "welded in to the Constitution,"-then what? Down with both of them as authority,—and up with the everlasting principles of right,-which no books can gainsay, and no priests meddle with, without being blasted.

Through the cold and dreary pages of this sermon, the wretched author insists over and again, with great earnestness, that the Apostles "connived at slavery." Very well, then, Mr. Hamilton, if your Apostles, instead of being straight-forward, honest men, are full of" connivances," and that, too, with the "sum of all villanies," then the apostolic succession instead of being matter of boast should be a cause of unqualified shame,-and those who substantiate their claim to it should be ranked with those

"whose blood

Has crept through scoundrels ever since the flood."

From such apostles, "good Lord deliver us." I will not stop to ask what need of conniving at slavery if it was right, but merely say, that any such connivance is utterly detestable, and if the coat fits St. Paul, or St. anybody, he should wear it, though it were as uncomfortable as a "cantharidian plaster." Speaking of Epistles, I wrote one "with mine own hand" to this Mr. Hamilton, when he was in these parts, in reply to one of his in which he complained that a man-stealer should be called a thief. Being no philologist, as Hamilton is, I didn't go into a verbal discussion, but I did tread upon his theological toes, and in the sermon before me he notices the fact as follows:

"So plainly does the Bible contemplate the existence of domestic servitude, —even in the church—and by its laws provided for its due regulation, and for the correction of abuses likely to spring from it, that a zealous abolitionist lately addressed me thus :- Prove to me from the Bible that slavery is to be tolerated, and I will trample your Bible under my feet, as I would the vilest serpent on the face of the earth.' Such language flows not from humanity, but from a ferocious pride; not from reason, but from madness; not from piety, but from the very spirit of infidelity."

Very well, Dr. Hamilton, if it is inhumanity to defend men from enslavement, against all authority, and to deny the competency of any book, apocryphal or canonical, to justify such enslavement; and if it is the dictate of " ferocious pride" to trample any book under foot which dares to assume to itself such competency, -then may my ferocity increase with every passing hour, and my inhuman acts multiply till they outnumber the stars in the sky. I know full well, sir, that you and your clerical colleagues will call this infidelity, and tell me with many a solemn warning that "it will not do to die by." And that is true. Such humane sentiments were not intended to die by; their "steps " do not "take hold on death." They are given us to live by,-and to live here on this green and beautiful earth. The doctrine which answers to die by, which is just fit to die by, is your doctrine that the Great Parent of Good looks with an approving smile upon the

appalling institution of American slavery. Indeed, that doctrine is moral death itself,-and men are "dying by" it every day. You say, Dr. Hamilton, that your sentiments will "fit us for another world;" that may be,-and your arguments on that point I may not answer, for my knowledge is confined exclusively to this world, in whose behalf only I speak. But I will say, if there is "another world" where your inhuman and unearthly sentiments pass current for virtue or wisdom,-a world whose God is on the side of slavery, it must be an infernal place, and I for one, have not the least inclination to "prepare" for it,—if I had, I would join the Andover (or some other) Theological Seminary, forthwith, and take orders for the ministry.

One word in conclusion. Whoever supposes I think that the Apostle to the Gentiles, or any other Christian teacher, is in favor of slavery, makes a great mistake. I am certain that the principles of the New Testament are utterly irreconcileable with the slightest form of human bondage, but then I want the reader to understand that if those principles were pro-slavery, they should be despised just as much in the Bible as anywhere else.

GIVE ME A GRAVE WHERE THE WILD BLOSSOMS REVEL.

BY CAROLINE A. BRIGGS.

Give me a grave where the wild blossoms revel,
Let me repose 'neath some whispering tree,
Close by the home of the robin and sparrow,
Near to the haunts of the murmuring bee;

Bury me not where the place is all silent,

Saving the sound of the bat on the wing,
Or the screech of the owl in his midnight carousal,
Haunting the spot like a terrified thing.

Let me not lie where the brier and bramble

Choke the green grass o'er my place of repose :
Give me no grave where the poisonous night shade
Over my ashes its dim shadow throws;

Friends that I loved in the hour of my being,
Never would visit my desolate bed,

Or, if they came, they would turn away shuddering,
Linking dark thoughts with the home of the dead.

No, let me lie by the side of some streamlet,
Murm'ring its song in the flow'r-scented air :
Seek ye some place where the spot is all joyous,
Meet for my spirit,—and bury me there.
Oh, I should slumber so peacefully, sweetly,
Blossoms to deck me, and music around!
Angels, methinks, would be ever beside me,
Making the charnel place heavenly ground!

Friendship would come with its off'ring of roses,
Twining a chaplet to lay on my tomb,

Love would be there with a smile and a tear-drop,
Smiles for my mem'ry, and tears for my doom;
There they would linger the long summer evening,
Lik'ning my race to the course of the sun,
Glad in its rising and calm in its setting,

Sinking to rest when my journey was done.

Over my grave they would talk of the lost one,
Fondly recalling each trait that was dear,
Tenderly throwing the pall of oblivion

Over the faults of the cherished one near.
Then they would pause in the pleasant recital,
Marking the loveliness scattered abroad,
Turning their thoughts to the lovelier dwelling,
Where the departed was resting with God.

Then let me lie where the wild blossoms revel,
Let me repose 'neath some whispering tree,
Close by the home of the robin and sparrow,

Near to the haunts of the murmuring bee:
Oh, I should slumber so peacefully, sweetly,
Blossoms to deck me and music around!
Surely kind angels would hover beside me,

Making the charnel spot heavenly ground.