submitted by: Mary Hoit Abbe From the Sumter Democrat A SCRIPTURAL VIEW OF SLAVERY By J. HAIR ESQ. The subject of slavery is now, and has, for a long time, been agitating the people of the United States, both North and South, and those opposed to it in a religious point of view are respectable for their numbers, learning, talents, morality and piety. Yet they might all be addressed in the language of our Savior to the Sacucees, ?ye do err, not knowing the Scripture nor the power of God.? When I see our country menaced with civil War in the West, the wheels of government clogged at Washington City, and standing still more than six weeks, I think it behooves every patriot and philanthropist to examine into the cause, and, if possible to assist in applying a remedy; I , therefore, make no apology for appearing before the public. When I consider that all this disruption is the offspring of religious fanaticism, bigoty and intolerance, (the worst of all principle, to combat with reason,) and the that case has become chronic, I would abandon it as hopeless, were I not convinced that there is a conservative spirit, law-abiding, constitution Loving, and God-obeying principle in the North, that may leaven the whole lump, or cast out that which cannot be leavened, and that the same providence that was with our fathers in their struggle for independence, and sustained us in every trial, will sustain us now. Abraham was chose of God, and set apart and called by him, the father of the faithful, his acts were approved of , and blessed, and he prospered in an extraordinary manner during his whole life. And all who have done their duty, to God, themselves, and one another, down to the present time, are denominated, in scriptural parlance his children?He is, therefore, a fit example for our imitation, in the various departments of life. Yet he had servants born in his house, and servants bought with his money. Gen. XVII 12, 13, 23, 27. The institution of master and slave was by him and in his family fully sustained. He was not only a slave owner, but he owned a large number of them. When he heard that Lot was taken captive, he armed his trained servants born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan. Gen. XVI, 14 Now let us suppose that for every soldier fit to bear arms, there was a family, and that for every family there were six persons, a husband, wife, and four children, we will find connected with that company 1908 slaves, say nothing about those untrained and bought with his money, we may therefore, conclude without any forced construction, that he owned over 2000 slaves. Yet Abraham?s life and example was approved by God under Jewish dispensation, and recognized and approved by Christ and the apostles, under the christian dispensation. But the skeptic may require an express grant of the right before he will believe.?Well, here it is, from God himself. Leviticus XXV. 44. Beth thy bondmen and bondmaids which thou shalt have, shall be the heathen that are round about you, of them shall ye buy bond men and bond maids. 45. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy ???of these families that are with you which they beget in our land, and they shall be your possession. 46. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children, after you, to inherit them, for a possession they shall be your bond men forever. Here you see the right to buy and hold slaves, was expressly granted by the Almighty, and the slave made inheritable chattels forever, and to descend from parents to children. When a right is expressly granted, it requires as strong negative expressions to repeal or disannul it as it did to grant it. Now I most respectfully ask, where are these negative expressions, or of the repeal of that right, to be found? I answer without the fear of contradiction, not in the word of God, either in the old or new testament. Servitude is recognized in the decalogue in the 4th and 10th commandments, and throughout the whole scriptures of the old and new testament. Laws, given by the Almighty under the Jewish dispensation, for the government of the institution and the Isrealites forbidden to sell one another into bondage, and rules laid down by Christ and his apostoles for the regulation of both master and servant, under the christian dispensation. A law Is always the expression of the will of the law giver, and the laws of God are and must of necessity be eternal, and unchangeable. It must here be observed that Christ never failed to rebuke sin, he never lent to his countenance, aid or encouragement; but he healed servants at the request of, and partly for the benefit of their masters, and exclaimed respecting the Centurean , when he healed , that he had not found so great faith no not in Israel [although he was a slaveholder.] Luke VII 2nd to 10th verse. Our opponents, one and all, claim the golden rule as an invulnerable fortress for their opposition to our institutions. Well, here it is, it is the words of them that spake as never man spake. Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you do ye even so to them for this the law and prophets.?Matthew VII, 12. I have carefully examined the opinions of eight commentators upon the above passage; and am satisfied that no one of them gives the least pleas or encouragement to the abolition doctrine, but to the reverse. This was no new doctrine, it was only a summary or embodiment of what the world had in the law and prophets. The law and the prophets and slavery had always harmonized and stood well together. The former of what the offspring of the ??????????????????????????????????//// preted so as to subvert or repeal the laws then in force. It must be taken in a limited point of view, agreeable to the spirit and not the letter; if not, it would subvert all law, order and discipline?be an end to all punishment, and produce anarchy and confusion. What I desire to be done or not to be done to men, on the principles of christianity, that I must do or abstain from doing to another. It would not, however, follow that if I was tired of life, and desired that some one should kill me that I would have the right to kill him, or that if I wished someone to abuse my wife and family, that I would have a right to abuse his. A master, because he required obedience from his servants, is not bound to obey the., but he must be as obedient to his own master, as he expects them to be to him, and treat his servants as kindly as he could reasonably desire to be treated, were he in their situation. So, if a father should require obedience of his child, a guardian of his ward, a mechanic of his apprentice, or teacher of his pupils, they would neither of them be bound to render obedience because they required it in the above cases. The general meaning of the passage is this, guided by justice and mercy, do unto others as you would be done by, were their circumstances and yours reversed. This principle is often misunderstood. If a prisoner should ask a judge, would you consent to be hanged were you in my place, and he would answer no, then say the prisoner do as you would be done by. He could say the same to the executioner. We are not required to do for others anything that we might unreasonably desire them to do for us. The following view of this text of scripture ought to silence the tongue of every abolitionist who rests upon it for support. It requires of every one to search his own heart, enquire of his own conscience, and, by that standard judge himself, but it authorized no man to judge another; in the light of that scripture, and that alone, no none can say to another, you have done wrong to a fellow creature