One word with regard to these remarks: ‘Before the Abolition movements commenced, both northern and southern men expressed their views freely at the South.’ This, also, I deny, because, as a southerner, _I know_ that _I_ never could express my views freely on the abominations of slavery, without exciting anger, even in professors of religion. It is true, ‘the _dangers_, _evils_ and _mischiefs_ of slavery’ could be, and were discussed at the South and the North. Yes, we might talk as much as we pleased about _these_, as long as we viewed slavery as a _misfortune_ to the _slaveholder_, and talked of ‘the dangers, evils and mischiefs of slavery’ to _him_, and pitied _him_ for having had such a ‘sad inheritance entailed upon him.’ But could any man or woman ever ‘express their views freely’ on the SIN of slavery at the South? I say, never! Could they express their views freely as to the dangers, mischiefs and evils of slavery to the _poor suffering slave_? No, never! It was only whilst the _slaveholder_ was regarded as _an unfortunate sufferer_, and sympathized with _as such_, that he was willing to talk, and be talked to, on this ‘delicate subject.’ Hence we find, that as soon as _he_ is addressed as a _guilty oppressor_, why then he is in a phrenzy of passion. As soon as we set before him the dangers, and evils, and mischiefs of slavery to _the down-trodden victims of his oppression_, O then! the slaveholder storms and raves like a maniac. Now look at this view of the subject: as a southerner, I know it is the only correct one. With regard to the discussion of ‘the subject of slavery, in the legislative halls of the South,’ if thou hast read these debates, thou certainly must know that they did not touch on the SIN of slavery at all; they were wholly confined to ‘the dangers, evils and mischiefs of slavery’ to the _unfortunate slaveholder_. What did the discussion in the Virginia legislature result in? In the _rejection of every_ plan of emancipation, and in the passage of an act which they believed would give additional permanency to the institution, whilst it divested it of its dangers, by removing the free people of color to Liberia; for which purpose they voted $20,000, but took very good care to provide, ‘that no slave to be thereafter emancipated should have the benefit of the appropriation,’ so fearful were they, lest masters might avail themselves of this scheme of expatriation to manumit their slaves. The Maryland scheme is altogether based on the principle of banishment and oppression. The colored people were to be ‘got rid of,’ for the benefit of their lordly oppressors--_not_ set free from the noble principles of justice and mercy to _them_. If Abolitionists have put a stop to all _such_ discussions of slavery, I, for one, do most heartily rejoice at it. The fact is, the South is enraged, because we have exposed her horrible hypocrisy to the world. We have torn off the mask, and brought to light the hidden things of darkness.