Slavery is a great evil and sin, which affects not only individuals, but our country; and, both as Christians and patriots, we ought to be sensibly alive to every thing that affects our common weal. You who live at the South, it may be, have more responsibility in this matter than we at the North; but none of us can say, "because I am not personally implicated in inflicting wrongs upon the slave, therefore I have nothing to do for their removal." Should this become the universal sentiment of the church, Satan's kingdom in our world would never come to an end, and wickedness would prevail forever. The spirit of Christianity, although preëminently mild, gentle, patient, and long-suffering, is nevertheless, in an important sense, aggressive. It has ever claimed the right of interesting itself in the welfare of every human creature--to exert its influence to check the progress of sin in every form--to attack error in principle and in practice--to "loose the bands of wickedness,"--"undo heavy burdens,"--"break every yoke,"--"deliver the poor and needy,"--and to "remember them that are in bonds as bound with them." This, by some, may be called officiousness, but we cannot help it; it is a part of the Christian's legitimate business to volunteer his influence and his services (in every proper way) in opposing wrong, and to stand up and plead the cause of those who suffer it the world over. He cannot refrain from doing so, without proving himself false to his Master and his Master's cause. Admitting, then, that all Christians have some kind of responsibility and duty devolving on them, a most important question comes up. Thirdly, what shall they do? There are certainly some things which it is perfectly evident we should not do,--though we should rebuke this and every sin, we should not give vent to our hatred of the system in ebullitions of wrath, invective, and abuse toward slaveholders. Thus did not Christ nor his apostles. This is not in accordance with the Christian spirit, and could be productive only of evil. Neither should we endeavor to exert an influence over the slaves to make them restive and disobedient; none but an enemy to the true interests, both of the slave and his country, would do that, unless under some hallucination. Neither should we interfere politically with slavery beyond the boundaries of our own State, in States where it now exists by the laws of the land. I might go on indefinitely, and specify what we should not do; but this does not meet the case;--what shall we do? It would be arrogance in me to attempt a full answer to a question that has engaged the attention of many abler heads and better hearts than mine, but there are some things which have already been said by others, that cannot be too frequently repeated.