The position which, in the article so often referred to in this paper, the Princeton professor takes, is sufficiently remarkable.  Northern abolitionists he saw in an earnest struggle with southern slaveholders.  The present welfare and future happiness of myriads of the human family were at stake in this contest.  In the heat of the battle, he throws himself between the belligerent powers.  He gives the abolitionists to understand, that they are quite mistaken in the character of the object they have set themselves so openly and sternly against.  Slaveholding is not, as they suppose, contrary to the law of God.  It was witnessed by the Savior “in its worst form,"[A] without extorting from his lips a syllable of rebuke.  “The sacred writers did not condemn it."[B] And why should they?  By a definition[C] sufficiently ambiguous and slippery, he undertakes to set forth a form of slavery which he looks upon as consistent with the law of Righteousness.  From this definition he infers that the abolitionists are greatly to blame for maintaining that American slavery is inherently and essentially sinful, and for insisting that it ought at once to be abolished.  For this labor of love the slaveholding South is warmly grateful and applauds its reverend ally, as if a very Daniel had come as their advocate to judgment.[D]

[Footnote A:  Pittsburgh pamphlet p. 9.]

[Footnote B:  The same p. 13.]

[Footnote C:  The same p. 12.]

[Footnote D:  Supra p. 61.]

A few questions, briefly put, may not here be inappropriate.

1.  Was the form of slavery which our professor pronounces innocent the form witnessed by our Savior “in Judea?” That, he will by no means admit.  The slavery there was, he affirms, of the “worst” kind. How then does he account for the alledged silence of the Savior?—­a silence covering the essence and the form—­the institution and its “worst” abuses?

2.  Is the slaveholding, which, according to the Princeton professor, Christianity justifies, the same as that which the abolitionists so earnestly wish to see abolished?  Let us see.

Christianity in supporting The American system for Slavery, according to Prof. supporting Slavery,_ Hodge,_

“Enjoins a fair compensation Makes compensation impossible for labor.” by reducing the laborer to a
                                        chattel.

“It insists on the moral It sternly forbids its victim and intellectual improvement to learn to read even the of all classes of men.” name of his Creator and
                                        Redeemer.

“It condemns all infractions            It outlaws the conjugal and
of marital or parental rights.”         parental relations.

“It requires that free scope It forbids any effort, on the
should be allowed to human part of myriads of the human
improvement.” family, to improve their
                                        character, condition, and
                                        prospects.