I will group with this charge several others of the same class.

1. Abolitionists neglect the fact, that “the slavery which exists amongst us (southern people) is our affair—­not theirs—­and that they have no more just concern with it, than they have with slavery as it exists throughout the world."

2. They are regardless of the “deficiency of the powers of the General Government, and of the acknowledged and incontestable powers of the States."

3. “Superficial men (meaning no doubt abolitionists) confound the totally different cases together of the powers of the British Parliament and those of the Congress of the United States in the matter of slavery."_

Are these charges any thing more than the imagery of your own fancy, or selections from the numberless slanders of a time-serving and corrupt press?  If they are founded on facts, it is in your power to state the facts.  For my own part, I am utterly ignorant of any, even the least, justification for them.  I am utterly ignorant that the abolitionists hold any peculiar views in relation to the powers of the General or State Governments.  I do not believe, that one in a hundred of them supposes, that slavery in the states is a legitimate subject of federal legislation.  I believe, that a majority of the intelligent men amongst them accord much more to the claims of “state sovereignty,” and approach far more nearly to the character of “strict constructionists,” than does the distinguished statesman, who charges them with such latitudinarian notions.  There may be persons in our country, who believe that Congress has the absolute power over all American slavery, which the British Parliament had over all British slavery; and that Congress can abolish slavery in the slave states, because Great Britain abolished it in her West India Islands; but, I do not know them; and were I to look for them, I certainly should not confine my search to abolitionists—­for abolitionists, as it is very natural they should be, are far better instructed in the subject of slavery and its connections with civil government, than are the community in general.

It is passing strange, that you, or any other man, who is not playing a desperate game, should, in the face of the Constitution of the American Anti-Slavery Society, which “admits, that each state, in which slavery exists, has, by the Constitution of the United States, the exclusive right to legislate in regard to the abolition of slavery in said state;” make such charges, as you have done.

In an Address “To the Public,” dated September 3, 1835, and subscribed by the President, Treasurer, the three Secretaries, and the other five members of the Executive Committee of the American Anti-Slavery Society, we find the following language. 1.  “We hold that Congress has no more right to abolish slavery in the Southern states than in the French West India Islands.  Of course we desire no national legislation on the subject. 2.  We hold that slavery can only be lawfully abolished by the legislatures of the several states in which it prevails, and that the exercise of any other than moral influence to induce such abolition is unconstitutional.”