trated there. They were the very prototypes of their gifted countryman's description. And thou, whose glory and whose crime Would feed thy upward-tending star? Like Hades, when her thrones were stirred The entire statements and reasonings of the American dele gates deserve the most attentive consideration, and we would gladly quote them, together with some of Mr. O'Connell's vehement-but not more vehement than righteous-denunciations on the same subject, if our limits would permit. All the transatlantic speakers seemed to labor with the sentiment that slavery might be put down by a vigorous use of British influence, but that it could not be put down without it. The southern slave-holders, it was emphatically said, will resist us-the abolitionists of the United States-will resist all the arguments we can employ, and all the influence we can exert; but they cannot resist the strongly expressed sentiment of England. Mr. Wendell Phillips made some strong and, we thought, convincing remarks on the im portance of saturating with the anti-slavery spirit all departments of British literature-which is still the literature of America-and especially the more influential periodicals.* In this respect we can boldly say, that in our humble sphere we have done what we could; but it has long been to us matter of regret, and we think it might justly be matter of surprise, that reviewers of a higher walk---the Edinburgh and the Quarterly, for example, which, upon the appearance of every number, are immediately reprinted and circulated entire through the whole union---have never spoken out on this interesting and momentous subject. Their responsibility is great, for they can effect much. Why will they give southern slave-holders a pretext for saying that the antislavery feeling of England is not deep, imperative, and unchangeable? In relation to slavery in the United States, however, no part of the proceedings of the convention was in our judgment so important as the decision taken respecting religious fellowship with slave-holders. As the resolutions adopted on this subject, after repeated discussion and ultimately without opposition, lay a basis for extensive action on both sides of the Atlantic, we quote them entire. "That it is the deliberate and deeply rooted conviction of this convention, which it thus publicly and solemnly expresses to the world, that slavery, in whatever form or in whatever country it exists, is contrary to the eternal and immutable principles of justice, and the spirit and precepts of Christianity, and is therefore a sin against God, which acquires additional enormity when committed by nations professedly Christian, and in an age when the subject has been so generally discussed, and its criminality so thoroughly exposed. 'That this convention cannot but deeply deplore the fact, that the continuance and prevalence of slavery are to be attributed, in a great degree, to the countenance afforded by many Christian churches, especially in the western world, which have not only withheld that public and emphatic testimony against the crime which it deserves, but have retained in their communion without censure those by whom it is notoriously perpetrated. The following resolution was proposed by Mr. Phillips, and unanimously adopted by the convention. That while the literature of Great Britain exercises so vast an influence over the public opinion of America, we deem it the duty of British abolitionists, individually as well as collectively, to make systematic efforts to secure a frequent, clear, and full expression of the sentiments of the nation, through its leading religious, political, and literary periodicals, on the subject of slavery and the anti-slavery enterprise in United States; to fix the attention of the world on the successful results of the West India emancipation; and to spread before the American public evidence of the deep indignation of the civilised world against a slave-holding republic.-Sun, June 16. VOL. VIII. Ꭱ That this convention, while it disclaims the intention or desire of dictating to Christian communities the terms of their fellowship, respectfully submit that it is their incumbent duty to separate from their communion all those persons who, after they have been faithfully warned in the spirit of the gospel, continue in the sin of enslaving their fellow-creatures, or of holding them in slavery; a sin, by the commission of which, with whatever mitigating circumstances it may be attended in their own particular instance, they give the support of their example to the whole system of compulsory servitude, and the unutterable horrors of the slave-trade. 6 That it be recommended to the Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, in the name of this convention, to furnish copies of the above resolutions to the ecclesiastical authorities of the various Christian churches throughout the world.'-Sun, June 19. Upon this point the Eclectic has already taken a stand which we are far from being disposed to relinquish. We are aware nevertheless that the sentiments of the religious community are as yet only partially with us, and that both the feelings of pious men and the real difficulties of the question demand a patient and good tempered discussion. Scarcely, we think, in the convention was such a discussion granted. Some of the transatlantic delegates seemed to think that the decisive settlement of the question with them left nothing for English abolitionists but instant and unreasoning-we might almost say uninquiring-acquiescence. The vote was in some danger of being carried by enthusiasm rather than by conviction, and those who had a question to ask or a doubt to express were rather cried down than satisfied. It may be so that American abolitionists are gone a-head (to use a term of their country) of their British brethren on this point; but a little knowledge of human nature might have taught them that their English associates would have followed much more readily in the wake of their wisdom by being convinced than by being overborne. The old English maxim, however, think and let think,' may be better understood on the other side of the Atlantic at a somewhat greater distance from the martyr age.' To return to the resolutions, we earnestly hope that they will be considered and ultimately acted on by all Christian churches. To the Congregational churches in this country, who have a full liberty of action, we more especially commend them. If they will make themselves acquainted with the melancholy and afflictive facts which are now of authentic notoriety, we are sure that they will see a case made out for action, and will be stimulated by an urgent sense of duty to discharge the responsibility which devolves on them. We are not concerned to make out the position that no slave-holder can be a Christian. It is not necessary to the consistency of our views that we should do so, nor is it requisite in order to justify the course we recommend. It is 6 enough that slave-holding is a manifest and glaring violation of the laws of Christ, and uniformly tends to the dishonor of his name and the injury of his church. We would therefore deal with the person practising it, as we would with any other individual whose conduct was, in any department, at open variance with the law of Christ. Whatever might be his excellencies, however consistent his conduct in other respects, we would say to him, 'Here is a palpable deviation from the mind of your gracious Lord,-a practice which, in our judgment, no sound or scriptural reasoning can reconcile with the honor of your pro'fession. Your slave-holding, therefore, must be abandoned, if 'you would have us accredit the profession you make. With 'what excellent intentions, or amidst how many excuses, or with 'what supposed justifications, you may have become or may 'continue a slave-holder, we ask not; here, in the robbery and oppression of your fellow man-your fellow believer it 'may be is so monstrous an inconsistency with the spirit and 'precepts of your Master, that we must bid you keep at a distance from our fellowship till such inconsistency be removed. Repent of and abandon this sin; wash yourself clean from this 'pollution, and we will then rejoice over you as, in this respect, a consistent disciple of our Lord.' The scriptural ground of Christian fellowship is not sincere but consistent piety. The temper and conduct of one who would become a professor of religion, or be recognised as such, should exbibit such a conformity with Christian precepts as will be conducive to the honor of Christianity. We may refer to some directions given in the New Testament in reference to the exclusion of members for an illustration, and we think for a confirmation, of our view. Such are 2 Thess. iii. 6, 12; Rom. xvi. 17, and others. We should be glad if any who may differ with us in the principle would read these passages, and then permit us to propound this questionWhether facts which constitute a valid cause for cutting off a person from Christian fellowship would not, if they were known, afford a just ground for refusing admission to it. If this is affirmed, it seems to us to carry the principle we have above expressed. As to the eminently pious and benevolent slaveholders whose actual existence has been so positively asserted by persons who say they know the fact, without affirming the nonexistence of these gentlemen and ladies-we are glad it is admitted they are few-we shall content ourselves with saying, that we think their position as slave-holders is one in which a just regard to the honor of Christianity should induce them voluntarily to relinquish the profession of it. Involved as they are-involuntarily, or even against their will, as is alleged-in the support of a system so unrighteous as slavery is at the best, and so atrocious as American slavery is in fact, they should not wait to be told by their brethren of any church, we cannot hold Christian fellowship with you. They should anticipate this step, and say once for all, We will never solicit Christian fellowship till we can wash our hands of slavery. Next in importance to those which related to the United States, were the proceedings of the convention which had reference to France. The French society for the abolition of slavery was represented in the convention by three distinguished men, M M. Isambert, Lauré, and Cremieux, all of whom were received and heard with great interest. There was a marked difference, however, between the men who had crossed the Atlantic and those who had only crossed the Channel. The former seemed to be heavily burdened with the crimes of their country, and boldly spoke forth its shame; the latter were desirous rather of claiming credit for their nation, and of placing in the most favorable light what had been done for improving the condition of the slaves, and what was contemplated for their emancipation. We should be glad to see a different spirit. It is high time, we think, that the Code Noir should be spoken of in terms of indignant reprehension, and that the question of immediate and unconditional emancipation should be more vigorously grasped. M M. Isambert perceived, we hope, that it gains no plaudits from a British audience to be told that the French plan of abolition includes the continuance of slavery for from ten to twenty years. We intreat the abolitionists of France to look to this melancholy and murderous element of the plan which they seem to regard with so much complacency. Among the finest and most valuable proceedings of the convention was the reading of an admirable paper by Dr. Madden on the state of slavery in the island of Cuba, which has justly been called the centre of the slave system,' and which, as to the actual horrors of slavery there, is still to the public a terra incognita. Dr. Madden has been for three years the official Protector of imported Africans at Havanna, a post which he has filled with the justice and the firmness belonging to an Englishman. He has had ample opportunities of observation, and has with rare courage and fidelity detailed what he knows. We applaud not his fidelity only, but his courage also, because he is about to return to Cuba, and to face the men whom he has exposed. The paper, which will of course be published in the proceedings of the convention, is in course of translation into the Spanish language, and is designed for extensive circulation in the Spanish dominions. Notice was subsequently taken of slavery in the colonies of Holland, Denmark, and Sweden; but we must pass on to advert briefly to the subject of Mohammedan slavery. This was introduced to the convention by Dr. Bowring, whose statements, made in great part from personal knowledge, were listened to with much interest. It is pleasing to see that Mehemet Ali, who is one of |