edings became intensely interesting.

At the appointed hour, Dr. Elder, the moderator, made a few remarks, by
way of opening the meeting, and introduced

Mr. Freeman, who, upon advancing to the table, said that he regarded it
as complimentary indeed, that he was permitted to proceed with the
discussion. Under all the circumstances, he considered it a great
compliment, that a highly intelligent audience should listen to one of
the proscribed fraternity. But friends, (said the speaker,) if the scene
of the discussion lay farther South, in the region of the spot where he
was born, he would not consider it so much of a compliment--he would not
make such a concession, even from the great Harry of the West down to my
fallen foe. In looking round the staging he observed new faces, and
missed those who had previously occupied their places--he had heard
those men had consulted their dignity, and any man (in the opinion of
the speaker) who thinks more of his dignity than his duty is not fit to
occupy the sacred desk. The arguments which he had brought forward on
the previous occasions have not been answered. Mr. Green has not even
attempted to do so, but he (the speaker) had found that a worthy
gentleman had entered the field, though not verbally, and endeavoured to
supply the place of his opponent. He would take the liberty to
compliment him--the distinguished editor of the Post--though he did not
know him, nor that such a paper as the Post was printed. That editor,
like many others whose prejudices overbalance their reason, had
misunderstood him. The speaker then indulged in a _critique_ on the
editorial, principally upon the ground which he had taken--that a man
has a right to do with his own things what he pleases, provided, in so
doing, he does not infringe upon the rights of others. On this point, it
appeared that the editor thought and argued differently, and Mr. Freeman
said, that in taking the above ground, he did not claim originality, for
it is a principle of law, as laid down in Blackstone, Paley, and
others--it is the language of great commentators, and upon it he would
stand or fall, and leave the distinguished editor to battle with those
men.

Some things, continued the speaker, may seem inconsistent at first,
which, upon examination, are not inconsistent. A thing may be legally
right and morally wrong, and whilst he could defend it legally, he could
not morally. For instance, suppose a rich man had two sons, bot