FROM OUR PROVIDENCE CORRESPONDENT.

FREDERICK DOUGLAS, ESQ:—In your paper of the 12th inst. in an article on "The Republican Party," you say of the party, "We have now an Anti-Slavery party to which Anti-Slavery men may come." With this I do not agree. I do not regard the Republican party as being Anti-Slavery, but as selfish, proscriptive, Pro-Slavery. What is the Slavery which you and other Anti-Slavery men have been battling against? It is naught else but a selfish indifference as to the rights and feelings of colored men, North and South. The South gives it a practical turn by causing the subject to labor for its benefit; the North gives him a harder fate—there he not only labors, but while laboring, is reminded of his right to be free, by allurements, deceptive proclamations, partial enjoyments; yet is snubbed, depressed and proscribed at every corner; "held in bonds," not free to educate, to teach honorable aspirations.

The Slavery North and South, emanates from the same passion; is akin; either would manacle. What has the Republican party done; what is it doing; or what is it likely to do to do away with this Northern sister of Southern Slavery? Has not the party taken particular pains to publish that it is the "white man's party?" That they have not in view the black man's rights and interests? Have they not taken upon themselves the distinctive appellation of the "white man's party," in contradistinction to the party which has as its aim the acknowledgement of the rights of all, black as well as white. Is not this its position; proclaimed by its oracles as well as by address? What is the action of its Kansas branch? They declared that the colored American citizen should not live in Kansas. Yes, the people—the of them—by solemn vote declared that no colored man should reside in Kansas. This excites no horror, no upraising. When submitted by your correspondent to the notice of the State Convention of the Rhode Island Republican party, they unceremoniously tabled the matter. Yes, to be of the Republican party, these men had to forego Rhode Island's liberal action.

I have not the documents before me, but I am strongly impressed with the idea that the Republican party have declared that they have to interfere with Slavery in the States; not simply that they are restrained by what they may regard as constitutional restriction, but that they are alike restrained by the lack of a to do so; but I have before me a communication of F. P. Blair, one of the leading spirits of the Republican party, from which I extract the following: " I was at Pittsburg—was a member of the committee which embodied in form the principles on which the Republicans of the Union installed their organization. It was designed to oppose the phalanx of nullifies, wielding the executive power to overthrow the most solemn compacts made between the States—to destroy the principles of the Constitution, and to fund an oligarchy based on Slavery in their stead. , THEY , AS A SECURITY TO THE INSTITUTION IN THE STATES WHERE IT EXISTS." Mr. Blair says that he can safely affirm this to be the mind and intent of this Republican Convention. The address of the Republican party of Maryland says: "We declare the charge that the Republican party is in favor of the Abolition of Slavery ."

Can we, in the light of the above and much more that might be given, call the Republican party an Anti-Slavery party, and invite our and , our and our to join it?

Slavery is doomed, come what may, and in the line of probabilities I think that it may be shown, that even the defeat of Fremont would not be so disastrous; but that is not the object of my communication!

PHILO

PROVIDENCE, R. I., Sept. 25, 1856.