Ladies and gentlemen: An earnest
espousal of the Anti-Slavery cause for a quarter of
a century, under circumstances which have served in
a special manner to identify my name and labours with
it, will shield me from the charge of egotism, in
assuming to be its exponent at least for
myself on this occasion. All that I
can compress within the limits of a single lecture,
by way of its elucidation, it shall be my aim to accomplish.
I will make a clean breast of it. You shall know
all that is in my heart pertaining to Slavery, its
supporters, and apologists.
Of necessity, as well as of choice,
I am a “Garrisonian” Abolitionist the
most unpopular appellation that any man can have applied
to him, in the present state of public sentiment; yet,
I am more than confident, destined ultimately to be
honourably regarded by the wise and good. For
though I have never assumed to be a leader have
never sought conspicuity of position, or notoriety
of name have desired to follow, if others,
better qualified, would go before, and to be lost
sight of in the throng of Liberty’s adherents,
as a drop is merged in the ocean; yet, as the appellation
alluded to is applied, not with any reference to myself
invidiously, but to excite prejudice against the noblest
movement of the age, in order that the most frightful
system of oppression ever devised by human ingenuity
and wickedness may be left to grow and expand to the
latest generation I accept it as the synonym
of absolute trust in God, and utter disregard of “that
fear of man which bringeth a snare” and
so deem it alike honourable and praiseworthy.
Representing, then, that phase of
Abolitionism which is the most contemned to
the suppression of which, the means and forces of the
Church and the State are most actively directed I
am here to defend it against all its assailants as
the highest expediency, the soundest philosophy, the
noblest patriotism, the broadest philanthropy, and
the best religion extant. To denounce it as fanatical,
disorganising, reckless of consequences, bitter and
irreverent in spirit, infidel in heart, deaf alike
to the suggestions of reason and the warnings of history,
is to call good evil, and evil good; to put darkness
for light, and light for darkness; to insist that
Barabbas is better than Jesus; to cover with infamy
the memories of patriarchs and prophets, apostles
and martyrs; and to inaugurate Satan as the God of
the universe. If, like the sun, it is not wholly
spotless, still, like the sun, without it there is
no light. If murky clouds obscure its brightness,
still it shines in its strength. If, at a seems
to wane to its final setting, it is only to reveal
itself in the splendour of a new ascension, unquenchable,
glorious, sublime.
Let me define my positions, and at
the same time challenge any one to show wherein they
are untenable.
I. I am a believer in that portion
of the Declaration of American Independence in which
it is set forth, as among self-evident truths, “that
all men are created equal; that they are endowed by
their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that
among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness.” Hence, I am an Abolitionist.
Hence, I cannot but regard oppression in every form and
most of all, that which turns a man into a thing with
indignation and abhorrence. Not to cherish these
feelings would be recreancy to principle. They
who desire me to be dumb on the subject of Slavery,
unless I will open my mouth in its defence, ask me
to give the lie to my professions, to degrade my manhood,
and to stain my soul. I will not be a liar, a
poltroon, or a hypocrite, to accommodate any party,
to gratify any sect, to escape any odium or peril,
to save any interest, to preserve any institution,
or to promote any object. Convince me that one
man may rightfully make another man his slave, and
I will no longer subscribe to the Declaration of Independence.
Convince me that liberty is not the inalienable birthright
of every human being, of whatever complexion or clime,
and I will give that instrument to the consuming fire.
I do not know how to espouse freedom and slavery together.
I do not know how to worship God and Mammon at the
same time. If other men choose to go upon all-fours,
I choose to stand erect, as God designed every man
to stand. If, practically falsifying its heaven-attested
principles, this nation denounces me for refusing to
imitate its example, then, adhering all the more tenaciously
to those principles, I will not cease to rebuke it
for its guilty inconsistency. Numerically, the
contest may be an unequal one, for the time being;
but the Author of liberty and the Source of justice,
the adorable God, is more than multitudinous, and
he will defend the right. My crime is, that I
will not go with the multitude to do evil. My
singularity is, that when I say that Freedom is of
God, and Slavery is of the devil, I mean just what
I say. My fanaticism is, that I insist on the
American people abolishing Slavery, or ceasing to
prate of the rights of man. My hardihood is,
in measuring them by their own standard, and convicting
them out of their own mouths.
“Woe to the rebellions
children, saith the Lord, that take
counsel, but not of me; and
that cover with a covering, but
not of my spirit, that they
may add sin to sin.
That walk to go down into
Egypt, and have not asked at my
mouth; to strengthen themselves
in the strength of Pharaoh,
and to trust in the shadow
of Egypt!
Therefore shall the strength
of Pharaoh be your shame, and the
enact in the shadow of Egypt
your confusion.
Now go, write it before them
in a table, and note it in a
book, that it may be for the
time to come for ever and ever:
That this is a rebellious
people, lying children, children
that will not hear the law
of the Lord.
Which say to the seers, See not; and
to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things;
speak unto us smooth things; prophesy deceits;
get you out of the way, turn aside out of the
path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before
us.
Wherefore thus saith the Holy
One of Israel: Because ye
despise this word, and trust
in oppression and perverseness,
and stay thereon:
Therefore this iniquity shall
be to you as a breach ready to
fall, swelling out in a high
wall, whose breaking cometh
suddenly, at an instant.”
II. Notwithstanding the lessons
taught us by Pilgrim Fathers and Revolutionary Sires,
at Plymouth Rock, on Bunker Hill, at Lexington, Concord
and Yorktown; notwithstanding our Fourth of July celebrations,
and ostentatious displays of patriotism; in what European
nation is personal liberty hold in such contempt as
in our own? Where are there such unbelievers
in the natural equality and freedom of mankind?
Our slaves outnumber the entire population of the
country at the time of our revolutionary struggle.
In vain do they clank their chains, and fill the air
with their shrieks, and make their supplications
for mercy. In vain are their sufferings portrayed,
their wrongs rehearsed, their rights defended.
As Nero fiddled while Rome was burning, so the slaveholding
spirit of this nation rejoices, as one barrier of liberty
after another is destroyed, and fresh victims are multiplied
for the cotton-field and the auction-block. For
one impeachment of the slave system, a thousand defences
are made. For one rebuke of the man-stealer,
a thousand denunciations of the Abolitionists are heard.
For one press that bears a faithful testimony against
Slavery, a score are ready to be prostituted to its
service. For one pulpit that is not “recreant
to its trust,” there are ten that openly defend
slaveholding as compatible with Christianity, and
scores that are dumb. For one church that excludes
the human enslaver from its communion table, multitudes
extend to him the right hand of religious fellowship.
The wealth, the enterprise, the literature, the politics,
the religion of the land, are all combined to give
extension and perpetuity to the Slave Power.
Everywhere to do homage to it, to avoid collision with
it, to propitiate its favour, is deemed essential nay,
is essential to political preferment and ecclesiastical
advancement. Nothing is so unpopular as impartial
liberty. The two great parties which absorb nearly
the whole voting strength of the Republic are pledged
to be deaf, dumb and blind to whatever outrages the
Slave Power may attempt to perpetrate. Cotton
is in their ears blinds are over their
eyes padlocks are upon their lips.
They are as clay in the hands of the potter, and already
moulded into vessels of dishonour, to be used for
the vilest purposes. The tremendous power of the
Government is actively wielded to “crush out”
the little Anti-Slavery life that remains in individual
hearts, and to open new and boundless domains for
the expansion of the Slave system. No man known
or suspected to be hostile to “the Compromise
Measures, including the Fugitive Slave Law,”
is allowed to hope for any office under the present
Administration. The ship of State is labouring
in the trough of the sea her engine powerless,
her bulwarks swept away, her masts gone, her lifeboats
destroyed, her pumps choked, and the leak gaining
rapidly upon her; and as wave after wave dashes over
her, all that might otherwise serve to keep her afloat
is swallowed by the remorseless deep. God of
heaven! if the ship is destined to go down “full
many a fathom deep,” is every soul on board to
perish? Ho! a sail! a sail! The weather-beaten,
but staunch ship Abolition, commanded by the Genius
of Liberty, is bearing toward the wreck, with the
cheering motto, inscribed in legible capitals, “We
will not forsake you!” Let
us hope, even against hope, that rescue is not wholly
impossible.
To drop what is figurative for the
actual. I have expressed the belief that, so
lost to all self-respect and all ideas of justice have
we become by the corrupting presence of Slavery, in
no European nation is personal liberty held at such
discount, as a matter of principle, as in our own.
See how clearly this is demonstrated. The reasons
adduced among us in justification of slaveholding,
and therefore against personal liberty, are multitudinous.
I will enumerate only a dozen of these: 1.
“The victims are black.” 2. “The
slaves belong to an inferior race.” 3.
“Many of them have been fairly purchased.”
4. “Others have been honestly inherited.”
5. “Their emancipation would impoverish
their owners.” 6. “They are better
off as slaves then they would be as freemen.”
7. “They could not take care of themselves
if set free.” 8. “Their simultaneous
liberation would be attended with great danger.”
9. “Any interference in their behalf will
excite the ill-will of the South, and thus seriously
affect Northern trade and commerce.” 10.
“The Union can be preserved only by letting Slavery
alone, and that is of paramount importance.”
11. “Slavery is a lawful and constitutional
system, and therefore not a crime.” 12.
“Slavery is sanctioned by the Bible; the Bible
is the word of God; therefore God sanctions Slavery,
and the Abolitionists are wise above what is written.”
Here, then, are twelve reasons which
are popularly urged in all parts of the country, as
conclusive against the right of a man to himself.
If they are valid, in any instance, what becomes of
the Declaration of Independence? On what ground
can the revolutionary war, can any struggle for liberty,
be justified? Nay, cannot all the despotisms of
the earth take shelter under them? If they are
valid, then why is not the jesuitical doctrine, that
the end sanctifies them, and that it is right to do
evil that good may come, morally sound? If they
are valid, then how does it appear that God is no
respecter of persons? or how can he say, “All
souls are mine”? or what is to be done with Christ’s
injunction, “Call no man master”? or with
what justice can the same duties and the same obligations
(such as are embodied in the Decalogue and the gospel
of Christ) be exacted of chattels as of men? But
they are not valid. They are the logic of Bedlam,
the morality of the pirate ship, the diabolism of
the pit. They insult the common sense and shock
the moral nature of mankind. Take them to Europe,
and see with what scorn they will be universally treated!
Go, first, to England, and gravely propound them there;
and the universal response will proudly be, in the
thrilling lines of Cowper,
“Slaves cannot breathe
in England; if their lungs
Inhale our air, that moment
they are free!
They touch our country, and
their shackles fall!”
Every Briton, indignant at the monstrous
claim, will answer, in the emphatic words of Brougham:
“Tell me not of rights; talk not of the property
of the planter in his slaves! I deny the right I
acknowledge not the property! The principles,
the feelings of our nature, rise in rebellion against
it. Be the appeal made to the understanding or
to the heart, the sentence is the same that rejects
it.” And Curran, in words of burning eloquence,
shall reply: “I speak in the spirit of the
British law, which makes liberty commensurate with,
and inseparable from, the British soil which
proclaims, even to the stranger and the sojourner,
that the ground on which he treads is holy, and consecrated
by the genius of universal emancipation. No matter
in what language his doom may have been pronounced;
no matter what complexion an Indian or an African
sun may have burnt upon him; no matter in what disastrous
battle his liberty may have been cloven down; no matter
with what solemnities he may have been offered upon
the altar of Slavery; the first moment he touches
the sacred soil of Britain, the altar and the god
sink together in the dust his spirit walks
abroad in its own majesty his body swells
beyond the measure of his chains, and he stands redeemed,
regenerated and disenthralled, by the irresistible
genius of universal emancipation.”
Again take these slaveholding
pleas to Scotland and from the graves of the dead
and the homes of the living, they shall be replied
to in thunder-tones in the language of Burns:
“A man’s a man, for all that.”
“Who would be a traitor
knave?
Who would fill a coward’s
grave?
Who so base as be a slave?
Let him turn and
flee!”
Pass over to Ireland, and there repeat
those excuses for Slavery, and eight million voices
shall reply, in the words of Thomas Moore:
“To think that man,
thou just and loving God!
Should stand before thee with
a tyrant’s rod,
O’er creatures like
himself, with souls from Thee,
Yet dare to boast of perfect
liberty!
Away! away! I’d
rather hold my neck
By doubtful tenure from a
Sultan’s beck,
In climes where liberty has
scarce been nam’d,
Nor any right but that of
ruling claim’d,
Than thus to live where boasted
Freedom waves
Her fustian flag in mockery
over slaves!”
And the testimony of O’Connell,
in behalf of all Ireland, shall pass from mouth to
mouth: “I am an Abolitionist. I am
for speedy, immediate Abolition. I care not what
caste, creed or colour, Slavery may assume. Whether
it be personal or political, mental or corporeal, intellectual
or spiritual, I am for its instant, its total Abolition.
I am for justice, in the name of humanity, and according
to the law of the living God.” “Let
none of the slave-owners, dealers in human flesh,
dare to set a foot upon our free soil!” “We
are all children of the same Creator, heirs of the
same promise, purchased by the blood of the same Redeemer and
what signifies of what caste colour or creed we may
be? It is our duty to proclaim that the cause
of the negro is our cause, and that we will insist
upon doing away, to the best of our human ability,
the stain of Slavery, not only from every portion of
this mighty empire, but from the whole face of the
earth.” “Let the American Abolitionists
be honoured in proportion as the slaveholders are
execrated.”
Pass over to the Continent, even into
Papal-ridden Italy, and there urge the popular pleas
in defence of slaveholding, and, from the Vatican,
Pope Gregory XVI. shall reply: “We urgently
invoke, in the name of God, all Christians, of whatever
condition, that none henceforth dare to subject to
Slavery, unjustly persecute, or despoil of their goods,
Indians, Negroes, or other classes of men, or to be
accessories to others, or furnish them aid or assistance
in so doing; and on no account henceforth to exercise
that inhuman traffic, by which Negroes are reduced
to Slavery, as if they were not men, but automata
or chattels, and are sold in defiance of all the laws
of justice and humanity, and devoted to severe and
intolerable labours.”
Proceed to Austria, and there defend
the practice of reducing men to Slavery, and the Austrian
code shall proclaim: “Every man, by right
of nature, sanctioned by reason, must be considered
a free person. Every slave becomes free from
the moment he touches the Austrian soil, or an Austrian
ship.”
Finally, enter the Tunisian dominions,
and there urge the claim of property in man, and Musheer
Ahmed Bashaw Bey shall reply: “We declare
that all slaves that shall enter our kingdom, by land
or by sea, shall be free; and further order, that
every one born a slave in our dominions shall be considered
as free from the very instant of his birth, and that
he shall neither be sold nor bought.”
Thus do I prove that, in regard to
personal liberty the right of every man
to the ownership of his own body even Italy,
Austria and Tunis are in advance of this boasted Republic,
and put it to open shame!
III. The Abolitionism which I
advocate is as absolute as the law of God, and as
unyielding as His throne. It admits of no compromise.
Every slave is a stolen man; every slaveholder is a
man-stealer. By no precedent, no example, no
law, no compact, no purchase, no bequest, no inheritance,
no combination of circumstances, is slaveholding right
or justifiable. While a slave remains in his
fetters, the land must have no rest. Whatever
sanctions his doom must be pronounced accursed.
The law that makes him a chattel is to be trampled
under foot; the compact that is formed at his expense,
and cemented with his blood, is null and void; the
church that consents to his enslavement is horribly
atheistical; the religion that receives to its communion
the enslaver is the embodiment of all criminality.
Such, at least, is the verdict of my own soul, on
the supposition that I am to be the slave; that my
wife is to be sold from me for the vilest purposes;
that my children are to be torn from my arms, and
disposed of to the highest bidder, like sheep in the
market. And who am I but a man? What right
have I to be free, that another man cannot prove himself
to possess by nature? Who or what are my wife
and children, that they should not be herded with
four-footed beasts, as well as others thus sacredly
related? If I am white, and another is black,
complexionally, what follows?
“Does, then, th’
immortal principle within
Change with the casual colour
of the skin?
Does matter govern spirit?
or is mind
Degraded by the form to which
’tis joined?”
What if I am rich, and another is
poor strong, and he is weak intelligent,
and he is benighted elevated, and he is
depraved? “Have we not one Father?
Hath not one God created us?”
“How rich, how poor,
how abject, how august,
How complicate, how wonderful
is man!
Distinguished link in being’s
endless chain,
Midway from nothing to the
Deity!
A beam ethereal, sullied and
absorpt;
Though sullied and dishonoured,
still divine!”
Such is man, in every clime above
all compacts, greater than all institutions, sacred
against every outrage, priceless, immortal!
By this sure test, every institution,
every party, every form of government, every kind
of religion, is to be tried. God never made a
human being either for destruction or degradation.
It is plain, therefore, that whatever cannot flourish
except at the sacrifice of that being, ought not to
exist. Show me the party that can obtain supremacy
only by trampling upon human individuality and personal
sovereignty, and you will thereby pronounce sentence
of death upon it. Show me the government which
can be maintained only by destroying the rights of
a portion of the people; and you will indicate the
duty of openly revolting against it. Show me
the religion which sanctions the ownership of one
man by another, and you will demonstrate it to be
purely infernal in its origin and spirit.
No man is to be injured in his person,
mind, or estate. He cannot be, with benefit to
any other man, or to any state of society. Whoever
would sacrifice him for any purpose is both morally
and politically insane. Every man is equivalent
to every other man. Destroy the equivalent, and
what is left? “So God created man in his
own image male and female created he them.”
This is a death-blow to all claims of superiority,
to all charges of inferiority, to all usurpation,
to all oppressive dominion.
But all three declarations are truisms.
Most certainly; and they are all that is stigmatized
as “Garrisonian Abolitionism.” I have
not, at any time, advanced an ultra sentiment, or
made an extravagant demand. I have avoided fanaticism
on the one hand, fully on the other. No man can
show that I have taken one step beyond the line of
justice, or forgotten the welfare of the master in
my anxiety to free the slave. Why, citizens of
the Empire State, did you proclaim liberty to all in
bondage on your soil, in 1827, and forevermore?
Certainly, not on the ground of expediency, but of
principle. Why do you make slaveholding unlawful
among yourselves? Why is it not as easy to buy,
breed, inherit, and make slaves in this State, compatible
with benevolence, justice, and right, as it is in
Carolina or Georgia? Why do you compel the unmasked
refugee from Van Dieman’s Land to sigh for “a
plantation well stocked with healthy negroes in Alabama,”
and not allow him the right to own and flog slaves
in your presence? If slaveholding is not wrong
under all circumstances, why have you decreed it to
be so, within the limits of your State jurisdiction?
Nay, why do you have a judiciary, a legislative assembly,
a civil code, the ballot box, but to preserve your
rights as one man? On what other ground, except
that you are men, do you claim a right to personal
freedom, to the ties of kindred, to the means of improvement,
to constant development, to labour when and for whom
you choose, to make your own contracts, to read and
speak and print as you please, to remain at home or
travel abroad, to exercise the elective franchise,
to make your own rulers? What you demand for yourselves,
in virtue of your manhood, I demand for the enslaved
at the South, on the same ground. How is it that
I am a madman, and you are perfectly rational?
Wherein is my ultraism apparent? If the slaves
are not men; if they do not possess human instincts,
passions, faculties and powers; if they are below
accountability, and devoid of reason; if for them there
is no hope of immortality, no God, no heaven, no hell;
if, in short, they are, what the Slave Code declares
them to be, rightly “deemed, sold, taken, reputed
and adjudged in law to be chattels personal in the
hands of their owners and possessors, and their executors,
administrators and assigns, to all intents, constructions,
and purposes whatsoever;” then, undeniably,
I am mad, and can no longer discriminate between a
man and a beast. But, in that case, away with
the horrible incongruity of giving them oral instruction,
of teaching them the catechism, of recognising them
as suitably qualified to be members of Christian churches,
of extending to them the ordinance of baptism, and
admitting them to the communion table, and enumerating
many of them as belonging to the household of faith!
Let them be no more included in our religious sympathies
or denominational statistics than are the dogs in
our streets, the swine in our pens, or the utensils
in our dwellings. It is right to own, to buy,
to sell, to inherit, to breed, and to control them,
in the most absolute sense. All constitutions
and laws which forbid their possession ought to be
so far modified or repealed as to concede the right.
But, if they are men; if they are
to run the same career of immortality with ourselves;
if the same law of God is over them as over all others;
if they have souls to be saved or lost; if Jesus included
them among those for whom he laid down his life; if
Christ is within many of them “the hope of glory;”
then, when I claim for them all that we claim for
ourselves, because we are created in the image of
God, I am guilty of no extravagance, but am bound,
by every principle of honour, by all the claims of
human nature, by obedience to Almighty God, to “remember
them that are in bonds as bound with them,”
and to demand their immediate and unconditional emancipation.
I am “ultra” and “fanatical,”
forsooth! In what direction, or affecting what
parties? What have I urged should be done to the
slaveholders? Their punishment as felons of the
deepest dye? No. I have simply enunciated
in their ear the divine command, “Loose the
bands of wickedness, undo the heavy burdens, break
every yoke, and let the oppressed go free,”
accompanying it with the cheering promises, “Then
shall thy light rise obscurity, and thy darkness be
as the noon-day. And the Lord shall guide thee
continually, and satisfy thy soul in drought, and
make fat thy bones; and thou shalt be like a watered
garden, and like a spring of water whose waters fail
not. And they that shall be of thee shall build
the old waste places; thou shalt raise up the foundations
of many generations; and thou shalt be called, The
repairer of the breach, The restorer of paths to dwell
in.” Yet, if I had affirmed that they ought
to meet the doom of pirates, I should have been no
more personal, no more merciless, than is the law
of Congress, making it a piratical act to enslave a
native African, under whatever pretence or circumstances;
for in the eye of reason, and by the standard of eternal
justice, it is as great a crime to enslave one born
on our own soil, as on the coast of Africa; and as,
in the latter case, neither the plea of having fairly
purchased or inherited him, nor the pretence of seeking
his temporal and eternal good, by bringing him to
a civilized and Christian country, would be regarded
as of any weight, so, none of the excuses offered for
slaveholding in this country are worthy of the least
consideration. The act, in both cases, is essentially
the same equally inhuman, immoral, piratical.
Oppression is not a matter of latitude or longitude;
here excusable, there to be execrated; here to elevate
the oppressor to the highest station, there to hang
him by the neck till he is dead; here compatible with
Christianity, there to be branded and punished as
piracy. “He that stealeth a man, and selleth
him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely
be put to death.” So reads the Mosaic code,
and by it every American Slaveholder is convicted of
a capital crime. By the Declaration of Independence,
he is pronounced a man-stealer. As for myself,
I have simply exposed his guilt, besought him to repent,
and to “go and sin no more.”
What extravagant claim have I made
in behalf of the slaves? Will it be replied,
“Their immediate liberation!” Then God,
by his prophet, is guilty of extravagance! Then
Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the Declaration of Independence,
and all who signed that instrument, and all who joined
in the Revolutionary struggle, were deceivers in asserting
it to be a self-evident truth, that all men are endowed
by their Creator with an inalienable right to liberty!
The issue is not with me, but with them, and with
God. What! is it going too far to ask, for those
who have been outraged and plundered all their lives
long, nothing but houseless, penniless, naked freedom!
No compensation whatever for their past unrequited
toil; no redress for their multitudinous wrongs; no
settlement for sundered ties, bleeding backs, countless
lacerations, darkened intellects, ruined souls!
The truth is, complete justice has never been asked
for the enslaved.
How has the slave system grown to
its present enormous dimensions? Through compromise.
How is it to be exterminated? Only by an uncompromising
spirit. This is to be carried out in all the relations
of life social, political, religious.
Put not on the list of your friends, nor allow admission
to your domestic circle, the man who on principle
defends Slavery, but treat him as a moral leper.
“If an American addresses you,” said Daniel
O’Connell to his countrymen, “find out
at once if he be a slaveholder. He may have business
with you, and the less you do with him the better;
but the moment that is over, turn from him as if he
had the cholera or the plague for there
is a moral cholera and a political plague upon him.
He belongs not to your country or your clime he
is not within the pale of civilization or Christianity.”
On another occasion he said: “An American
gentleman waited upon me this morning, and I asked
him with some anxiety, ’What part of America
do you come from?’ ‘I came from Boston.’
Do me the honour to shake hands; you came from a State
that has never been tarnished with Slavery a
State to which our ancestors fled from the tyranny
of England and the worst of all tyrannies,
the attempt to interfere between man and his God a
tyranny that I have in principle helped to put down
in this country, and wish to put down in every country
upon the face of the globe. It is odious and insolent
to interfere between a man and his God; to fetter
with law the choice which the conscience makes of
its mode of adoring the eternal and adorable God.
I cannot talk of toleration, because it supposes that
a boon has been given to a human being, in allowing
him to have his conscience free. It was in that
struggle, I said, that your fathers left England;
and I rejoice to see an American from Boston; but I
should be sorry to be contaminated by the touch of
a man from those States where Slavery is continued.
‘Oh,’ said he, ’you are alluding
to Slavery though I am no advocate for it, yet, if
you will allow me, I will discuss that question with
you.’ I replied, that if a man should propose
to me a discussion on the propriety of picking pockets,
I would turn him out of my study, for fear he should
carry his theory into practice. ’And meaning
you no sort of offence; I added, ’which I cannot
mean to a gentleman who does me the honour of paying
me a civil visit, I would as soon discuss the one
question with you as the other. The one is a
paltry theft.
’He that steals my purse
steals trash; ’tis something, nothing;
’Twas mine, ’tis
his, and has been slave to thousands’
but he who thinks he can vindicate
the possession of one human being by another the
sale of soul and body the separation of
father and mother the taking of the mother
from the infant at her breast, and selling the one
to one master, and the other to another is
a man whom I will not answer with words nor
with blows, for the time for the latter has not yet
come.’”
If such a spirit of manly indignation
and unbending integrity pervaded the Northern breast,
how long could Slavery stand before it? But where
is it to be found? Alas! the man whose hands are
red with blood is honoured and caressed in proportion
to the number of his victims; while “he who
departs from evil makes himself a prey.”
This is true, universally, in our land. Why should
not the Slave Power make colossal strides over the
continent? “There is no North.”
A sordid, truckling, cowardly, compromising spirit,
is everywhere seen. No insult or outrage, no
deed of impiety or blood, on the part of the South,
can startle us into resistance, or inspire us with
self-respect. We see our free coloured citizens
incarcerated in Southern prisons, or sold on the auction-block,
for no other crime than that of being found on Southern
soil; and we dare not call for redress. Our commerce
with the South is bound with the shackles of the plantation “Free-Trade
and Sailors’-Rights” are every day violated
in Southern ports; and we tamely submit to it as the
slave does to the lash. Our natural, God-given
right of free speech, though constitutionally recognised
as sacred in every part of the country, can be exercised
in the slaveholding States only at the peril of our
lives. Slavery cannot bear one ray of light,
or the slightest criticism. “The character
of Slavery,” says Gov. Swain, of North
Carolina, “is not to be discussed” meaning
at the South. But he goes beyond this, and adds,
“We have an indubitable right to demand of the
Free States to suppress such discussion, totally and
promptly.” Gov. Tazewell, of Virginia,
makes the same declaration. Gov. Lumpkin,
of Georgia, says: “The weapons of reason
and argument are insufficient to put down discussion;
we can therefore hear no argument upon the subject,
for our opinions are unalterably fixed.”
And he adds, that the Slave States “will provide
for their own protection, and those who speak against
Slavery will do well to keep out of their bounds, or
they will punish them.” The Charleston
Courier declares, “The gallows and the
stake (i.e. burning alive and hanging) await
the Abolitionists who shall dare to appear in person
among us.” The Colombia Telescope
says: “Let us declare through the public
journals of our country, that the question of Slavery
is not and shall not be open to discussion; that the
system is too deep-rooted among us, and must remain
forever; that the very moment any private individual
attempts to lecture us upon its evils and immorality,
and the necessity of putting means in operation to
secure us from them, in the same moment his tongue
shall be cut out and cast upon the dunghill.”
The Missouri Argus says: “Abolition
editors in slave States will not dare to avow their
opinions. It would be instant death to them.”
Finally, the New Orleans True American says:
“We can assure those, one and all, who have
embarked in the nefarious scheme of abolishing Slavery
at the South, that lashes will hereafter be spared
the backs of their emissaries. Let them send
out their men to Louisiana; they will never return
to tell their suffering, but they shall expiate the
crime of interfering in our domestic institutions,
by being burned at the stake.” And Northern
men cower at this, and consent to have their lips padlocked,
and to be robbed of their constitutional right, aye,
and their natural right, while travelling Southward;
while the lordly slaveholder traverses the length
and breadth of the Free States, with open mouth and
impious tongue, cursing freedom and its advocates with
impunity, and choosing Plymouth Rock, and the celebration
of the landing of the Pilgrims upon it, as the place
and the occasion specially fitting to eulogize Slavery
and the Fugitive Slave Bill!
“Now, by our fathers’
ashes! where’s the spirit
Of the true-hearted and th’ unshackled
gone?
Sons of old freemen! do we but inherit
Their names alone?
“Is the old Pilgrim spirit
quenched within us,
Stoops the proud manhood of our souls so low,
That Passion’s wile or Party’s lure
can win us
To silence now?”
Whatever may be the guilt of the South,
the North is still more responsible for the existence,
growth and extension of Slavery. In her hand
has been the destiny of the Republic from the beginning.
She could have emancipated every slave, long ere this,
had she been upright in heart and free in spirit.
She has given respectability, security, and the means
of sustenance and attack to her deadliest foe.
She has educated the whole country, and particularly
the Southern portion of it, secularly, theologically
religiously; and the result is, three millions and
a half of slaves, increasing at the appalling rate
of one hundred thousand a year, three hundred a day,
and one every five minutes the utter corruption
of public sentiment, and general skepticism as to
the rights of man the inauguration of Mammon
in the place of the living God the loss
of all self-respect, all manhood, all sense of shame,
all regard for justice the Book styled
holy, and claimed to be divinely inspired, everywhere
expounded and enforced in extenuation or defence of
slaveholding, and against the Anti-Slavery movement colour-phobia
infecting the life-blood of the people political
profligacy unparalleled the religious and
the secular press generally hostile to Abolitionism
as either infidel or anarchical in its spirit and
purpose the great mass of the churches
with as little vitality as a grave-yard the
pulpits, with rare exceptions, filled with men as
careful to consult the popular will as though there
were no higher law synods, presbyteries,
general conferences, general assemblies, buttressing
the slave power the Government openly pro-slavery,
and the National District the head-quarters of slave
speculators fifteen Slave States and
now, the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and the
consecration of five hundred thousand square miles
of free territory forever to the service of the Slave
Power!
And what does all this demonstrate?
That the sin of this nation is not geographical is
not specially Southern but deep-seated and
universal. “The whole head is sick, and
the whole heart faint.” We are “full
of wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores.”
It proves, too, the folly of all plasters and palliatives.
Some men are still talking of preventing the spread
of the cancer, but leaving it just where it is.
They admit that, constitutionally, it has now a right
to ravage two-thirds of the body politic but
they protest against its extension. This in moral
quackery. Even some, whose zeal in the Anti-Slavery
cause is fervent, are so infatuated as to propose no
other remedy for Slavery but its non-extension.
Give it no more room, they say, and it may be safely
left to its fate. Yes, but who shall “bell
the cat?” Besides, with fifteen Slave States,
and more than three millions of Slaves, how can we
make any moral issue with the Slave Power against
its further extension? Why should there not be
twenty, thirty, fifty Slave States, as well as fifteen?
Why should not the star-spangled banner wave over
ten, as well as over three millions of Slaves?
Why should not Nebraska be cultivated by Slave labour,
as well as Florida or Texas? If men, under the
American Constitution, may hold slaves at discretion
and without dishonour in one-half of the country,
why not in the whole of it? If it would be a damning
sin for us to admit another Slave State into the Union,
why is it not a damning sin to permit a Slave State
to remain in the Union? Would it not be the acme
of effrontery for a man, in amicable alliance with
fifteen pickpockets, to profess scruples of conscience
in regard to admitting another pilfering rogue to
the fraternity? “Thou that sayest, A man
should not steal, dost thou steal,” or consent,
in any instance, to stealing? “If the Lord
be God, serve Him; but if Baal, then serve him.”
The South may well laugh to scorn the affected moral
sensibility of the North against the extension of her
slave system. It is nothing, in the present relations
of the States, but sentimental hypocrisy. It
has no stamina no back-bone. The argument
for non-extension is an argument for the dissolution
of the Union. With a glow of moral indignation,
I protest against the promise and the pledge, by whomsoever
made, that if the Slave Power will seek no more to
lengthen its cords and strengthen its stakes, it may
go unmolested end unchallenged, and survive as long
as it can within its present limits. I would
as soon turn pirate on the high seas as to give my
consent to any such arrangement. I do not understand
the moral code of those who, screaming in agony at
the thought of Nebraska becoming a Slave Territory,
virtually say to the South: “Only desist
from your present designs, and we will leave you to
flog, and lacerate, and plunder, and destroy the millions
of hapless wretches already within your grasp.
If you will no longer agitate the subject, we will
not.” There is no sense, no principle,
no force in such an issue. Not a solitary slaveholder
will I allow to enjoy repose on any other condition
than instantly ceasing to be one. Not a single
slave will I leave in his chains, on any conditions,
or under any circumstances. I will not try to
make as good a bargain for the Lord as the Devil will
let me, and plead the necessity of a compromise, and
regret that I cannot do any better, and be thankful
that I can do so much. The Scriptural injunction
is to be obeyed: “Resist the devil, and
he will flee from you.” My motto is, “No
union with slaveholders, religiously or politically.”
Their motto is “Slavery forever! No alliance
with Abolitionists, either in Church or State!”
The issue is clear, explicit, determinate. The
parties understand each other, and are drawn in battle
array. They can never be reconciled never
walk together never consent to a truce never
deal in honeyed phrases never worship at
the same altar never acknowledge the same
God. Between them there is an impassable gulf.
In manners, in morals, in philosophy, in religion,
in ideas of justice, in notions of law, in theories
of government, in valuations or men, they are totally
dissimilar.
I would to God that we might be, what
we have never been a united people; but
God renders this possible only by “proclaiming
liberty throughout all the land, unto all the inhabitants
thereof.” By what miracle can Freedom and
Slavery be made amicably to strike hands? How
can they administer the same Government, or legislate
for the same interests? How can they receive
the same baptism, be admitted to the same communion-table,
believe in the same Gospel, and obtain the same heavenly
inheritance? “I speak as unto wise men;
judge ye.” Certain propositions have long
since been ceded to be plain, beyond contradiction.
The apostolic inquiry has been regarded as equally
admonitory and pertinent: “What concord
hath Christ with Belial? or what fellowship hath light
with darkness?” Fire and gunpowder, oil and
water, cannot coalesce; but, assuredly, these are not
more antagonistical than are the elements of Freedom
and Slavery. The present American Union, therefore,
is only one in form, not in reality. It is, and
it always has been, the absolute supremacy of the
Slave Power over the whole country nothing
more. What sectional heart-burnings or conflictive
interests exist between the several Free States?
None. They are homogeneous, animated by the same
spirit, harmonious in their action as the movement
of the spheres. It is only when we come to the
dividing line between the Free States and the Slave
States that shoals, breakers and whirlpools beset the
ship of State, and threaten to engulf or strand it.
Then the storm rages loud and long, and the ocean
of popular feeling is lashed into fury.
While the present Union exists, I
pronounce it hopeless to expect any repose, or that
any barrier can be effectually raised against the
extension of Slavery. With two thousand million
dollars’ worth of property in human flesh in
its hands, to be watched and wielded as one vast interest
for all the South with forces never divided,
and purposes never conflictive with a spurious,
negro-hating religion universally diffused, and everywhere
ready to shield it from harm with a selfish,
sordid, divided North, long since bereft of its manhood,
to cajole, bribe and intimidate with its
foot planted on two-thirds of our vast national domains,
and there unquestioned, absolute and bloody in its
sway with the terrible strength and boundless
resources of the whole country at its command it
cannot be otherwise than that the Slave Power will
consummate its diabolical purposes to the uttermost.
The Northwest Territory, Nebraska, Mexico, Cuba, Hayti,
the Sandwich Islands, and colonial possessions in the
tropics to seize and subjugate these to
its accursed reign, and ultimately to re-establish
the foreign Slave Trade as a lawful commerce, are
among its settled designs. It is not a question
of probabilities, but of time. And whom will
a just God hold responsible for all these results?
All who despise and persecute men on account of their
complexion; all who endorse a slaveholding religion
as genuine; all who give the right hand of Christian
fellowship to men whose hands are stained with the
blood of the slave; all who regard material prosperity
as paramount to moral integrity, and the law of the
land as above the law of God; all who are either hostile
or indifferent to the Anti-Slavery movement; and all
who advocate the necessity of making compromises with
the Slave Power, in order that the Union may receive
no detriment.
In itself, Slavery has no resources
and no strength. Isolated and alone, it could
not stand an hour; and, therefore, further aggression
and conquest would be impossible.
Says the Editor of the Marysville
(Tenn.) Intelligencer, in an article on the
character and condition of the slave population:
“We of the South are emphatically
surrounded by dangerous class of beings degraded,
stupid savages who, if they could but
once entertain the idea that immediate and unconditional
death would not be their portion, would re-enact
the St. Domingo tragedy. But the consciousness,
with all their stupidity, that a ten-fold force,
superior in discipline, if not in barbarity, would
gather from the four corners of the United States
and slaughter them, keeps them in subjection. But,
to the non-slaveholding States, particularly, we are
indebted for a permanent safeguard against insurrection.
Without their assistance, the while population
of the South would be too weak to quiet that insane
desire for liberty which is ever ready to act
itself out with every rational creature.”
In the debate in Congress on the resolution
to censure John Quincy Adams, for presenting a petition
for the dissolution of the Union, Mr. Underwood, of
Kentucky, said:
“They (the South) were the weaker
portion, were in the minority. The North could
do what they pleased with them; they could
adopt their own measures. All he asked was, that
they would let the South know what those measures
were. One thing he knew well; that State,
which he in part represented, had perhaps a deeper
interest in this subject than any other, except
Maryland and a small portion of Virginia. And
why? Because he knew that to dissolve the
Union, and separate the different States composing
the confederacy, making the Ohio River and the
Mason and Dixon’s line the boundary line, he
knew as soon as that was done, Slavery was done
in Kentucky, Maryland and a large portion of Virginia,
and it would extend to all the States South of
this line. The dissolution of the Union was
the dissolution of Slavery. It has been the common
practice for Southern men to get up on this floor,
and say, ’Touch this subject, and we will
dissolve this Union as a remedy.’ Their
remedy was the destruction of the thing which they
wished to save, and any sensible man could see
it. If the Union was dissolved into two parts,
the slave would cross the line, and then turn
round and curse the master from the other shore.”
The declaration of Mr. Underwood as
to the entire dependence of the slave masters on the
citizens of the nominally Free States to guard their
plantations, and secure them against desertion, is
substantially confirmed by Thomas D. Arnold, of Tennessee,
who, in a speech on the name subject, assures us that
they are equally dependent on the North for personal
protection against their slaves. In assigning
his reasons for adhering to the Union, Mr. Arnold
makes use of the following language:
“The Free States had a majority
of 44 in that House. Under the new census,
they would have 53. The cause of the slaveholding
States was getting weaker and weaker, and what
were they to do? He would ask his Southern
friends what the South had to rely on, if the
Union were dissolved? Suppose the dissolution
could be peaceably effected (if that did not involve
a contradiction in terms), what had the South
to depend upon? All the crowned heads were
against her. A million of slaves were ready
to rise and strike for freedom at the first tap of
the drum. If they were cut loose from their
friends at the North (friends that ought to be,
and without them, the South had no friends), whither
were they to look for protection? How
were they to sustain an assault from England or France,
with the cancer at their vitals? The more
the South reflected, the more clearly she must
see that she has a deep and vital interest in
maintaining the Union.”
These witnesses can neither be impeached
nor ruled out of Court, and their testimony is true.
While, therefore, the Union is preserved, I see no
end to the extension or perpetuity of Chattel Slavery no
hope for peaceful deliverance of the millions who
are clanking their chains on our blood-red soil.
Yet I know that God reigns, and that the slave system
contains within itself the elements of destruction.
But how long it is to curse the earth, and desecrate
his image, he alone foresees. It is frightful
to think of the capacity of a nation like this to
commit sin, before the measure of its iniquities be
filled, and the exterminating judgments of God overtake
it. For what is left us but “a fearful
looking for of judgment and fiery indignation”?
Or is God but a phantom, and the Eternal Law but a
figment of the imagination? Has an everlasting
divorce been effected between cause and effect, and
is it an absurd doctrine that, as a nation sows, so
shall it also reap? “Wherefore, hear the
word of the Lord, ye scornful men that rule this people:
Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with
death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the
overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not
come unto us; for we have made lies our refuge, and
under falsehood have we hid ourselves: Therefore,
thus saith the Lord God, Judgment will I lay to the
line, and righteousness to the plummet; and the hail
shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters
shall overflow the hiding-place: And your covenant
with death shall be annulled, and your agreement with
hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge
shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by
it.”
These are solemn times. It is
not a struggle for national salvation; for the nation,
as such, seems doomed beyond recovery. The reason
why the South rules, and North falls prostrate in
servile terror, is simply this: With the South,
the preservation of Slavery is paramount to all other
considerations above party success, denominational
unity, pecuniary interest, legal integrity, and constitutional
obligation. With the North, the preservation of
the Union is placed above all other things above
honour, justice, freedom, integrity of soul, the Decalogue
and the Golden Rule the Infinite God himself.
All these she is ready to discard for the Union.
Her devotion to it is the latest and the most terrible
form of idolatry. She has given to the Slave
Power a carte blanche, to be filled as it may
dictate and if, at any time, she grows
restive under the yoke, and shrinks back aghast at
the new atrocity contemplated, it is only necessary
for that Power to crack the whip of Disunion over
her head, as it has done again and again, and she
will cower and obey like a plantation slave for
has she not sworn that she will sacrifice everything
in heaven and on earth, rather than the Union?
What then is to be done? Friends
of the slave, the question is not whether by our efforts
we can abolish Slavery, speedily or remotely for
duty is ours, the result is with God; but whether we
will go with the multitude to do evil, sell our birthright
for a mess of pottage, cease to cry aloud and spare
not, and remain in Babylon when the command of God
is, “Come out of her, my people, that ye be
not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not
of her plagues.” Let us stand in our lot,
“and having done all, to stand.” At
least, a remnant shall be saved. Living or dying,
defeated or victorious, be it ours to exclaim, “No
compromise with Slavery! Liberty for each, for
all, forever! Man above all institutions!
The supremacy of God over the whole earth!”