Some Recollections of Our Antislavery Conflict
Part 33
“‘_Resolved_, That the right of free discussion, given to us by God, and asserted and guarded by the laws of our country, is a right so vital to man’s freedom and dignity and usefulness, that we can never be guilty of its surrender, without consenting to exchange that freedom for slavery, and that dignity and usefulness for debasement and worthlessness.’
“I love our free and happy government, but not because it confers any new rights upon us. Our rights spring from a nobler source than human constitutions and governments,--from the favor of Almighty God.
“We are not indebted to the Constitution of the United States, or of this State, for the right of free discussion. We are thankful that they have hedged it about with so noble a defence. We are thankful, I say, that they have neither restrained nor abridged it; but we owe them no thanks for our possession of rights which God gave us. And the proof that he gave them is in the fact that he requires us to exercise them.
“When, then, this right of free discussion is invaded, this home-bred right, which is yours, and is mine, and belongs to every member of the human family, it is an invasion of something which was not obtained by human concession, something as old as our own being, a part of the original man, a component portion of our own identity, something which we cannot be deprived of without dismemberment, something which we never can deprive ourselves of without ceasing to be MEN.
“This right, so sacred and essential, is now sought to be trammelled, and is in fact virtually denied.... Men in denying this right are not only guilty of violating the Constitution, and destroying the blessings bought by the blood and toil of our fathers, but guilty of making war with God himself. I want to see this right placed on this true, this infinitely high ground, as a DIVINE right. I want to see men defend it and exercise it with that belief. I want to see men determined to maintain, to their extremest boundaries, all the rights which God has given them for their enjoyment, their dignity, and their usefulness.
* * * * *
“We are even now threatened with legislative restrictions on this right. Let us tell our legislators, in advance, that we cannot bear any. The man who attempts to interpose such restrictions does a grievous wrong to God and man, which we cannot bear. Submit to this, and we are no longer what God made us to be,--MEN. Laws to gag men’s mouths, to seal up their lips, to freeze up the warm gushings of the heart, are laws which the free spirit cannot brook; they are laws contrary alike to the nature of man and the commands of God; laws destructive of human happiness and the divine constitution; and before God and man they are null and void. They defeat the very purposes for which God made man, and throw him mindless, helpless, and worthless at the feet of the oppressor.
“And for what purpose are we called to throw down our pens, and seal up our lips, and sacrifice our influence over our fellow-men by the use of free discussion? If it were for an object of benevolence that we are called to renounce that freedom of speech with which God made us, there would be some color of fitness in the demand; but such a sacrifice the cause of truth and mercy never calls us to make. That cause requires the exertion, not the suppression, of our noblest powers. But here we are called on to degrade and unman ourselves, and to withhold from our fellow-men that influence which we ought to exercise for their good. And for what? I will tell you for what. That the oppressed may lie more passive at the feet of the oppressor; that one sixth of our American people may never know their rights; that two and a half millions of our countrymen, crushed in the cruel folds of slavery, may remain in all their misery and despair, without pity and without hope.
“For such a purpose, so wicked, so inexpressibly mean, the Southern slaveholder calls on us to lie down like whipped and trembling spaniels at his feet. Our reply is this: Our republican spirits cannot submit to such conditions. God did not make us, Jesus did not redeem us, for such vile and sinful uses.
“I knew before that slavery would not survive free discussion. But the demands recently put forth by the South for our surrender of the right of discussion, and the avowed reasons of that demand, involve a full concession of this fact, that free discussion is incompatible with slavery. The South, by her own showing, admits that slavery cannot live unless the North is tongue-tied. Now you, and I, and all these Abolitionists, have two objections to this: One is, we desire and purpose to employ all our influence lawfully and kindly and temperately to deliver our Southern brethren from bondage, and never to give rest to our lips or our pens till it is accomplished. The other objection is that we are not willing to be slaves ourselves. The enormous and insolent demands put forth by the South show us that the question is now, not only whether the blacks shall continue to be slaves, but whether our necks shall come under the yoke. While we are trying to break it off from others, we are called to see to it that it is not fastened on our own necks also.
“It is said: ‘The South will not molest our liberty if we will not molest their slavery; they do not wish to restrict us if we will cease to speak of their peculiar institution.’ Our liberty is not our _ex gratia_ privilege, conceded to us by the South, and which we are to have more or less, as they please to allow. No, sir! The liberty which the South proffers us, to speak and write and print, if we do not touch that subject, is a liberty we do not ask, a liberty which we do not accept, but which we scornfully reject.
“It is not to be disguised, sir, that war has broken out between the South and the North, not easily to be terminated. Political and commercial men, for their own purposes, are industriously striving to restore peace; but the peace which they may accomplish will be superficial and hollow. True and permanent peace can only be restored by removing the cause of the war,--that is, _slavery_. It can never be established on any other terms. The sword now drawn will not be sheathed until that deep and damning stain is washed out from our nation. It is idle, criminal, to speak of peace on any other terms.
* * * * *
“Whom shall we muster on our side in this great battle between liberty and slavery? The many never will muster in such a cause, until they first see unequivocal signs of its triumph. We don’t want the many, but the true-hearted, who are not skilled in the weapons of carnal warfare. We don’t want the politicians, who, to secure the votes of the South, care not if slavery is perpetual. We don’t want the merchant, who, to secure the custom of the South, is willing to applaud slavery, and leave his countrymen, and their children, and their children’s children to the tender mercies of slavery forever.
“We want only one class of men for this warfare. Be that class ever so small, we want only those who will stand on the rock of Christian principle. We want men who can defend the right of free discussion on the ground that God gave it. We want men who will act with unyielding honesty and firmness. We have room for all such, but no room for the time-serving and selfish.”
APPENDIX IV.
Notwithstanding the caution I have given my readers in the Preface and elsewhere, not to expect in this volume anything like a complete history of our antislavery conflict, many may be disappointed in not finding any acknowledgment of the services of some whom they have known as efficient, brave, self-sacrificing laborers in our cause. I was reproached, accused of ingratitude and injustice, because I did not give in my articles in _The Christian Register_ any account of the labors of certain persons, whose names stand high on the roll of antislavery philanthropists. The following is a copy of a part of one of the letters that I received:--
BOSTON, April, 1868.
DEAR SIR,--The writer of this is a subscriber to _The Christian Register_, and has there read your “Reminiscences of the Antislavery Reformers.” The numbers thus far (including the thirty-eighth) contain no notice of, or allusion to, our late lamented friend, Nathaniel P. Rogers, editor of _The Herald of Freedom_. His numerous friends in New England have been waiting and wondering that his name did not appear in your papers. Mr. Rogers gave up a lucrative profession, in which he had attained a high rank, and devoted himself _soul, body, and estate_, to the service of the antislavery cause, in which he labored conscientiously during the rest of his life, and left his family impoverished in consequence. That Mr. Rogers was one of the few most talented Abolitionists no one will deny who knew them; and that he was the intimate friend and fellow-laborer of Mr. Garrison was equally well known. He went to Europe with Mr. Garrison, and together they visited the most distinguished Abolitionists in England and Scotland; and, after his return, George Thompson, on his first visit to this country, was received by him in his family, and passed several days with him.
You have mentioned many names in your papers quite obscure, and of very little account in this movement, and why you have thus far omitted one of such prominence has puzzled many of your readers.
Notwithstanding, the writer will not allow himself to doubt that it is your intention in the end to do to all equal and exact
JUSTICE.
I cordially indorse my unknown correspondent’s eulogium of Nathaniel P. Rogers. I remember hearing much of his faithfulness and fearlessness in the cause of our enslaved countrymen, and of liberty of speech and of the press. Between the years 1836 and 1846 he wrote much, and so well that his articles in the _Herald of Freedom_ were often republished in the _Antislavery Standard_ and _Liberator_. I generally read them with great satisfaction. They were racy, spicy, and unsparing of anything he deemed wrong. Mr. Rogers, I have no doubt, rendered very important services to the antislavery cause, especially in New Hampshire, and was held in the highest esteem by the Abolitionists of that State. But it was not my good fortune to know much of him personally. I seldom saw him, and never heard him speak in any of our meetings more than two or three times. The only reason why I have only named him is that I really have no personal recollections of him. A volume of his writings, prefaced by a sketch of his life and character from the pen of Rev. John Pierpont, was published in 1847 and republished in 1849. It will repay any one for an attentive perusal, and help not a little to a knowledge of the temper of the times,--the spirit of the State and the Church,--when N. P. Rogers labored, sacrificed, and suffered for impartial liberty, for personal, civil, and religious freedom. The fact that he was a lineal descendant of the never-to-be-forgotten Rev. John Rogers--the martyr of Smithfield--and also one of the Peabody race, will add to the interest with which his writings will be read.
APPENDIX V.
An intimation is given on page 272 that I have known some remarkable colored women. I wish my readers had seen, in her best days, _Sojourner Truth_. She was a tall, gaunt, very black person, who made her appearance in our meetings at an early period. Though then advanced in life, she was very vigorous in body and mind. She was a slave in New York State, from her birth in 1787 until the abolition of slavery in that State in 1827, and had never been taught to read. But she was deeply religious. She had a glowing faith in the power, wisdom, and goodness of God. She had had such a full experience of the wrongs of slavery, that she could not believe they were permitted by God. She was sure He must hate them, and would destroy those who persisted in perpetrating them. She often spoke in our meetings, never uttering many sentences, but always such as were pertinent, impressive, and sometimes thrilling.
APPENDIX VI.
On page 283 I have spoken of Harriet Tubman. She deserves to be placed first on the list of American heroines. Having escaped from slavery twenty-two years ago, she set about devising ways and means to help her kindred and acquaintances out of bondage. She first succeeded in leading off her brother, with his wife and several children. Then she helped her aged parents from slavery in Virginia to a free and comfortable home in Auburn, N. Y. Thus encouraged she continued for several years her semi-annual raids into the Southern plantations. Twelve or fifteen times she went. Most adroitly did she evade the patrols and the pursuers. Very large sums of money were offered for her capture, but in vain. She succeeded in assisting nearly two hundred persons to escape from slavery.
When the war broke out she felt, as she said, that “the good Lord has come down to deliver my people, and I must go and help him.” She went into Georgia and Florida, attached herself to the army, performed an incredible amount of labor as a cook, a laundress, and a nurse, still more as the leader of soldiers in scouting parties and raids. She seemed to know no fear and scarcely ever fatigue. They called her their _Moses_. And several of the officers testified that her services were of so great value, that she was entitled to a pension from the Government. The life of this remarkable woman has been written by a lady,--Mrs. Bradford,--and published in Auburn, N. Y. I hope many of my readers will procure copies of it, that they may know more about Harriet Tubman.
APPENDIX VII.
The saddest, most astounding evidence of the demoralization of our Northern citizens in respect to slavery, and of Mr. Webster’s depraving influence upon them, is given in the following letter addressed to him soon after the delivery of his speech on the 7th of March,--signed by eight hundred of the prominent citizens of Massachusetts. I have given the names of a few as specimens of the whole.
From the Boston Daily Advertiser of April 2, 1850.
TO THE HON. DANIEL WEBSTER:
SIR,--Impressed with the magnitude and importance of the service to the Constitution and the Union which you have rendered by your recent speech in the Senate of the United States on the subject of slavery, we desire to express to you our deep obligation for what this speech has done and is doing to enlighten the public mind, and to bring the present crisis in our national affairs to a fortunate and peaceful termination. As citizens of the United States, we wish to thank you for recalling us to our duties under the Constitution, and for the broad, national, and patriotic views which you have sent with the weight of your great authority, and with the power of your unanswerable reasoning into every corner of the Union.
It is, permit us to say, sir, no common good which you have thus done for the country. In a time of almost unprecedented excitement, when the minds of men have been bewildered by an apparent conflict of duties, and when multitudes have been unable to find solid ground on which to rest with security and peace, you have pointed out to a whole people the path of duty, have convinced the understanding and touched the conscience of a nation. You have met this great exigency as a patriot and a statesman, and although the debt of gratitude which the people of this country owe to you was large before, you have increased it by a peculiar service, which is felt throughout the land.
We desire, therefore, to express to you our entire concurrence in the sentiments of your speech, and our heartfelt thanks for the inestimable aid it has afforded towards the preservation and perpetuation of the Union. For this purpose, we respectfully present to you this, our Address of thanks and congratulation, in reference to this most interesting and important occasion in your public life.
We have the honor to be, with the highest respect,
Your obedient servants,
T. H. PERKINS, CHARLES C. PARSONS, THOMAS B. WALES, CALEB LORING, WM. APPLETON, JAMES SAVAGE, CHARLES P. CURTIS, CHARLES JACKSON, GEORGE TICKNOR, BENJ. R. CURTIS, RUFUS CHOATE, JOSIAH BRADLEE, EDWARD G. LORING, THOMAS B. CURTIS, FRANCIS J. OLIVER, J. A. LOWELL, J. W. PAGE, THOMAS C. AMORY, BENJ. LORING, GILES LODGE, WM. P. MASON, WM. STURGIS, W. H. PRESCOTT, SAMUEL T. ARMSTRONG, SAMUEL A. ELIOT, JAMES JACKSON, MOSES STUART,[S] LEONARD WOODS,[S] RALPH EMERSON,[S] JARED SPARKS,[T] C. C. FELTON,[U]
And over seven hundred others.
THE END.
Cambridge: Electrotyped and Printed by Welch, Bigelow, & Co.
FOOTNOTES
[A] This chapter was written in June, 1867, and I give it here as it first came from my pen.
[B] Rev. Mr. Pierpont, who afterwards did good service, was absent in Europe during 1835.
[C] See Appendix.
[D] See Appendix.
[E] See “Right and Wrong in Boston,” by Mrs. M. W. Chapman.
[F] I have been told, and I record it here to his honor, that Hon. Joshua A. Spencer made an earnest, excellent speech, in behalf of free discussion.
[G] See Appendix.
[H] Of Leicester, England, who first demanded “immediate emancipation.”
[I] See Appendix.
[J] On that occasion, or another, I am not sure which, Mr. Adams announced another very pregnant opinion which he was ready to maintain; namely, that slaveholders had no right to bring or send their slaves into a free State, and keep them in slavery there; but that whenever slaves were brought into any State where all the people were free, they became partakers of that freedom, were slaves no longer.
[K] Elizabeth Heyrick, of Leicester, England.
[L] I am most happy to preserve and make known the fact that Dr. Henry Ware, Jr., then at the head of the Divinity School, and Professor Sidney Willard, of the college in Cambridge, were also members of that Convention.
[M] Would that justice would allow shame to wipe forever from the memory of man the disgraceful fact that, on the 27th of July, 1840, the Rev. John Pierpont was arraigned before an Ecclesiastical Council in Boston, by a committee of the parish of Hollis Street, as guilty of offences for which his connection with that parish ought to be dissolved,--and was dissolved. His offences were “his too busy interference with questions of legislation on the subject of prohibiting the sale of ardent spirits, his too busy interference with questions of legislation on the subject of imprisonment for debt, _and his too busy interference with the popular controversy on the subject of the abolition of slavery_.”
[N] The one of which Rev. Baron Stow, D. D., was pastor.
[O] See Appendix.
[P] I advertised my request in “Notes and Queries” for August, 1859.
[Q] See “The American Churches the Bulwarks of American Slavery,” by J. G. Birney, “Slavery and Antislavery,” by W. Goodell, and “The Church and Slavery,” by Rev. Albert Barnes.
[R] See Appendix.
[S] Of the Theological Institution at Andover.
[T] President of Harvard University.
[U] Professor of Greek in Harvard University.
Transcriber’s Notes
Punctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made consistent when a predominant preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed.
Simple typographical errors were corrected; occasional unbalanced quotation marks retained.
Ambiguous hyphens at the ends of lines were retained.
The entries in the Table of Contents for pages 389 and 391 do not have corresponding sub-headings on the referenced pages, and the sub-heading on page 85 is not mentioned in the Table of Contents.
Page 28: “de-gradation” was printed with the hyphen; in context, this appears to be intentional.
Page 40: “through the school” was printed as “though the school”; changed here.
Page 111: Extraneous opening quotation mark removed before “Here, too, the”.
Page 191: Unmatched closing quotation mark retained after “national honor and prosperity.”
Page 237: Unmatched opening quotation mark removed before “Pastoral Association of Massachusetts”.
Page 354: The second line of poetry, beginning “And in my soul’s just estimation”, was printed as one very long line. In other books, those lines are in several different ways.