Viewing page 1 of 4

Published every Friday, at the anti-slavery office, 25, Cornhill
Henry W. Williams, General Agent.
All remittances are to be made, and all letters relating to the pecuniary concerns of the paper are to be directed, (post paid,) to the General Agent.
TERMS.--$2 50 per annum, payable in advance; or $3 00 at the expiration of six months.
Five copies will be sent to one address for ten dollars, if payment be forwarded in advance.
ADVERTISEMENTS making less than a square inserted three times for 75 cts.: one square for $1 00.
Financial Committee.--Francis Jackson, Ellis Gray Loring, Edmund Quincy, Samuel Philbrick, Wendell Phillips. [This committee is responsible only for the financial economy of the paper.]

[[image--The Liberator masthead]]

All men are born free and equal--with certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights--among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Three millions of the American people are in chains and slavery--held as chattels personal, and bought and sold as marketable commodities.
Seventy thousand infants, the offspring of slave parents, kidnapped as soon as born, and permanently added to the slave population of Christian, (!) Republican, (!!) Democratic (!!!) America every year.
Immediate, Unconditional Emancipation.
Slave-holders, Slave-traders and Slave-drivers are to be placed on the same level of infamy, and in the same fiendish category, as kidnappers and menstealers--a race of monsters unparalleled in their assumption of power, and their despotic cruelty.
The existing Constitution of the United States is 'a covenant with death, and an agreement with hell.'


VOL. XV.--NO. 20.


We confess our amazement at the villany and falsehood which the respectable leaders of the Whig party in Connecticut, have allowed to be perpetrated by those who have labored in their name and behalf. The people in Norwich are considered eminently a moral and religious people. And Senator Huntington and Congressman Rockwell, as well as the Whig citizens generally, surely out to feel some degree of responsibility for the conduct of the press that represents and speaks for them.

A friend has sent us the Norwich Courier, (a paper we do not exchange with,) of March 18, containing an elaborate article designed to make those who are so unfortunate as to have no other means of political information, believe that the Liberty paper is a sort of snag or offshoot of the French revolution; and he distinctly charges that the Liberty party 'are ready to trample upon the Constitution, outrage every law of reason and humanity, and bury the Church and Union in a common grave.' And what was the proof, think you, by which the organ of the Norwich Whigs sustained so grave a charge against a body of their fellow-citizens, we venture to say, as exemplary in all relations of life, and as observant of all duties, social, civil, and religious, as any other equal number of men in this nation, associated for any other purpose whatever? The proof is just this, and no more.

'At the last anniversary of the American Anti-Slavery Society held in New-York, May 7, 1844, the following resolutions were presented and passed:--

'Whereas, No institution is more hostile to the anti-slavery movement than the professedly Christian church in this country; and whereas, from her prominent position, her high professions, and her deep hold upon the affections of the people, and her immense influence, she out to be first among the foremost of the ranks of freedom; and whereas, by continuing our connection with so base an institution, we do thereby surround the system of American slavery with holy sanctions and entrench it behind religious bulwarks; therefore,

Resolved, As the deliberate opinion of this society that is the duty of every true abolitionist to withdraw entirely from the support of said institution, and to hold her up before the people as hypocritical in profession, infamous in practice, as having usurped the name of the Christian church, and as being one of the greatest obstacles in the way of immediate emancipation.

Resolved, That fourteen years of warfare against the slave power has convinced us that every act done with the support of the American Union, rivets the chains of the slave--that the only Exodus of the slave to freedom, unless it be one of blood, must be over the ruins of the present American church, and the grave of the present Union.'

This follows directly after the charge, and is designed to identify the authors of those resolutions with the Liberty Party. Now, the conductors of that paper very well know that the American Anti-Slavery Society is composed of a small faction of Garrisonians--party Non-Resistants, and nearly all Whigs in sympathy, and all as malignantly hostile to the Liberty party as the Whigs [[folded, text not visible]] same society denounced the Liberty party in the most opprobrious terms. The Norwich Courier, we presume, has itself quoted from the Garrison papers many paragraphs of scurrilous abuse of Mr. Birney and the Liberty part. The leading Whigs are perfectly acquainted with all this; many of them profess to be men of honor; and yet, by their instrument; they perpetrate this false accusation.

It was by such means that the Liberty party has been kept from increasing among the people of Connecticut. Shall falsehood always triumph?

The truth is, the Liberty party is sacredly pledged to employ only constitutional measures for the abolition of slavery and the overthrow of the political slaveocracy. Those who formed the old American Anti-Slavery Society, and who controlled its movements so long as it adhered to its proper character and retained its influence in the community, were law-abiding people, and aimed to bring both masters and slaves alike under the control and under the protection of law. And the great body of those are the same men who formed and gave direction to the Liberty party, and who never had the least sympathy or gave the least countenance to Mr. Garrison's crudites and fantasies about religion and government. 

This the Whig leaders at Norwich know very well; they know that to represent the Liberty party in any way, or in any degree, responsible for Mr. Garrison's opinions or acts, is nothing but a blackhearted fraud. They also know that Mr. Garrison and his party are and have been for five years, kept in countenance chiefly by the Whigs, many of whom sympathize with his disunion sentiments, and still more rely on him to war against the Liberty party. We can hardly conceive a more unjust attack than this of the Norwich Whigs upon the Liberty party.

[[line break]]

How cooly some people can palm off a lie. The Albany Evening Journal says: 'James G. Birney passed through our city yesterday.' So far is true, we believe, though we had not the pleasure of speaking with Mr. Birney. The Journal continues: 'When last among us, he was laboring as an abolition candidate for President, to promote the election of Mr. Polk, so that Texas might be annexed.' All this the Journal writer knows is sheer falsehood, without the color of pretence. 'He is now, it is said,'continues the Journal, 'proceeding to a convention which contemplates the dissolution of the Union.' All we need to say here is, that the assertion is wholly without foundation, and the writer, we have a right to believe, knew it to be so. No such opinion has been expressed by Mr. Birney as to favor a dissolution of the Union, and no such convention is called or contemplated by Mr. B. or his friends.

The annual meeting of the Non-Residents, as they are somewhat inaptly termed, takes place next week, we understand.  They go for dissolution dead, and have for some years been the hearty allies of the Journal and its friends, and petted by it just before election!

How contemptible a party must be that which needs to be propped up by a system of mean lying!

[[line break]]

The Anti-Birney Standard more than intimates that its 'Refuge of Oppression' is 'learning' the Liberty Press 'wisdom.' That school of abolitionists have generally assumed very pedagogical airs in the anti-slavery sphere; and we are not at all surprised that the Standard, like all other pedantics, should pride itself on its achievements over those it regards as its pupils -- nay, that it should assume to be the schoolmaster, and treat its exchanges as scholars. We confess, however, we have 'learned' something of our non-resident neighbor -- but not the thing it aims to inculcate, but just the reverse.  We should be a dull scholar not to learn any thing from the exhibitions of folly weekly spread over that sheet.  We have taken our 'learning' from it in the same manner that certain Grecian youths imbibed their temperance principles; that is to say, by looking at a miserable, reeling drunkard.  Its exhibitions of 'all-talk,' 'non-resident' abolition has so completely disgusted us with that miserable sham, that we feel no danger of ever being caught by it.  However, the Standard may ply us with its 'Refuge of Oppression,' if it like. --Liberty Press.

[[line break]]

They have no Penitentiary in North Carolina, and in consequence hang men for theft.  On Friday last, a man was hung for stealing a pair of suspenders from a store.  Horrible!--Baltimore Pat., Thursday.

Remarks of Mr. Wilson, of Middlesex, in support of his motion to recommit the report of the Committee on the Judiciary, with instructions to report a bill, making it a penal offence to claim or arrest any person held as a slave in Texas, who shall come into this Commonwealth.

Mr. Wilson said, that he was not a little surprised and disappointed at the conclusion at which the Committee on the Judiciary had arrived, in presenting this report.  When he submitted the order, some days ago, instructing the Committee on the Judiciary to consider the expediency of providing by law, that any person held as a slave in Texas, shall have all the rights of a freeman in this State, and making it a penal offence to detain, molest, or arrest, any such person, who may come into the Commonwealth, he had no doubt whatever, about the action of the committee, or the Senate.  He supposed that a bill would be reported in accordance with the principles of the order, by the committee, without the least hesitation, and that such a bill would pass the Senate, without a dissenting voice or vote.  Contrary to his expectations, the committee had decided that it was inexpedient to legislate on the subject.  No other course remained for him, but to submit the motion which he had made, to recommit the report with instructions to report a bill.  In support of that motion, and in explanation and defence of the course he had felt it his duty to take, he desired to submit a few remarks to the consideration of the Senate.

When the resolutions against the admission of the foreign nation of Texas into the Union, were under consideration, he submitted an amendment, the object of which was to indicate and declare the position and course Massachusetts would assume and pursue, if that act should be consummated.  That amendment was opposed by several Senators, on the ground that it was undignified for Massachusetts to declare in advance, what action she would take if Congress should pass the joint resolutions then before the Senate of the Union.  Senators all around him declared, that if that act was consummated--if Texas was forced into the Union, in violation of the Constitution--that they would be ready to act--to go as far as he who would go farthest--to use all the constitutional power we possess, to arrest and defeat the objects and purposes of annexation.  Now, it seemed to him, was the hour to act.  The measure had passed through both Houses of Congress.  If not in the Union, she was invited in; the doors were thrown wide open to receive her.  He hoped Senators would now be ready to act.  He thought it was dignified to speak out now.  His amendment was voted down; and the resolutions, as they came from the hands of the committee, were adopted, without a dissenting vote.  Those resolutions asserted a great principle.  The position was boldly assumed, that the admission of Texas into the Union by a joint resolution of the two Houses of Congress, 'would have no binding effect whatever upon us.'  That assertion and declaration of a great principle, was made in full view of all the facts of the case, under the solemnities of an [[??  text obscured by fold in the paper]] or can rest upon us.  When he gave his vote for that principle, he felt the full force of it.  He was ready to stand by and defend it now and hereafter.  He was prepared to treat that act of Congress as unconstitutional, null and void, and of 'no binding force whatever upon us.'  He would use every lawful and constitutional means we possessed, to arrest the consummation and defeat the objects and purposes of annexation.  If were were honest and sincere, if we meant what we said, we were bound, pledged, to treat the act of Congress admitting Texas, as null and void.  He would assume that position, and maintain it with firmness; and if hereafter that position should be odious and unpopular, he was willing to take his full share of all the odium and unpopularity that can be heaped upon us.  He hoped the resolutions of his friend from Suffolk, (Mr. Adams,) now on the table, would be adopted, and that we should pass, the only legal act we can pass making it penal to arrest a person claimed as a slave from Texas, in this Commonwealth.

The Senator from Hampshire, (Mr. Lawrence,) Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, has informed us that the reason why the committee did not report a bill, was that a slave from Texas, the moment he stepped on our soil, as a freeman, if the law of Congress admitting that country into the Union was unconstitutional; and that a person claimed as a slave could carry the case to the Supreme Court, and test the question.  The Senator says that there is no more occasion for legislation in this case, than there is for legislation for other foreign powers.  The cases were different.  No State, not claiming to be a part of the Union, would ever think of claiming a person escaping into this Commonwealth as a slave.  The law of nations does not recognize slavery.  Every human being who comes here from another land, whether black or white, a prince or a slave, a believer in Christianity or a worshipper of the sun, has all the rights of a freeman; and our laws protect him in his life, liberty and property.  Texas would claim and demand the protection and guaranties of the Federal Constitution, whether the act of admission was constitutional or not.  We should not by our silence admit, or seem to admit, for a moment, that she is a portion of the Union; at any rate, we should treat her as a foreign state.  We were bound by the Constitution, as understood and interpreted, to return the slave to his master, when claimed.  We cannot shield and protect him.  Our hands are tied.  Massachusetts has no spot on which he can stand up a freeman; she has no city of refuge to which he can flee.  Every foot of her soil is the slaveholder's hunting ground.  No place is sacred from his polluted footstep.  The fleeing and panting fugitive may take refuge within the walls of old Faneuil Hall, which in other days was consecrated to the cause of human liberty, and he is still a slave; he may take shelter under the very shadow of yonder monument, on the spot where Warren fell, and on the sods once moistened by revolutionary blood, and he is still a slave; he may flee for refuge into the counsel chamber of the executive, and he is still a slave; he who represents the sovereignty of Massachusetts, who can pardon the criminal who has imbrued his hands in a brother's blood, is powerless to protect him; and the poor bondman may be dragged from that chamber into interminable slavery.  It is in the bond.  Shylock can have his pound of flesh.

The power to pass a law to protect any person claimed as a slave, who may chance to be thrown upon our shores, is clear, undoubted, unquestioned.  The justice and expedience of such a law is as clear and plain to my mind, as the simplest demonstration in mathematics.  We have the power; and justice and sound policy alike demand that we should exercise it.  He would provide at once, by law, that the moment any person held as a slave in Texas, stepped upon our soil, he would have all the rights which belong to him as a man.  His liberty should be as sacred as his life.  It should be a high crime in the eye of the law to molest him, on the ground that man can hold property in man.  The law should denounce him as a felon who should lay his hands on a man and claim him as his property.  We owe it to ourselves, to the cause of humanity, to take that stand.  If we had the power to pass a law to protect the slaves from other States of the Union, we should be compelled to exercise it.  We should not dare to adjourn without doing it.  The people would demand action.  We have declared that Texas is no part of the Union.  Let us then treat her as such.  The Senator from Worcester, (Mr. Hill) says that if no action is taken upon the subject, and a slave comes here from Texas, and is pursued by his master and arrested, that he can carry the case up to the Supreme Court, and test the constitutionality of the act of admission; and if the Court declares the act unconstitutional, he would be free.  That was true; but the person claimed as a slave would be held as such, for a time, on the soil of this Commonwealth.  He did not like this process.  He did not wish the slave to be placed in that position.  He was not the criminal in the eye of heaven.  He wished to place the parties in their true position.  The master the moment he placed his hand upon the person claimed as his property, should be arrested, placed in the criminal box, tried and convicted, and then put to hard labor in the State Prison, where he might learn some useful employment.  If he chose to test the constitutionality of the [[law he?]] would have the question to be, not whether his slave should go back into bondage, but whether he should remain within the walls of our State Prison.  That should be the position of such parties.  Justice and humanity demanded it.  Such a position would show to the country and the world our regard for human rights, and would have a powerful moral influence upon the public sentiment of the country.

Why is Texas sought with so much zeal and assiduity?  What are the motives, objects and purposes of the advocates of annexation?  We have millions of acres of as fertile soil as the sun every shone upon, unbroken by the hand of industry.  The safety, prosperity and glory of the country do not demand that Texas be admitted into the Union.  But the dark spirit of slavery demands it.  The extension of the area, power and influence of slavery, is the real object.  It requires no argument to prove it.  The history of the whole conspiracy, from the moment it was unmasked by the explosion of the Peacemaker to the present time, proves it clearly.  Our statemen have boldly avowed it in their public documents.  The apprehension that Texas could not sustain the institution of domestic slavery 'ten years, and not probably five years longer'--the fear that the existence of a free Republic on our southern border would endanger their 'peculiar institution'--the desire to restore the waning power of slavery--and the growing apprehension in the minds of southern statesmen that the providence of God and the progress of human events were all tending to overthrow the whole system of slavery; these causes all combined, have produced that strong desire in the bosoms of the slave-holding statesmen, that now wield the destinies of the country, to secure that country at every hazard.  To sustain, extend and perpetuate the power and influence of human slavery, is now the avowed object of the government of the country.  For the accomplishment of that object, we are called upon to violate the Constitution, and to sacrifice the good name and fame of the country.

The issue is now made up.  It is clearly and distinctly presented to the country.  Slavery, the eternal foe of freedom, assumes to guide, direct, and control the government of the country.  Not content with the guaranty of the Constitution, it set iself above the Constitution.  It assumes and denies the powers granted in that instrument for its own preservation.  It claims to be paramount to the Constitution.  It has united and combined its supporters in a crusade against the free influences of the [[age?]].  It shows itself the eternal foe of freedom, progress and humanity.  It exhausts and turns to barrenness the soil on which it treads.  Like the fabled upas tree, it blasts, withers and consumes all the life that comes within the circle of its influence.  The friends of slavery have presented the issue.  The friends of freedom must meet it boldly.  Freedom and slavery are now arrayed against each other.  The contest is not a doubtful one.  The acquisition of Texas cannot save it.  God and nature are on the side of freedom.  The tide of advancing civilization is sweeping against the whole system with irresistible energy.  Heaven grant that the broken and shattered fragments of the Union may not be swept away on its surging floods.

It requires no prophetic eye to read the signs of the times.  Every thing around us indicates that the great struggle for the restoration of the Constitution, and the government, to the objects and purposes for which the Union was formed, and the Constitution and the government originally established, is now to engage the attention and absorb the energies of the whole people.  We cannot shun it if we would.  In this great moral contest, it is fit that Massachusetts should lead the van, as she did in the great struggle for independence.  Then the post of danger and of honor was hers,--be it so now.  Her descent from the old puritain stock--her past history--her free labor and schools--her high moral and social position--all point to her as the standard-bearer in this great contest.  Let us place her at once in her true position.

He knew that it was sometimes urged as a reason why Massachusetts should not speak in a bolder tone, and act with more vigor against the slave power, that we were a mechanical, manufacturing, and commercial people, and must consult our material interests.  He knew we were closely bound up in our business relations with the slaveholding States.  We are anxious to retain our relations with them; yet he did not hesitate to say that we had never received dollar for dollar, in all our dealings with them.  Millions of dollars of the hard earnings of our people had gone to sustain an institution which could not sustain itself.  Our wealth, so diffused among us, was the result of our sleepless, unceasing and untiring industry.  It was the result of free labor.

If the prosperity of Massachusetts depended upon her supporting the institution of human slavery, he would say without the least hesitation, let her mechanic arts, her manufacturing and her commerce perish.  Better, far better, that her sons should till her cold and barren soil, and cast their nets into the deep, to obtain a poor and scanty subsistence, than that her coffers should be filled with gold, soiled and dimmed by the blood and tears of the bondman.  The mechanic arts, manufacturing and commerce, have been the pioneers and the instruments of liberty, civilization and Christianity.  Their combined influences broke down the landed aristocracy, and swept away the feudal system, and gave liberty to the nations of Western Europe.  Shall the influences be changed here?  Shall they be the instruments of slavery in Massachusetts?  He had far rather that her noble ships, that now whiten every sea, should wrap their shrouds around them and go down to their graves beneath the dark rolling billows of the deep--and that her manufacturing villages which have sprung up around all her waterfalls should be leveled with the dust, so that a squadron of cavalry might gallop over the sites where they now stand, unimpeded, as the steeds sweep over the buried cities of the desert--than that she should forget her past history, and the teachings and examples of the great and the good, who laid her foundations in prayers and in tears, and bow her neck in the dust, and fawn and crawl at the feet of the slave power.

It might be urged as a reason why we should not commit Massachusetts fully and entirely against the whole system of slavery, that she would not be sustained by her sister States.  She might not be sustained now.  If in the support of the right and the true it be her destiny to stand alone--alone let her stand.  Her stern and lofty principles, and her firm and solemn purposes might be denounced as visionary and fanatical--her enemies might point at her the finger of scorn and derision--timid friends might chide her; but the stout-hearted and the true, all over the land, would gather around and sustain her.  Standing on the broad and elevated platform of equal rights to all--living out and illustrating her own great principles, she would speak to her sister States with a thousand tongues.  They would rally around her, and she would lead them on to the redemption of the country, from the dominion of slavery.  In any event, whatever the result might be, he wished Massachusetts to do her duty.  When the present generation shall have passed away--when the passions and prejudices of the hour shall be forgotten--he desired that the historic pen that shall record the acts in this great drama of national guilt, infamy and shame, shall record in letters of living light, for the study and admiration of all after ages, the glorious fact that there was one State--one free and proud Commonwealth--whose soil was first trod by the feet of the Pilgrims, and first baptized in revolutionary blood, that was faithful among the faithless, to the principles, the teachings and the examples of the founders of the republic.

He desired to say a few words to his political friends here, as he might not have the opportunity of doing it again.  It seemed to him that the path of duty was plain and clear.  We are committed, fully and entirely committed, against the whole scheme of annexation.  We cannot recede from that position if we were base enough to desire it.  Our opponents would hold us to our recorded acts.  We are bound to use every lawful and constitutional means, to prevent the final consummation of that scheme.  We cannot stand still in the position we now occupy.  We must either advance or recede.  Our political opponents are fully committed in favor of annexation.  They have ranged themselves under the black flag of slavery.  Their leaders in the free States will seize on every circumstance to quiet their consciences and retain the support of the rank and file, whose confidence they have so basely betrayed.  Every topic of popular interest, passion, and prejudice, will be continually brought to bear in favor of the position assumed by the party.

During the debates in Congress, they have adroitly seized upon all these topics; while our friends have been compelled to base their opposition on abstract principles of constitutional power and law.  The advantage has been theirs.  Let us then at once take an advance step--base our opposition on the ground of slavery.  Let us hold ouer opponents to their position, in favor of the extension of the slave power.  Let us go as far as we have a constitutional right to go, in favor of emancipation.  Let us make it the cardinal doctrine of our creed--the sun of our system.  Let us inscribe emancipation on the banner under which we rally, in letters of light.  Let us go to the country on that issue.  We shall reach the heart and conscience of the country.  The people will come to the rescue, and we shall lay the foundations of a permanent and enduring triumph.  The true and noble-hearted, even in the slave States, will be with us.  The good and the true, the world over, would sympathize with us, and quote and commend our example.  We should do something in our day for the cause of human liberty, and the improvement of our race.

The bold and daring movement of the slave power, to resist the workings of Providence, the influence of free principles, and and the progress of human improvement, and to secure the ascendency in the national councils, had forced the conviction upon his mind that we must either destroy slavery, or slavery would corrupt and destroy all we have that is worth preserving.  He intended now [[and hereafter to use every power he possessed, in??] such a manner as he believed would be most efficient against it.  He loathed and detested slavery.  He had no apologies to make for it.  In every form it had ever exhibited itself, it was at war with Nature and Nature's God.  No hope of political reward, no fear of ridicule or reproach, should deter him from expressing, on all fit and proper occasions, his detestation of slavery, and his fixed and unalterable determination to use every influence he possessed, to sweep it from the land, and to make our county what it should be, the home of the free.

[[line break]]

The following letter from one of the most prominent supporters of Hon. John P. Hale, and one who has dared to disregard the mandate of a desperate and unprincipled party, is worthy of being placed on record as an example of honest adherence to principle rarely met with in a political partisan.

To the Editors of the N.H. Patriot:
I acknowledge the receipt of the last nnmber of your paper, and have perused the articles by which you have attempted to dispose of a few more members of the Democratic party, and to pass them over to the tormentors.  I shall make a few plain statements in reply to your summary, proceedings, not because I wish to evade any particle of your wrath, but merely to express my contempt of your denunciations, and my unwavering adherence to the cause of freedom and justice.  I am well satisfied that the bolts hurled against myself and others, were not, in the main, intended for us, but rather as a warning to those who, just at this time, need to witness some exhibition of fearful power to keep them in the traces.  When your Master, the Chairman of the State Central Committee for the moment took off his clutches from the devoted head of Mr. Hale, and wrote the last decapitory article in the Patriot, he knew that his abuse had not terrors for those whom he attacked.  He knew that although we had never had the 'moral courage' to 'dare to do more than may become a man' for the democracy, when it had been made to consist wholly in following the jack o' lantern fantasies of little dictators, we yet had courage sufficient to stand by the truth without fear, favor, or hope of reward.  We are startled as little by your newspaper thunder as we are by the harmless flashes of heat lightning.  We have long since learned to distinguish between the 'live thunder' of Jupiter, and those impotent explosions which are manufactured to order.  If you expect to make freemen repress their free thoughts at your bidding--if you expect to put a hook in my nose, and lead me about in your crooked back-track political course,--you have, for once, mistaken your course.  'I would rather be a dog, and bay the moon, than such a Roman.'  Is not this a free country, and shall not men speak out their sentiments, spite of the despotism of self-constituted censors?  Who made your paper a ruler and judge over us?  And your paper--your Patriot--a Democratic journal!!!  Why, there is no tyranny in Europe half so absolute as that which your masters(for you are mere tools) seek to establish over the People.  Your Democracy is like that of Napoleon's Marshal, when he announced that opinions were free--perfectly free--but that he who did not vote for Napoleon Bonaparte, First Consul of France, should be shot at the head of the regiment.

But you are tyrants without the power of the French marshal, and thank God for it.  You are that sort of despots, whose powers consist in 'sound and fury, signifying nothing.'  The voice of freedom which has reached your terrified ears from every part of the State, you have been striving to stifle or belie, in its utterance.

You have sent forth your unworthy organ to every part of the State, publishing the falsehood that every other part of the State wsa unanimous in condemning Mr. Hale's course in Congress, and in approving the impudent presumption of the Chairman of the State Committee; while at the same time, you were trembling like an aspen, lest thetens of thousands in different parts of the State, who were burning with indignation at your base subservience to South Carolina demagogues, should know each other's sentiments, and rise and rend, like Sampson, the green withes with which you were binding them.

The people have not so acute a scent for the patronage of the President that is, and of the President that is to be, that they have ceased to think and act for themselves.  You have long been pampered by the patronage of a generous party, until like Jeshurun, you have 'waxed fat and kicked.'  You have forgotten that you are the creatures of the people, whom you are leading in rapid succession to the block of political execution.  Beware of the fate of tyrants, and especially of little tyrants, all the world over.  Take a lesson from your teacher in political manoeuvering, Isaac Hill, who has received the just judgment of heaven and earth, from your ungrateful hands.

I wish to know by what authority the New-Hampshire Patriot has introduced a succession of new tests into the Democratic creed of the Granite State, until Democracy in New-Hampshire is quite a different article from Democracy in any other State?  You say it is to purify the party!  Strange that so much scum should be yet left; and stranger still that any process of cleansing should leave any traces of the New-Hampshire Patriot.

Your paper has contributed to make our representatives in Congress partisans, instead of patriots.  Instead of leading them to the shrine of their country and their God, you have seduced them to the worship of a party; and when one of them has recognized the claims of humanity, and freedom and the Constitution, as paramount to the claims of party, the New-Hampshire Patriot has been made the infamous engine of attempting to accomplish ruin.  When private citizens have met quietly together, to express honest confictions of their consciences, and to resolve to abide by the truth, 'or perish in the last ditch,' you have denounced them as renegades and traitors.  Making a trade of politics, and living on the patronage of the dominant party, you have forgotten that the great mass of the people are governed and guided only by principle.  You have forgotten that you have to deal with the sons of Revolutionary Patriots, who hate domestic tyranny even worse than foreign control.

I have no time or inclination to allude to a tithe of the objections which the freemen of this State have to the course pursued by your paper.  Your tyranny is proverbial every where, especially since your published the decree that no man who has reverence for the Constitution, or who does not adopt human servitude as a part of his faith, shall stand in the Democratic ranks.  Fearing that the days of Concord ascendency are numbered, that hereafter the people will demand an organ published in a purer atmosphere than that in which you live, and move, and have your being--you are making a desperate struggle to sustain yourselves and secure the highest favor of a new administration.  I am sorry that some other Democratic paper, more deserving than yours, is not likely to obtain the patronage sought after by you.  The variety of misrepresentations, set on foot by office-holders and office-seekers, at your instigation, are too numerous to mention, to absurd to refute.  It is said that we are abotitionists, that we are whigs, that we are tories; that we have our votes printed at Whig presses, (not stating that we could not safely get them done elsewhere,) that we obtain Whig assistance in distributing our votes, that we have invited the co-operation of all men, without distinction of party,--these are among the idle and false allegations sent out into every nook and corner of the State.  In answer to all these scandals, I would say, that we plant ourselves upon the platform of truth and [[univeral justice of equality and a ? regard??]] to the rights of man, and that if this be treason, we ask you to make the most of it.

EXETER, March 3, 1845.

[[line break]]


The Texas oracles of our city were some days since favored with an extra from the Galveston News, filled with the Address of Memucan Hunt and five others, Committee appointed at an Annexation meeting in Galveston, to urge on the people of Texas the acceptance of the terms of union offered by our Government.  They all announced the receipt of this document, but were very chary of copying from it, or letting their readers know on what grounds it urged the instant consummation of the great Slave-breeding Conspiracy.  We have recently obtained, through the kindness of a friend in the South-West, a copy of this precious document. It presents the Slavery aspect of Annexation as follows:

Let us now carefully consider the influence of this measure in its tendency to develope our agricultural resources, and furnish a market for our products. Cotton, sugar and tobacco are the three great staples that must long constitute the principal riches of this country, and be the source of national revenue and individual prosperity.  Hitherto they have been furnished to the market of the world almost exclusively by slave labor.  The only attempts that have been made to produce them by free labor have been attended with the most disastrous consequences, involving immense losses, and rendering the most prolific regions barren and unprofitable wastes.  The experiment has cost the British Government nearly two hundred millions annually; and is said to cost eight or ten millions annually; and the result is, at this time, that her West India planters have been nearly ruined, and the exports almost destroyed.

It is then of the utmost importance to our future prosperity, that we should offer every possible security to that species of property, without which our most productive lands can never be cultivated. Do the planters of the Southern States feel any confidence in the guarantees which our present Government offers for the protection of slave labor and the perpetuity of its institutions? On the one hand, they behold the most powerful nation of the earth proclaiming it her settled policy to overthrow the institution of slavery wherever it exists, and at the same time pouring forth her myriads of emigrants into every corner of the world; and, on the other, they behold our government offering unlimited suffrage, and all the rights of citizenship to every immigrant, almost as soon as he treads upon our soil.  Do they not know that the whole population of our country will scarcely equal the annual emigration of Great Britain?  And can we be blind to the fact, that even one fourth part of the annual emigration to the city of New-York, once diverted to our shores, would hold the balance of power in their hands, and control the destinies of this country?  Can we close our eyes to the important truth, that the Constitution of the American Union is at this moment the strongest bulwark, and almost the only protection against the growing power, the fanaticism, the reckless violence of the Abolitionism? In the face of ministerial denunciations against our institutions - with full knowledge that the two most powerful governments of Europe are now operating in conjunction to accomplish the same hostile policy - with all these disorganizing materials and revolutionary elements in full operation before our eyes, can it be the part of prudence to boast our independence and entire exemption from all those dangerous and threatening influences?  It is this great uncertainty in which our condition - the thousand causalities with which we are surrounded - it is this manifest exposure to all those agitations and convulsions which are daily acquiring new activity and power under the imposing garb of philanthropy and religion - it is those avowed designs of foreign powers to subvert of institutions, and mould and fashion our domestic policy at their pleasure - it is for such reasons as these that the slaveholders of the South have ceased almost entirely to immigrate to our country.  And yet, of all men, we present to them the greatest inducements to come and settle among us, from the character of our clime, our soil, and its peculiar products.  Of all men, they alone can give value to our inexhaustible bottom lands, and render them a source of wealth and revenue to the country.  Without the labor and capital which they can bring, our country will present little else than an immense field for pasturage and stock-raising, like the Pampas of South America, inhabited, as under the rule of Mexico, by herdsmen and shepherds - losing all her agricultural importance, and furnishing no great staples for the commerce of the world.  We appeal to the experience of the past.  In this state of independence which we now enjoy, are we not rapidly becoming a European colony? The great body of our immigration is already from beyond the ocean, and is hourly increasing; while that from the Southern portion of the Union, whose interests, feelings and institutions are identical with our own, is almost totally annihilated.  Can we doubt the evidence of our senses?  Look at our numerous colonization contracts, and the crowds of Europeans who are daily coming under them, and settling in dense masses through the country, whose language, associations and customs bind them together, under their peculiar regulations, rendering it almost impossible to mix and amalgamate with our own citizens.  The conclusions is, therefore, inevitable, that we must either offer greater encouragement and more perfect security to the Southern planter or else abandon forever the cultivation of cotton, sugar, tobacco, rice and indigo, which have always been, and must long continue to be, dependant upon slave labor. 

[[line break]]


Judge Jay's letter is a painful thorn in the side of the former organ of the American Society.  And well it may be, for no surer blow can be aimed at the life of the Third party, than thorough and consistent Anti-Slavery.  The result shown in the late elections in this State, and in Connecticut, in the falling off of the Third party vote, is no doubt proof enough to the Emancipator, that Judge Jay is not the only man in the part who has assumed a true position since the annexation of Texas.
In reply to my article on Mr. Jay's letter, the Emancipator asks us to show, if we can, how Dissolution will dissolve us from the guilt in the support of slavery.  The thing is so self-evident, that I marvel that any one not a 'fool' - which the editor of the Emancipator is not, whatever he may think of the Disunionists - should ask the question.  A man ceases to be guilt of slaveholding whenever he ceases to be a slaveholder.  It is a true of States as it is of individuals. 
He further says: - 
'But if (Dissolution) won't bring them (the Southerners) to their senses, because they fear only votes, and you do nothing but talk.  Will you get up a Disolution party, and have Dissolution candidates, and cast Dissolution votes?  Or will you pitch a Dissolution camp, cast Dissolution cannon, and run Dissolution bullets?  One or the other course you will take, or frighten nobody.  To talk Dissolutions, and vote not at all, or vote with one of the pro-slavery parties, will bring about the frightening of the slaveholders and the Dissolution of the Union at precisely the same time, to wit, the day after the last.'
Here is the whole philosophy of Third party in a nutshell.  There is no power in the word, but the power of the ballot-box and bullets - no moral action of men, but through their fears - and no faith, but in force. There is infinite virtue in party tactics, infinite wisdom in a Third party ticket, infinite power in a Yankee 'March meeting,' and the end of all preaching is to choose the constable. - What madness is it to 'do nothing but talk!' Nevertheless, just such a no-thing did Jesus, and Paul, and Martin Luther, and John Knox, and Penn, - not without results.  The editor of the Emancipatior would have made a better first lieutenant to Mahomet, than Apostle to Jesus, and would have thought John Robinson talked nonsense, when he said 'it was a pity they had not converted the heathen instead of killing them.'
Notwithstanding, we believe in 'talk' still. Talk does much, the least of which is to make political parties.  Neither is our aim to frighten slaveholders.  We would frighten nobody, but convert a great many.  We believe yet, that the slaveholders have souls, and consciences, and common sense, and that enlightened consciences, and enlightenment selfinterest, through the power of 'talk,' will yet abolish slavery.  If it will not, it will, at least, abolish our connection with a system of wrong, and though we choose no constables, we shall have no blood upon our hands.
Again: - 
'But if your 'position' should not 'bring the Southerners to their senses,' then one of the two things will happen, either you will get Disunion or you won't.  If the former, you will have lost what little power the Union gave you to help the slave; if the latter, you will have made fools of yourselves, and lost your time.'
If we get Dissolution, we shall have done one thing - wiped off the guilt of slaveholding from the North, and made a nation of Freeman - certainly a thing worth striving for.  If we do not get it, we shall have freed ourselves, as individuals, from guilt, for he is never a fool who obeys the dictates of his conscience, and no time is lost in trying to live a true life, - the Rev. editor of the Emancipator to the contrary, notwithstanding.  But if we do not get Dissolution, it will be because it will not be needed, and the Union will be continued, in which there will neither be master nor slave. 
The editor further adds: - 
'And to work for the abolition of slavery, which you do not deny may be as easily effected as the dissolution of the Union - is not that to change public sentiment?  The difference between us is this: as fast as we get public sentiment changed, we use it on the only machinery which can peaceably abolish slavery; as fast as you get it changed, you don't use if for that purpose, but let it go on still support slavery.' 
The difficulty is, you are not working for the abolition of slavery, but to put your partisans in office, which is a very different matter. ' and the difference between us is,' that we so change 'public sentiment' that it will neither do a wrong thing, nor swear to do it; you only change it in part, so that while it refuses to support a pro-slavery party, it continues to support a slaveholding Union; and at the same time that it swears to support it entirely, perjures itself by refusing to obey a part of its requirements.  Will you tell me which 'public sentiment' supports slavery most - that which swears to do so, but does so only in part? or that which will neither do it, nor swear to it? - G. 

[[line break]]


The news from Mexico, which we publish this morning, is of a character to arrest the attention of the people of the United States, and to lead them to enquire whether the nation has of late been, or is now, in the hands of men who understand its genius and wants, and are able to administer its government for the good of the people.  The answer to such an inquiry must be, that our country needs a new policy, a new set of men, a new set of measures.  Economy in defence, in all that concerned public good, has been practised, until we have nothing to present to our enemy, that would not excite the smile of any considerable power.  Not a seaport in the Union is in a state of defence, not a 'company' of soldiers could be mustered under a United States commander.  Meantime, the public purse has been emptied into the pockets of favorites, and what should have gone to maintain the defences and honor of the nation, has been lavished upon unworthy partisans, who have cried economy, economy, whenever a ship was to be built, a fortification repaired a harbor defended, or a company raised, while they have drawn, like horse-leeches, the life-blood of the Treasury. 
War with Mexico is now likely.  The danger is imminent.  We mean what we say - the danger is 
Please note that the language and terminology used in this collection reflects the context and culture of the time of its creation, and may include culturally sensitive information. As an historical document, its contents may be at odds with contemporary views and terminology. The information within this collection does not reflect the views of the Smithsonian Institution, but is available in its original form to facilitate research. For questions or comments regarding sensitive content, access, and use related to this collection, please contact