Viewing page 2 of 4
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
[[double line across page]]
42 T H E L I B E R A T O R . MARCH 13.
[[double line across page]]
[[column 1]]
A series of resolutions on the same subject had been introduced into the House some time before, but had been got rid of by being laid on the table. An attempt was made to dispose of this in the same way, but it failed, 29 to 97. The House was then brought to a vote on the resolution, when it was carried, 107 yeas to 12 nays, the 12 nays being members of the St. Louis delegation. A Mr. McGee, from Putnam County, on the northern border of the State, asked to be excused from voting, but this being refused, he prefaced his vote by a short speech, in which he stated his belief that a majority of his constituents were opposed to slavery, and in favor of emancipation; but as they had not instructed him on the question, and as he was himself of a different way of thinking, he should vote for the resolution. It would seem that the entire St. Louis delegation in both Houses, with the exception of two, voted in the negative, representing, as the Missouri Democrat boasts, a constituency of 140,000 freeman.
That such a resolution introduced into the Legislature of a slaveholding State should have encountered any opposition, that members should have been found, who not only dared to vote against it, but to place that opposition on the avowed ground of hostility to slavery, is a most notable circumstance. A circumstance even more notable in the tenor of the preamble and resolution as introduced and adopted, in such striking contrast to anything which, within the last twenty years, has emanated from any Southern legislative body in relation to this subject. It has not been by resolutions expressed in moderate and decent terms, such terms as 'impracticable, inexpedient, impolitic and unjust,' that the idea of emancipation has hitherto been met. That is to treat the emancipation question like any other political question; whereas hitherto no Southern Legislature has been able to touch the subject without being thrown into a perfect paroxysm of slave-driving rage and fury. The term 'emancipation' has been altogether too well sounding to be employed in relation to the slaves. Insurrection, blood, murder, robbery, all summed up in 'abolition'--that word so horribly significant to slaveholding ears--these are the sort of euphuisms which slaveholding Legislatures have been accustomed to employ in reference to the question of emancipation. So far from merely declaring that any movement toward freeing the slaves ought to be 'discountenanced,' they have denounced the parties concerned therein, or suspected to be concerned therein, as conspirators and incendiaries, to be pursued, hunted, and destroyed without mercy, and no matter by what means, like so many poisonous reptiles. Not confining themselves to their own territory or their own citizens, more than one Southern Legislature has set a price upon the heads of supposed leaders in the emancipation movement resident in the other States. To nip the subject of slave emancipation in the bud, a series of tyrannical and unconstitutional laws has been enacted in which freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and even freedom of opinion have been totally disregarded. It is at this moment quite as safe to agitate republicanism in Russia, or freedom of religious opinion at Rome, as it is to advocate free labor in the greater part of the slaveholding States.
It is, however, in the very nature of things that such tyranny should produce a reaction. In Missouri it has begun. The policy of emancipation finds able and fearless advocates in the Missouri Democrat, and other journals. The Democrat is in no way discouraged, but returns to the charge in the following style :-
'The increase in the population since 1850 is 206,000 in round numbers, of which 13,000 only are slaves. At the largest estimate, the number of slaveholders does not exceed 25,000, while the entire white population amounts to 784,000. The non-slaveholding population is increasing at the rate of thirty per cent. every five years, while the ratio of the increase of the slaveholding section of our people for the same period can only be represented by the fractional part of a unit. From this we can only arrive at the conclusion that Missouri will be a free State during the present generation, for the non-slaveholders, who are so vastly in the preponderance, will soon discover that the negroes are in their way; and when they make that discovery, a resolution of the Senate will not impede their legitimate but irresistible action. The new revelation of the Democracy in the Kansas-Nebraska bill asserts the omnipotence of a simple majority for creating, modifying, or abolishing any institution; and when that majority calls for emancipation in this State, we trust the "National Democracy" will recognize the voice of their god.'
The concluding suggestion of the Democrat is a pregnant one. We will add still another. When the question of abolishing slavery in Missouri comes to the decision of the ballot-box, should the emancipationists lack a few thousand votes to give them a majority, Illinois, Iowa and Nebraska, to say nothing of Kansas, are close at hand. Those who sustain the Bogus laws of Kansas could hardly object to a little aid from abroad to help the passage of a Missouri emancipation act.
[[short dividing line]]
From the Practical Christian.
WENDELL PHILLIPS AT CORTLAND,
NEW YORK.
The inhabitants of our pleasant but conservative village have just enjoyed the [[italics]] rare [[/italics]] opportunity of hearing four grand and brilliant lectures from Philanthropy's greatest American orator. Early in the autumn--taking time by the forelock--I wrote to Mr. Phillips, requesting him, if possible, to visit us in the course of the lecturing season, and to speak to us on [[italics]] 'The Philosophy of Reform.'[[/italics]] His reply was, that he would endeavor to do so, and that if our Association would take him on a Saturday night, he would, in addition, occupy my place, a part of the day, at least, on Sunday. Of course, the generous offer was most gladly accepted, and the arrangements were made accordingly. For several months, therefore, many of us anticipated his coming with pleasure, praying that the railroads might not be blockaded with snow--so as to prevent his reaching us. And on Saturday, February the 14th, he safely arrived, accompanying me from Syracuse, whither I had gone to attend an Anti-Slavery Convention, held by Mr. Garrison & Co. The day was fine, but the evening sky being overcast with clouds, and the travelling muddy, it seemed rather doubtful about our having a large audience, and the more anxious were [[italics]] fearful. [[/italics]] But about three hundred and fifty persons assembled, and listened to Mr. Phillips for an hour and a half with great satisfaction and delight. Of course, we did not have the orator [[italics]] aroused [[/italics]], as some of us have heard him in the old Marlboro' Chapel, or the Melodeon, or in Faneuil Hall; but we heard him in his subdued, chaste, classic, charming and heroic eloquence. He was Wendell Phillips, though not with the fire that some anticipated, which fire would, indeed, [[italics]] consume [[/italics]] him should it be nightly kindled on the altar of his heart. But no one that could appreciate the highest style of oratory went away disappointed; but all hungered and thirsted for more of the 'same sort'--more such 'infidelity' and 'treason'!
Sunday morning was rainy, and the prospect was that the day would be so. This dampened our ardor somewhat, especially as many of our audience were expected from a distance of from two to ten miles; but about three hundred persons assembled even in the morning. Mr. Phillips took for his subject 'Slavery in relation to the CHURCH'--and it was one of his finest efforts minus the [[italics]] 'fire.' [[/italics]] It delighted, it instructed, it aroused, it convinced--some, I doubt not, it converted, as I know that others it [[italics]] confirmed. [[/italics]] It was a genuine Gospel Sermon, without twang, without cant, without dogmatism, and full of truth and beauty--not [[italics]] priestly [[/italics]] but [[italics]] manly. [[/italics]] There was no concealment and no compromise about it, of course, but it was as persuasive, in the highest sense of the term, as it was severe. I think I never before saw so large an audience carried right onward and upward, by a speaker uttering such radical principles. It was good to be there--many felt it to be, and so expressed themselves with great emphasis.
The afternoon address was Slavery in relation to the STATE--a most able, thorough, searching, eloquent and convincing discussion and presentation of the subject in all its bearings. Such a Discourse was never before heard in Cortland County--never in many places in the land. The doctrine of 'No Union with Slaveholders,' was presented as only Mr. Phillips can present it, and the people--now full [[italics]] four hundred [[/italics]]--seemed to respond to him, for time-being at least, most heartily. Not a few thought it the best lecture of the four, and the [[italics]] greatest [[/italics]] they ever heard. Even politicians said--'there was no getting away from the argument; and an impression, I am sure, was made by both the morning and afternoon discourses that will not be soon effaced. Some seed had been sown before, and now that was plowed in deep, and more scattered, evidently promising something of a harvest.
In the evening--Sunday evening! Mr. Phillips gave us his 'Lost Arts;' and [[italics]] five hundred [[/italics]] persons came out to hear it--many church-members who could not get out in the day time. It was a day of
[[/column 1]
[[column 2]]
struggling between [[italaics]] duty and desire--fear [[/italics]] and desire, too--and many an one, I presume, wished to be with us--with the [[italics]] multitude [[/italics]] for [[ that [[/italics]] day--who did not dare venture. But one very excellent and brave Presbyterian Elder heard Mr. Phillips each time. The 'Lost Arts' was popular, of course, as it is every where, and won for the orator 'golden opinions' from even those who could not endure or hear his 'infidelity and treason.'
And thus passed the 15th of February--Sunday--and the evening of the 14th--in Cortland. A memorable time, too, will it long be in our village and the vicinity. Mr. Phillips was exceedingly [[italics]] generous [[/italics]] with us, as to the matter of compensation, and in that way also laid us under special obligations to him, which we shall not forget. Could he come again soon, we could not promise him a house that would hold the people who would flock to hear him, such a favorable impression has he made by his whole bearing and speech. We can assure him that he has made a very strong and deep mark upon many minds.
Before closing, I would say that Mr. Phillips visited Central College, five miles distant from us, on Saturday afternoon, and addressed the students, and others assembled, for one hour or more in a most appropriate and admirable manner--carrying away with him the benediction of that interesting and important Institution. He has been urgently solicited to be present, in June, at the College Commencement, and we are all hoping, hereabouts, that he will be able to accept the invitation. He would have a large concourse of people to listen to him.
W. H. FISH.
Cortland, N.Y., Feb. 18, '57.
[[short dividing line]]
From the New York Independent.
THE PULPIT UNDER LAW.
The 'Private Correspondence of Daniel Webster' is valuable not only for the glimpses it gives us of the familiar moods of a great man, but also for the incidental revelations it makes of the principles and motives of sundry lesser men who hovered about him as satellites.
In the second volume of this correspondence, at page 412, is a letter dated 'Washington, Jan. 12th, 1851, [[italics]] Sunday morning,' [[/italics]] and addressed to 'Rev. Mr. Adams.' Neither the Christian name, the residence, or the ecclesiastical denomination of Mr. A. is given, and there is no clue to his identity, except in the title of a discourse which he had sent to Mr. Webster. This is styled 'Christianity and Civil Government;' but, as we do not find the discourse among our pamphlets, we will not venture a hint as to the author. Our concern is not at all with the minister as a person, but with the principle which he seems to have avowed in his letter to Mr. Webster.
Mr. Webster passes some fine compliments upon the discourse, and then adds: 'You see, therefore, my dear sir, that I do not agree with you that the only merit of your discourse is, that it was the first, in order of the time, which the Northern pulpit gave forth [[italics]] in obedience to law.' [[/italics]]
Did Mr. Adams then claim that his discourse was 'the first which the Northern pulpit gave forth in obedience to law'? We cannot judge whether Mr. Webster quotes the very words of Mr. A's letter; but inasmuch as Mr. A. must have furnished Mr. Webster's letter for publication, he of course accepted the construction which Mr. Webster here puts upon the letter that Mr. A had sent him.
But what is the meaning of the claim thus set forth? That the pulpit is under law, all will agree. In this country, however, all Protestant Christians are agreed in repudiating any such legal supervision over the pulpit as is exercised in France and Austria. They justly maintain that the pulpit is under law to Christ alone. Did, then, Mr. Adams intend to claim that up to January, 1851, he was the first minister who had preached in obedience to the law of Christ? We cannot suspect him of such foolish arrogance.
Did he mean that up to January, 1851, he was the first minister who enforced the proper Scriptural duty of obedience to civil government? We would not impute, even to an unknown person, a vanity so preposterous. When have there been wanting, in the North, at least, ministers to preach [[italics]] in [[/italics]] obedience to the law of Christ, or [[italics]] on [[/italics]] due obedience to civil government?
Setting aside, therefore, both these interpretations, we find in the phrase 'Northern pulpit,' and in the position of Mr. Webster at that time, a key to the interpretation of this singular phrase. The law, in obedience to which Mr. A. gave forth his voice 'first in the order of time,' was the [[italics]] Fugitive Slave Law [[/italics]]--the law which forbids a minister of Christ to shelter the poor and needy outcast; the law which requires that minister to seize his own brother in Christ, and deliver him over to hopeless bondage; to take James Hamlin from his wife and children, and from the communion table of the Lord, and surrender him to stripes and imprisonment; to deliver a brother minister, like Anthony Burns, to the tender mercies of the slave-dealer; to hand over a trembling woman to the lusts of a Southern plantation;--this was the law 'in obedience' to which 'the Northern pulpit' first gave forth its voice through Mr. Adams.
Mr. Webster wished the North to conquer their prejudices,' and to obey that law 'with alacrity.' That some ministers were befogged into a temporary recognition of that infamous statute as a law to be obeyed, even by Christians, we distinctly remember. But that any minister should boast his alacrity to preach 'in obedience to that law,' it was reserved for this correspondence to disclose. When and where was this sermon preached? Was a sermon preached [[italics]] 'in obedience' [[/italics]] to the Fugitive Slave Law, a [[italics]] Gospel [[/italics]] sermon? And what do plain Christians think of such a Gospel?
[[short dividing line]]
From the New York Evening Post.
THE INAUGURAL MESSAGE.
The President takes early occasion to advert to the case of the territory of Kansas. It was, he says, 'a happy conception for Congress to apply this simple rule, that the will of the majority shall govern in the settlement of the question of domestic slavery in the territories.' One would infer from this that, in Mr. Buchanan's opinion, the territories have a right to exclude slavery if the inhabitants do not desire its introduction. A few sentences afterwards he informs us that this is not his view of the matter. He explains that 'it has been his individual opinion that, under the Nebraska act, the appropriate time to [to settle the question of slavery] will be when the number of residents in the territory shall justify the formation of a constitution with a view to its admission as a State into the Union.'
Mr. Buchanan, therefore, holds the extreme Southern doctrine, that the people of a territory have no right to exclude slavery by any ordinances they can make. It is only in their capacity as a State that they can do this. This is the limit which, according to him, the Constitution sets to the power of the territories. 'Congress,' he says, 'is not to exclude slavery,' neither is the territory. Of course, slavery is to be freely admitted while the region is in its territorial state, and allowed to plant and propagate itself--to take firm and ineradicable root, if it can. When this is done--when slavery is fairly established, and the people come to form their State constitution--they may get rid of it, if they are able! That, according to Mr. Buchanan, is the 'appropriate time.' What strange ideas Mr. Buchanan has of the appropriate time! The appropriate time to apply the remedy is after the disease has destroyed the patient. No power of prevention is allowed by Mr. Buchanan's doctrine, either to the people of the territory or to Congress. And yet Mr. Buchanan goes on to prate about popular sovereignty, through sentence after sentence, as if he really held that the territories had some power over the question of slavery!
If Mr. Buchanan had openly professed these opinions before his election, it would have made a very essential difference in the support he received in some of the United States. If he had then expressly said, as now, that Congress has no power to prevent the introduction of slavery into the territories, and the territories no power to exclude it, we should have given him credit for frankness; but we could have appealed, and he knew it, with great effect to the people, to flock to the polls, and record their votes against this man who stands up as the champion of slavery, claiming for it the prerogative of overruling the will of the majority, and the legislative power, whether in the Union or in the territories. Under the load of this enormous doctrine, his cause would have broken down.
But Mr. Buchanan is of opinion that 'it is happily a matter of but little practical importance when the people of the territory shall decide this question for themselves.' It is of no consequence, he thinks, whether they try to exclude slavery before it is established in the territory, or afterwards. We can hardly suppose Mr. Buchanan's capacity so shallow as to believe this. Of no consequence whether the people make their decision while they are able to
[[/column 2]]
[[column 3]]
make it freely, or postpone it till the slaveholding influence has obtained the mastery, and the question is already virtually settled! Would Mr. Buchanan say to a western settler, that it made no practical difference whether he opened the door of his cabin to a panther, and let him in for a struggle on the floor, or whether he fired at him on his approach through a loop-hole in the wall?
Mr. Buchanan professes earnestly to deprecate all further agitation of the question of slavery. If we could be amused with hypocritical professions in high places, we should be amused with this. Here is a man who puts forth the most monstrous doctrines, who claims for slavery a national character, making its empire conterminous with the jurisdiction of the federal government, making it supreme in the territories, setting it above the power of law and of the popular will, and who yet utters solemn warnings against agitation. While he is stirring the subject freely, and in the most offensive manner, he exhorts those who differ with him not to meddle with it. We cannot take Mr. Buchanan's advice. If he agitates the subject, so must we. If the friends of slavery put forth exorbitant pretensions, we must resist them. When the right is in danger from the attacks of its enemies, we pay little heed to their attempts to dissuade us from undertaking its defence.
[[double line across column]]
The Liberator.
[[short dividing line]]
NO UNION WITH SLAVEHOLDERS.
[[short dividing line]]
BOSTON, MARCH 13, 1857.
[[double line across column]]
SLAVERY A BLESSING--FREEDOM A CURSE.
We have received from Ticknor, Fields & Co., of this city, a copy of the crazy work which we reviewed in our last number, entitled 'Cannibals All! or, Slaves without masters. By George Fitzhugh, of Port Royal, Caroline, Virginia.' The design of it is to show that personal freedom and free institutions are a calamity and a curse, and chattel slavery, with its whips and fetters and branding-irons and blood-hounds, is an unspeakable blessing to all the working classes, no matter what their complexion, or whether of African or Anglo-Saxon origin, or in what part of the world they reside! It also lays down the doctrine, that 'Christian morality was not preached to free competitive society, but to slave society, (!) where it is neither very difficult [[italics]] nor unnatural to practice it,' [[/italics]] but it is 'WHOLLY IMPRACTICABLE IN FREE SOCIETY'! This is incomparably more impious than was the declaration of the scribes and Pharisees, that Jesus had a devil, and was guilty of death; for they made it spitefully, and cast it as a foul reproach upon his character; where, this brazen eulogist of an accursed institution coolly makes a similar charge against the Founder of Christianity as a compliment, and finds in diabolism the only true method of saving the world! According to him, Christ did not come to redeem, but to enslave mankind,--all but a few, who are to be masters, overseers, drivers, and slave-dealers; his is a gospel of slavery, not of freedom; and his is a kingdom of darkness, not of light! It is true that, in the temple, Jesus read the words of Isaiah, and applied them to himself:--'The spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound.' It is true, he enjoined this as a rule of universal obligation, 'Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,' and illustrated what he meant by it in the parable of the Good Samaritan. It is true, he said to his disciples, 'Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them: but it shall not be so among you; but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; even as the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.' But, according to the reading and understanding of Mr. George Fitzhugh, Port Royal, Caroline, (Va.) these passages mean that Jesus came to abolish free society, to uproot free institutions, to transform the great mass of mankind into goods and merchandize, to establish chattel slavery universally, and to the end of time! And such is the gospel according to Beelzebub that is preached at the South.
Mr. Fitzhugh is astonishingly adroit and ingenious--or, at least, imagines himself to be so. He assumes that the slave system contains within itself all the elements of peace, comfort, security, prosperity and bliss; but he very wisely neglects to present any one of its features for inspection, and declines pointing out any one of its many blessings. Thomas Jefferson early testified as follows:--'The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions; the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submission on the other.' We know that this witness is true. Mr. Jefferson further said:--'With what execration should the statesman be loaded, who, permitting one half of the citizens thus to trample upon the rights of the other, transforms those into despots, and these into enemies, destroys the morals of the one part, and the [[italics]] amor patriae [[/italics]]of the other!' Thirty thousand escaped fugitive slaves in Canada, and perhaps an equal number scattered all through the North, constitute 'a cloud of witnesses' against Southern slavery. Its eternal condemnation is found in every specification and requirement of the Slave Code. Four millions of people deprived of marriage, of the Bible, of recognized parental and filial consanguinity, of all testimony against their merciless owners and drivers, of all right of self-defence, of all incentives to industry and thrift, of all available legal protection against any and every kind of brutality, of all freedom of locomotion, of all choice of employment, of all free will and conscience, of all education and moral culture, of all rights and all property, and thus sunk to the level of cattle and swine, present the most affecting and the most appalling spectacle to be found beneath the stars. Yet their condition is demoniacally held up, by Mr. Fitzhugh, as a model one for all the laboring people of the world, who, he maintains, ought to be owned and governed like brute beasts!
The ingenuity of Mr. Fitzhugh is equally striking in his treatment of 'Free Society,' which he so frequently pronounces a failure. He scorns the North, and flies across the Atlantic, to find cases of extreme destitution, competitive selfishness, swindling monopoly, an oppressive use of capital, &c. &c., and argues as though these were the legitimate fruits of freedom! He also finds in free communities a disposition to think, to argue, to dissent, to run to 'isms'; and this, to his jaundiced vision is nothing better than infidelity on the one hand, and anarchy on the other! He says that each of the philosophers of Europe 'proves clearly enough, that the present edifice of European society is out of all rule and proportion, and must soon tumble to pieces; but no two agree as to how it is to be rebuilt.' What if they do not agree, in regard to the remedy? It is something to be agreed as to the rottenness of the edifice--a rottenness which Mr. F. insanely attributes to liberty, but which all the world but himself knows to be wholly attributable to a despotism, kindred in spirit to American slavery, though not at all comparable to it on the score of injustice and villainy. Freedom in the world is, as yet, only a comparative term--not an absolute possession. Where it most abounds, there society is most civilized, refined, prosperous, enlightened, enterprising and safe. Take New England as demonstrative evidence of this.--Take the entire North, and contrast it in these particulars with the entire South. The difference is as great as exists between the effulgence of noon-day and the darkness of midnight. See the astonishing contrast between the intelligence, thrift, virtue, wealth, population and growth of these conflictive portions of the republic! There are no 'isms' at the South, it is true--except diabolism; nor are there any in Russia, Austria, or Italy; nor are there any in a grave-
[[/column 3]]
[[column 4]]
yard. The dead are without excitement; they are not chargeable with heresy; they plot no treason, make no attempt to excite insurrection, are as passive as clay in the hands of the potter, and behave with perfect propriety; they are exempt from all care, suffering and danger, do not ask to be liberated, give no countenance to agitation, complain of no ill-treatment, and are perfectly contented as they lie. How much better all this than life! exclaims the profoundly philosophical Mr. Fitzhugh;--life, with its burdens, its sorrows, its perils, its catastrophes, its wide-spread miseries! Life is a failure--let death overspread the world, and then will come the reign of universal peace and contentment!
Mr. Fitzhugh quotes Gerrit Smith, Horace Greeley, William Goodell, Stephen Pearl Andrews, and ourself, to prove that there are many unjust inequalities and grievous monopolies here at the North; but he has not the sense to see that these spring from injustice, class legislation, misuse of trust, and not from freedom itself, which is indeed the gift of God, and the noblest inheritance of the human race. If Mr. Fitzhugh is disposed to compare the politico-economical results of a state of freedom with those of a state of slavery, let him take population for population, and see what follows. For example: the slave population is quite as numerous as that of all New England. How many dwellings, shops, banks, manufactories, churches, and other edifices, does it own? Not one. How many ships and railroads? Not one. What household furniture, implements of husbandry, mechanical tools, scientific instruments? None? What is its capital and stock in trade? Nothing. How many acres of land does it possess? None. What does it own? Not a hand, not a leg, not a head, not a heart, among them all. What, then, is its pauperism? Total and unparalleled. Its education and intelligence? Heathenism. Its prospects? Dark, dreary, hopeless. Its motive for exertion? The lash.
Now let Mr. Fitzhugh analyze 'free society,' as it exists in New England--find all its defects, its sufferings, and its crimes, and place them in one scale; then let him take the schools, academies, and colleges--the public and private libraries--the all-prevailing competence, intelligence and happiness--the immense aggregate wealth in solid gold and silver, in houses and lands, in ships and manufactories, in ten thousand different forms, and not one farthing in human flesh--the universal industry, enterprise, invention and thrift--&c. &c. &c., let him take these, and place them in the other scale, and see which scale will kick the beam,--adding to the adverse side the whole slave population of the South, with all their owners, overseers, drivers, and bloodhounds!
[[short dividing line]]
WHERE SHALL THE DIVIDING LINE BE?
Our esteemed correspondent 'G. W. B.' (see our last page,) in giving his views of Disunion, says--'We want no issue between North and South, but between Freedom and Slavery.' But it happens that the geographical division will run [[italics]] pari-passu [[/italics]] with the moral division, in the very nature of the case--i.e., between the free and the slave States, free institutions and slave institutions, free labor and slave labor. Hence, ever since the national government was formed, all the heart-burnings and collisions that have taken place, have been uniformly between the North and the South as such. If the North is bent on cherishing and defending her free institutions at all hazards, and the South is determined to cling to her slave institutions with even greater tenacity, then a geographical division is as inevitable as it is desirable; precipitated as it will be by the highest moral considerations, and by all the promptings of self-preservation and self-interest.
As long ago as 1836, Gov. Ritner, in his memorable message to the Legislature of Pennsylvania, had the sagacity to perceive, and the courage to declare, when and where the line of disunion would be inevitable, provided the North remained true to the cause of freedom, and maintained her own natural and constitutional rights. He said:--
'Above all, let us never yield up the right of free discussion of any evil which may arise in the land, or any part of it; [[italics]] convinced that, the moment we do so, [[/italics]] THE BOND OF UNION IS BROKEN. For the Union being a voluntary compact, to continue together for certain specified purposes, the instant one portion of it succeeds in imposing terms and dictating conditions upon another, [[italics]] not found in the contract [[/italics]], the relation between them changes, and that which was UNION becomes SUBJECTION.'
That is just where the North stands now--robbed of all her constitutional rights at the South, and reduced to a state of abject vassalage by the connection. Let the cord be cut--the bond be broken--by all that is just, holy and true!
When the day of separation shall come, it will be far more glorious than the day which witnessed the secession of the colonies from the mother country, and of which John Adams said, 'It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to Almighty God. Through all the gloom, I can see the rays of light and glory. I can see that the end is worth more than the means, and that posterity will triumph, although you and I may not see it.' When that day shall come, O LIBERTY!
'We'll search the earth, the air, the sea,
To cull a fadeless wreath for thee!
And every field for freedom fought,
And vale, and shore, and mount, where aught
Of lofty manhood can be found,
Shall be our blooming harvest ground;
From victor's arch, from martyr's pall,
Triumphal or funereal,
For law and equal rights, and life,
Who won or fell in holy strife.'
[[short dividing line]]
INVIDIOUS DISTINCTIONS.
Now and then, there are those who profess to cherish great respect and a warm regard for us personally, but little or none for such toil-worn laborers in the Anti-Slavery vineyard as PARKER PILLSBURY, STEPHEN S. FOSTER, MARIUS R. ROBINSON, (editor of the Ohio [[italics]] Anti-Slavery Bugle,[[/italics]]) and the like. With the warm personal friendship we cherish for the latter--the absolute confidence we have in their integrity of soul and disinterestedness of purpose--we can tolerate no such distinction, for a moment. Nothing has occurred to warrant such a line of demarcation. We are proud of their friendship, and hold them to be worthy of universal respect and confidence. If they are to be ostracized, we beg to be included in the list. Individual preferences may exist, in regard to temperament, method and taste, without invidiousness; because what exactly suits one may not be so agreeable to another. Mr. Phillips, for instance, is the most popular orator in the Anti-Slavery ranks; and we think deservedly so:--not because he is not as faithful and uncompromising as the most radical of us all, but because he has the rarest gifts by nature, and the finest culture that education can give him. But he would indignantly spurn the distinction that should be made by any one between himself and his co-laborers, on the ground of personal worth or public respect. No one is more generous than himself in reference to such, in public and in private.
[[short dividing line]]
HOW TO WRITE. Fowler & Wells, 142 Washington street, Boston--308 Broadway, New York--231 Arch street, Philadelphia--have just published the first of a series of popular Hand-Books, entitled 'HOW TO WRITE: A Pocket Manual for Composition and Letter-Writing; embracing hints on penmanship and the choice of writing materials; practical rules for literary composition in general, and epistolary and newspaper writing and proof-correcting in particular; and directions for writing letters of business, relationship, friendship, and love; illustrated by numerous examples of genuine epistles, from the pens of the best writers. To which are added, forms for letters of introduction, notes, cards, &c., and a collection of poetical quotations.' We give our hearty commendations to this work, as it will prove highly useful in every family, it having been prepared with great care and excellent judgment.
[[/column 4]]
[[column 5]]
HOPEDALE HOME SCHOOL.
We call the special attention of our readers to the advertisement, in another column, respecting the HOME SCHOOL at Hopedale, sanctioned by the authorities of the Hopedale Community, and under the care of Mr. and Mrs. HAYWOOD as Principals. There is not a place in the whole country to which children and youth of both sexes can be sent with more certainty, not only that every attention will be paid to their studies, (and these take a wide range in the programme laid down,) but, what is of incomparably greater importance, that they will be surrounded by the best moral and social influences, carefully watched over in regard to their walk and conversation, more and more developed and strengthened in their moral nature, and trained up for a noble life and a glorious immortality.
To those acquainted with Hopedale--its principles and character--it is unnecessary to state the superior moral advantages which are there enjoyed, and which render it a peculiarly happy location for an Educational Institution. To others, however, a few words of explanation may not be out of place. There, in a population of about two hundred and fifty persons, no grog-shops exist; no intoxicating liquor is used as a beverage, or is allowed to be so used; no placed of resort are open for loafers and loungers, where public morals are endangered; no vulgarity or obscenity is tolerated, no profanity is permitted; no quarrelings or fightings, or coarse, harsh words are countenanced; but all the people are interested and pledged to prevent and suppress these misdeeds, pollutions and vices, and to secure the young, and all who dwell there, against the follies, sins and abominations of the world at large. The real reforms and philanthropies of the age are there fostered and sustained, and Practical Christianity is the acknowledged religion. Such being the case, the fact need but be mentioned to those who desire the young in their charge to be under salutary moral and social influences, to enable them to appreciate the claims put forth in behalf of the Hopedale Home School.
The next term will commence on Wednesday, April 15.
The expenses of board, tuition, &c., will be found to be very reasonable.
We again warmly recommend this School to all anxious parents and guardians in particular, and to the public at large, having no doubt, as soon as its real merits are known, that the number of applicants will be greater than the ability to receive them.
[[short dividing line]]
MR. BUCHANAN'S INAUGURAL ADDRESS.
We presume none of our readers expected a very elevated or otherwise able document in the Inaugural speech of the new President; and therefore they have not been disappointed. Not one noble idea, not one sentiment worthy of a man, whose business should be to guide the nation in the pathway of freedom, of peace, and of a generous protection to the poor, the weak, and the oppressed, marks the document. He considers it a mark of consummate wisdom, and a proof of the most perfect Democracy, to adopt as a fixed rule, that every territory and State shall be left free to have slavery, or have it not, as it pleases, without word or act of objection on the part of anybody;--in other words, that the strong shall have the right to oppress the weak, to grind the poor, to enslave the laborer, to whip, maim, slay, to buy and sell their human subjects, if they please and as they please, and that no authority or power exists to interfere with this right. But as this is the doctrine of the American democracy, it is or course Mr. Buchanan's, who has declared himself in advance not to be James Buchanan, so much as the impersonation of the American Democratic party. And that party being--as it has so long been--the ready and convenient organ of the Slave Power, (the most successful of all the political parties in the struggle for this place,) Mr. Buchanan is certain to have work enough to do for his masters. A spirit of tame subserviency to that power characterizes the address throughout. They who weakly expect of this administration better things than the last gave us are but increasing the causes of their own mortification and too tardy repentance.--M.
[[short dividing line]]
[[image: hand pointing right]] THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT of the United States, in the case of Dred Scott, has come at last, and an abstract of it will be found in another place. The opinion of the majority of the Court, as delivered by Judge Taney, will be given in our next. The decision is, to the last degree, infamous and tyrannical. None more cruel or abominable was ever given by Scroggs or Jeffries. Dissenting opinions, which we have not yet had an opportunity to read, but which are regarded as exceedingly able, were delivered by Judges McLean of Ohio, and Curtis of Massachusetts. We cannot but rejoice that the voice of New England, as uttered on that bench, was in harmony with the principles of justice. The fact cannot be winked out of sight that all the (five) judges from the slaveholding States decide that the law and the Constitution are in all points pro-slavery,--that the judges from the Middle States dodge the question,--and that New England and Ohio alone have a word of protest against the usurpations and encroachments of slavery.--M.
[[short dividing line]]
[[image: hand pointing right]] THE MASSACHUSETTS REGISTER, for the year 1857, has just been published by Mr. GEORGE ADAMS, 91 Washington street, Boston, and is an encyclopedia of valuable intelligence, pertaining to all the relations of citizenship. It contains the usual variety of information respecting the Government and Institutions of the State, revised and corrected. Complete lists of the Professional classes; the Legislature, State and County Officers; the Municipal Organizations of the several cities in this Commonwealth for the current year; Courts, Commissioners, and Justices of the Peace; Banks, Insurance Companies, Manufacturing Companies, Colleges, Academies, Societies, Newspapers, and Post Offices; Titles of the Laws and Resolves passed in 1856, and a Business Directory of Boston will be found arranged in their proper departments. In the table of towns in Massachusetts are the names of Town Clerks, the presidential and gubernatorial votes of 1856, the population of 1855, and the State Tax of each town apportioned for 1856. Also, a list of the churches and clergymen in the State; together with a chronological record of the General Events of the years 1854-5-6. The work is deserving of universal patronage.
[[short dividing line]]
THE PRACTICAL CHRISTIAN. We learn by the last number of this excellent and admirably conducted paper, that a new arrangement has been made, whereby the care of its publication and editorial supervision is to be wholly assumed by ADIN BALLOU, who has hitherto written the leading articles in its columns, and whose reputation as an earnest reformer and a fearless advocate of unpopular truth is too well established to need any certificate. Every thing from his pen indicates thought, the highest purity of mind, the utmost reverence for 'the higher law,' the deepest sympathy with suffering humanity. His paper is poorly patronized--to the shame of the age--and needs a strong addition to its subscription list, which we hope will be made during the present year. Its price is one dollar per annum, payable in advance.
[[short dividing line]]
THE CHRISTIAN EXAMINER (Crosby, Nichols & Co.) for March, 1857, tconains [[sic]] the following papers:--
I. Robinson's Later Biblical Researches. By Rev. C. H. Brigham, of Taunton. II. Comparative Theology of Heathen Religions. By Rev. J. F. Clarke, of Boston. III. Rhode Island Biography. By Rev. Charles T. Brooks, of Newport, R. I. IV. Indian Tribes of New England. By Hon. Lorenzo Sabine, of Framingham, Mass. V. The Grinnell Expeditions. By Rev. Thomas Hill, of Waltham. VI. Rev. Ephraim Peabody, D. D. By Rev. J. H. Morrison, of Milton. VII. MacWhorter on the Memorial Name. By Prof. Noyes, of Cambridge. Notices of Recent Publications--Intelligence.
[[/column 5]]
[[column 6]]
YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATIONS.
It seems that the societies in New York city and Brooklyn which have assumed the above designation as appropriate to them, have followed the example of the Boston Association in trying formally and thoroughly to exclude from their meetings such expressions of opposition to slavery as a few of their members seem desirous to present. The following is a brief statement of their recent movements and present position.
THE NEW YORK ASSOCIATION.
The following preamble and resolution, presented to this meeting at its December (monthly) meeting, by Mr. Lasar, a faithful German Abolitionist, were debated, and left open for future discussion:--
Whereas, every organization of Christian men--though outside the Church and separate and distinct from it--associated in the name of Christ, for the furtherance of his cause on earth, is in a measure like the Church itself, put in trust with the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, and should seek in all possible ways to bear witness to the truth of that Gospel, to promote the progress of its great and fundamental principles, and to resist all opposition--particularly that which is organized and formidable--to the progress of those principles throughout the land and the world; and
Whereas, the custom of holding human beings in involuntary servitude--converting them thereby into chattels and articles of merchandise, involving in their purchase and sale the severance of family ties, requiring as a necessary condition of their subjection, a denial to them of the ordinary facilities of education, and in many instances of the word of God--in short, the whole practice of human slavery, in all its details and with all its consequences, wherever it may exist, and particularly where it exists as an organized institution, recognized and sheltered by the law of the land, is a sin in the sight of God, a violation of the principles of the Gospel, and a hindrance to the progress of Christianity; and
Whereas, in the providence of God, one of the chief questions which occupies the attention of this nation in the present age has grown out of this subject; and while the exigencies of the times demand a free and unmistakable utterance of opinion in reference to it; and while silence itself is interpreted as an opinion; therefore,
Resolved, That this Association--in common with other Christian bodies--hereby solemnly bears its testimony, for Christ's sake, against the institution of human slavery, wherever it may exist on the face of the earth, as a violation of the law of God; and against it particularly as it exists in this enlightened and Christian country, as putting to shame the principles of Christianity.
At the January meeting, after a long and tempestuous debate upon the above resolution, it was displaced by the following, offered by Prof. Crosby, of the University of New York, which was finally adopted, 86 to 58, and therefore is now the rule of the New York Association. We quote from the published report:--
'Mr. Crosby said that he was in favor of almost every word of those resolutions, but he did not think it right to discuss any thing, however good, about which good, honest Christians had difference of opinion. He therefore proposed the following substitute:
'Resolved, That inasmuch as this Association was organized for the special objects, upon which all its members agree, having in view the promotion of evangelical religion among young men, and the discussion of slavery is not one of those objects, but the subject is one upon which the members do not all agree, one which disturbs our peace and harmony, and alienates many friends of the Association in the community around us, therefore all discussion or action, in any form, upon the question of slavery, and upon political and sectarian issues generally, in the meetings of this Association, is hereby declared inconsistent with its objects, and out of order, and is forbidden.'
Here we find the assumption, made in the name of Christianity, and sanctioned by 86 church members out of 144, that pro-slavery piety is just as good as anti-slavery piety, and must have the delicacy of its nerves respected, and shielded from the contact of unpleasant truths in a [[italics]] Christian [[/italics]] meeting.
The Standard informs us that the New York Association, immediately before the discussion which ended in the adoption of the resolution declaring the subject of slavery foreign to its [[italics]] one [[/italics]] exclusive object, the promotion of evangelical piety among the young men of New York, had listened with apparent interest to an address, delivered at its own request, by a missionary from Natal, upon the condition of the native inhabitants of Southern Africa! The negroes of the Cape of Good Hope, it seems, may be legitimately cared for by the Association, they being included in the one object of promoting evangelical religion among the young men of this city; but the slaves of the South are less fortunate, the pious juvenile cottonocracy being compelled, in their zealous devotion to their one great purpose, to leave [[italics]] them [[/italics]] to the sympathy of reckless fanatics and infidels!
THE BROOKLYN ASSOCIATION.
At its December meeting were presented the preamble and resolution quoted above as rejected by the New York Association. They were [[italics]] indefinitely postponed. [[/italics]]
At the January meeting, a motion to take them up for further consideration was [[italics]] voted down. [[italics]]
We find additional details and comments, as follows, in the [[italics]] Standard [[/italics]]:--
'The rejected resolution was first introduced in the Brooklyn Association by Mr. Theodore Tilton, a brave young man, in whose religion freedom and humanity are fundamental. The Brooklyn body was also terribly agitated. The discussion ended in the adoption of the following substitute, by a vote of 53 to 38:--
Whereas, certain misrepresentations have appeared in the newspaper press, touching the opinions and actions of the membership of this Association upon the subject of slavery; and
Whereas, while we hold that the proper work of this body has no direct connection with the institution of slavery, in its political bearings, we still believe that, in view of the false position in which we have been placed before the public, it becomes us to speak our true sentiments concerning this matter; therefore,
Resolved, That we believe the system of American slavery is a social, political and moral evil, and contrary to the spirit of Christianity.
This was a triumph of those who affected a conservative and moderate anti-slavery policy. Confessing that slavery was "contrary to the spirit of Christianity," they found a reason for expressing their opinion on the subject, not in the wrongs suffered by the slaves, nor in the demoralizing and irreligious tendencies inherent in the system, but in certain reports affecting their own precious reputations! Brave young soldiers of the cross, truly! Even this resolution, the fruit of a compromise, was exceedingly distasteful to the party opposed to all agitation, and at the next meeting (having worked the wires in secret, and feeling sure of a triumph) they introduced the following:--
Whereas, this Association was designed and organized for specific ends, which, as set forth in its Preamble and Constitution, are 'to improve the spiritual, intellectual and social condition of young men, by means appropriate and in unison with the spirit of the Gospel,'--'to combine the Christian influence and stimulate the piety of the young men of this city and vicinity,' which objects have hitherto nerved the endeavors and united the hearts of its members in fraternal bonds; and whereas, the agitation of the subject of slavery is not promotive of these objects, but inconsistent therewith, and productive of evil; therefore,
Resolved, That the introduction or discussion, at any of our meetings, of the subject of slavery, or of any political or sectarian issues, is irrelevant and foreign to our avowed objects, and a bar to their accomplishment; and we therefore declare them [[italics]] contraband [[/italics]], and their discussion henceforth out of order.
The Anti-Slavery party, taken generally by surprise, met the onset bravely. Their first movement was in a very damaging proposition to amend the resolution by a specific declaration that it was [[italics]] not [[/italics]] intended to prohibit [[italics]] prayer [[/italics]] for the slave! The irony of this was killing, and the resolution was finally [[italics]] defeated [[/italics]], by a vote of 51 to 45.'
In view of these transactions, Rev. George B. Cheever has written a series of scorching articles in the [[italics]] Independent [[/italics]]. from one of which (Jan. 22d) we take the following:--
'An association that, at this time, in our own country, instead of maintaining freedom of opinion and discussion on the one great question that, in church and state, is every where agitating the community, should deliberately attempt to exorcise itself from that agitation by a policy of enforced silence, by ta-
[[/column 6]]
