Chapter II: Part 2

During this week, my valued friends, John and Maria Candler, arrived from Hayti, after a stay of many months in Jamaica. At the close of the Yearly Meeting, a meeting was held, and attended by about three hundred "Friends," to whom John Candler gave much interesting information, detailing the results of emancipation in that Island, from his own extensive observations and inquiries. At the request of some individuals present I added a few observations at the close, on the principles and objects of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society.

I visited at this time the celebrated Schuylkill waterworks, which are beautifully situated on the river of that name. The water is raised to large reservoirs, at a higher level than the tops of the houses, by pumps worked by the current of the river. The supply not only suffices for the domestic use of the inhabitants, but is abundant for every public purpose of ornament or utility. My kind host, Samuel Webb, who accompanied me, pointed out a plot of land, presented by William Penn to a friend, to enable him to keep a cow, which is now worth many hundred thousand dollars for building purposes. He also showed me a mansion, the late proprietor of which had received a large accession of wealth from the quantities of plate which had been shipped to him in coffee barrels from St. Domingo, on the eve of the revolution in that Island, and whose owners are supposed to have subsequently perished, as they never appeared, with one solitary exception, to claim their property.

It will be necessary, in order to make certain passages of the succeeding narrative intelligible to my readers in this country, that some account should be given of the schism which has recently taken place in the once united and compact organizations of the abolitionists.

The American Anti-Slavery Society, whose origin has been already described, acted with great unity and efficiency for several years; auxiliaries were formed in all the free States; it scattered its publications over the land like the leaves of autumn, and at times had thirty or forty lecturers in the field. It kept a steady and vigilant eye upon the movements of the pro-slavery party, and wherever a vulnerable point was discovered, it directed its attacks. In its executive committee were such men as Judge Jay, Arthur and Lewis Tappan, La Roy Sunderland, Simeon S. Jocelyn, (the early laborer on behalf of the free colored people,) Joshua Leavitt, Henry B. Stanton, and the late Dr. Follen, a German political refugee, equally distinguished for his literary attainments and his love of liberty.

Until the last three or four years, entire union of purpose and concert of action existed among the American abolitionists. This harmony was first disturbed by the course pursued in the Boston Liberator. The editor of that paper, William Lloyd Garrison, whose early anti-slavery career has already been alluded to, and who was deservedly honored by the great body of the abolitionists, for his sufferings in their cause, and for his triumphant exposure of the oppressive tendencies of the colonization scheme, had always refused to share with any society or committee, the editorial responsibility of his journal. About the time referred to, several pieces were inserted in the _Liberator_, questioning the generally received opinions on the first day of the week. These were followed by others on other subjects, and he continued to keep his readers apprised of the new views of ethics and theology, which from time to time were presented to his own mind. His paper was not the special organ of any anti-slavery society, yet it was regarded, by general consent of the friends and enemies of the cause, as the organ of the anti-slavery movement. The discussion in its columns of new and startling doctrines, on subjects unconnected with slavery, occasioned many of the former much uneasiness and embarrassment, while it furnished the latter with new excuses for their enmity, and with the pretence that under cover of _abolition_, lurked a design of assailing institutions and opinions justly held in regard throughout the Christian world.

In the summer of 1837, Sarah and Angelina Grimke visited New England for the purpose of advocating the cause of the slave, with whose condition they were well acquainted, being natives of South Carolina, and having been themselves at one time implicated in the system. Their original intention was to confine their public labors to audiences of their own sex, but they finally addressed promiscuous assemblies. Their intimate knowledge of the true character of slavery; their zeal, devotion, and gifts as speakers, produced a deep impression, wherever they went. They met with considerable opposition from colonizationists, and also from a portion of the New England clergy, on the ground of the impropriety of their publicly addressing mixed audiences. This called forth in the Liberator, which at that time, I understand, was under the patronage, though I believe not under the control of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society, a discussion of the abstract question of the entire equality of the rights and duties of the two sexes. Here was a new element of discord. In 1838, at the annual New England convention of abolitionists, a woman was for the first time placed on committees with men, an innovation upon the general custom of the community, which excited much dissatisfaction in the minds of many.

About this time the rightfulness of civil and church government began to be called in question, through the columns of the Liberator, by its editor and correspondents. These opinions were concurrently advocated with the doctrine of non-resistance. Those who hold these opinions, while they deny that civil and ecclesiastical government are of divine authority, are yet passively submissive to the authority of the former, though they abstain from exercising the political rights of citizenship. There were not wanting those, among the opponents of abolition, to charge the anti-slavery body at large with maintaining these views, and in consequence serious embarrassments were thrown in the way of a successful prosecution of the cause. The executive committee of the Society at New York were placed in a difficult position, but as far as I am able to judge, they endeavored to hold on the steady tenor of their way, without, on the one hand, countenancing the introduction of extraneous matters upon the anti-slavery platform; or, on the other hand, yielding to the clamor of the pro-slavery party, whether in church or state.

In subsequent anti-slavery meetings in Boston, New York, and elsewhere, it became manifest that there was a radical difference of opinion on the subject of political action; the non-resistant and no-government influence, operating decidedly against the employment of the elective franchise in the anti-slavery cause; and the agitation of this question, as well as that of the rights of women, in their meetings, gave to them a discordant and party character, painfully contrasting with the previous peaceful and harmonious action of the societies. That some of both parties began to overlook the great subject of the slaves' emancipation, in zealous advocacy of, or opposition to, these new measures, I cannot well doubt, judging from the testimony of those, who, not fully sympathizing with either, endeavored to bring all back to the single object of the anti-slavery association. In addition to these intestine troubles, the pro-slavery party made strenuous exertions to fasten upon the society the responsibility of the opinions and proceedings of its non-resistant and no-government members. Under these circumstances it is easy to understand the interruption, for a season, of the unity of feeling and action which had previously characterized the assemblies of the abolitionists. The actual separation in the societies took place in the Spring of 1840. The members of the executive committee at New York, with one exception, seceded and became members of the committee of the "new organization," under the name of the "American and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society." There are, therefore, now two central or national anti-slavery societies; the "old organization," retaining the designation of the "American Anti-Slavery Society." The State Societies have, for the most part, taken up a position of neutrality, or independence of both. It is important to add that the division took place on the "women's rights" question, and that this is the only one of the controverted points which the American Anti-Slavery Society has officially affirmed; and it is argued, on behalf of their view of this question, that since, in the original "constitution" of the society, the term, describing its members, officers, et cet., is "persons," that women are plainly invested with the same eligibility to appointments, and the same right to vote and act as the other sex. I need not say how this "constitutional" argument is met on the other side. The other new views are held by comparatively few persons, and neither anti-slavery society in America is responsible for them. In conclusion, I rejoice to be able to add, that the separation, in its effects, appears to have been a healing measure; a better and kinder feeling is beginning to pervade all classes of American abolitionists; the day of mutual crimination seems to be passing away, and there is strong reason to hope that the action of the respective societies will henceforward harmoniously tend to the same object. That such may be the result is my sincere desire. It is proper in this connection to state that a considerable number of active and prominent abolitionists do not entirely sympathize with either division of the anti-slavery society; and there are comparatively few who make their views, for or against the question on which the division took place, a matter of conscience.

I have now given a brief, and I trust an impartial account of the origin of these dissensions. Some may possibly regard the views and proceedings above referred to, as the natural growth of abolitionism, but as well might the divisions among the early reformers be charged upon the doctrines of the Reformation, or the "thirty years' war" upon the preaching of Luther.

On the evening of the 14th instant, we met at a social party the leading abolitionists of Philadelphia of the "old organization." There were present all but one of the delegates from Pennsylvania to the London Convention. I availed myself of the opportunity of briefly and distinctly stating the unanimous conclusion of the London Anti-Slavery Committee, in which I entirely concurred, on the points at issue. I observed, in substance, that in the struggle for the liberation of the slaves in the British Colonies, one great source of our moral strength was, the singleness of our object, and our not allowing any other subject, however important or unexceptionable, to be mixed up with it; that though the aid of our female coadjutors had been of vital importance to the success of the anti-slavery enterprize, yet that their exertions had been uniformly directed by separate committees of their own sex, and that the abolitionists of Europe had no doubt that their united influence was most powerful in this mode of action: that the London Committee being convinced that no female delegate had crossed the Atlantic, under the belief that the "call" or invitation was intended to include women, felt themselves called upon, without in the slightest degree wishing to interfere with private opinion on this, or any other subject, to withhold their assent to the reception of such delegates, as members of the Convention, and that their decision, when appealed against, had been ratified in the Convention itself, by an overwhelming majority, after a protracted discussion: finally, that those whose views I represented, could not be parties to the introduction, in any future convention, of this or any other question, which we deemed foreign to our cause, and therefore that for those with whom it was a point of conscience to carry out what they deemed "women's rights," I saw no alternative but a separate organization, in which I wished that their efforts on behalf of the oppressed colored race, might be crowned with the largest measure of success. I observed, in conclusion, that my object was simply to state the decision of those with whom I acted in Great Britain, and that I must decline discussion, being fully convinced that it was better that the now separate societies should aim at the common object, in a spirit of kind and friendly co-operation, each in its own sphere, rather than that they should waste their energies in mutual contentions, and in the unprofitable discussion of topics not legitimately belonging to the great question of the abolition of slavery.

Although I had to address a company almost unanimously opposed on these points to myself, my communication was received in a kind and friendly spirit, and I was courteously informed that it would be taken into consideration at the next meeting of the Committee.

My friend, Daniel Neall, at whose house this interview took place, is a venerable looking man, a native of Delaware, and son-in-law of the excellent Warner Mifflin. He has been an abolitionist from his boyhood. Two years ago, he was dragged from the house of a friend in Delaware, and tarred and feathered, and otherwise mal-treated by a mob of slave-holders and their abettors; he mildly told those near him that if they would call at his house at Philadelphia, he would treat them in a very different manner. He was president of the Pennsylvania Hall Association, and in the terrible mobs of 1838, manifested a calm, quiet courage, as rare as it is commendable.

I remained in Philadelphia until the morning of the 28th, and during this interval paid many visits, and obtained much information, on the state of the anti-slavery feeling in this city, and more particularly amongst the members of the religious community to which I belong. On one occasion an esteemed individual kindly invited a number of "Friends" to meet me at his house, including some who object to uniting in anti-slavery effort with those of other denominations. I was introduced by the reading of a certificate of membership from the monthly meeting to which I belong, and also a document from a number of "Friends" in England, well known to those in America, commending me, and the cause in which I was engaged, to their kind and favorable consideration.

I then briefly related the leading objects of my visit to America, and that it was my anxious wish the members of my own religious society in this land, could see it their place to take the same active and prominent part in the anti-slavery cause, as their brethren in England had done, especially as the principles on which the British and Foreign and the American and Foreign Societies were founded, were entirely in accordance with the views of the Society of Friends. Those who spoke in reply mostly vindicated the course pursued in the United States. From this interview, as well as from others of a more private nature, with leading "Friends," I came to the conclusion, that a number of these would continue, by their influence and advice, to oppose their fellow members joining anti-slavery societies, though it is not probable that any disciplinary proceedings would be taken against such who might act in opposition to this counsel, so long as the recognized principles of the Society were not compromised. On this, to me, painfully interesting subject, I could dwell at length, but I will simply remark that, while it is evident that anti-slavery feeling is at too low an ebb among "Friends" here, yet doubtless, many of those who thus excuse themselves from active and effective service in the cause, still deeply sympathize with their oppressed fellow-men, and are not quite at ease in view of the apathy and inaction of the body to which they belong.

On the 28th we arrived at Baltimore; during a stay of two or three days, we found several persons who were friendly to our cause. There are computed to be five thousand slaves in this city, but of course slavery does not obtrude itself on the casual observer. Here, as in other countries, he who would see it as it is, must view it on the plantations.

The free people of color in Baltimore, are alive to the importance of education. One individual told us, that in distributing about two hundred and fifty religious books, which had been sent to be gratuitously supplied to the poor of this class, he found only five or six families, in which the children were not learning to read and write.

While in Baltimore, the inquiries I made respecting Elisha Tyson, fully confirmed the impression I have attempted to convey of his extraordinary character; perhaps no one has so good a claim to be considered the Granville Sharp of North America, and I have inserted in another place some particulars drawn from his biography, which will be found full of interest.[A] I am glad also to state, that if there is no one citizen of Baltimore on whom his mantle rests, there are yet some who are active in preventing the illegal detention of negroes, and of bringing such cases before the proper tribunal. One of these related the following case of recent occurrence. A woman, who was the wife of a free man, and the mother of four children, and who had long believed herself legally free, was claimed by the heir of her former master. The case was tried, and his right of property in her and her children affirmed. He then sold the family to a slave dealer for a thousand dollars; of whom the husband of the woman re-purchased them, (his _own_ wife and children,) for eleven hundred dollars, to repay which he bound himself to labor for the person from whom it was borrowed, for twelve years. Yet this is but a mitigated instance of oppression in this _Christian_ country.

[Footnote A: See Appendix D.]

The religious public of this city appear to be doing nothing collectively, to abolish or ameliorate slavery, and with the exception of "Friends," and the body who have lately seceded from them, I fear that all are more or less implicated in its actual guilt. I was informed not long since, even the Roman Catholics, who are more free from the contamination than many other religious bodies, had, in some part of the State, sold several of their own church members, and applied the proceeds to the erection of a place of worship. We called upon the Roman Catholic Bishop to inquire into the truth of this, but he was from home. When at Philadelphia afterwards, in conversation with a priest, I gave the particulars, and said I should be glad to be furnished with the means of contradicting it. I have not heard from him since.

I am informed that the Yearly Meeting of "Friends" has advised its members not to unite with the anti-slavery societies, and has latterly discontinued petitioning the legislature for the abolition of the internal slave trade, and the amelioration of the slave code; such is the prevailing influence of a pro-slavery atmosphere. The code in question has of late years been rendered more severe, and the legal emancipation of slaves more difficult; yet I was pleased to learn that public opinion has in this respect counteracted legislative tyranny; that slavery has in fact become milder, and the number of manumissions has not lessened.

The mischievous influence of the Colonization Society is very extensive among professing Christians in Baltimore, and is paramount in the legislature of the State.

The _American_ slave trade is carried on in the most open manner in this city. We paid a visit to the establishment of an extensive slave dealer, a large new building in one of the principal streets. The proprietor received us with great courtesy, and permitted us to inspect the premises. Cleanliness and order were every where visible, and, might we judge from the specimens of food shewn us, the animal wants of the slaves are not neglected. There were only five or six negroes _in stock_, but the proprietor told us he had sometimes three or four hundred there, and had shipped off a cargo to New Orleans a few days before. That city is the market where the highest price is generally obtained for them. The premises are strongly secured with bolts and bars, and the rooms in which the negroes are confined, surround an open court yard, where they are permitted to take the air. We were accompanied and kindly introduced by an individual who has often been engaged in preventing negroes from being illegally enslaved; and the proprietor of the establishment expressed his approval of his efforts, and that when such cases come before himself in the way of trade, he was accustomed to send them to our friend for investigation; he added that slaves would often come to him, and ask him to purchase them, and that he was the means of transferring them from worse masters to better; that he never parted families, though of course he could not control their fate, either before they came into his hands, or after they left him. He said he frequently left his concerns for weeks together, under the care of his head slave, whose wife he had made free, and promised the same boon to him, if he conducted himself well a few years longer. I thought it right to intimate my view of the nature of slavery and the slave trade, and that I deemed it wholly inconsistent with the plain precept "do unto others as ye would they should do unto you." This he did not attempt to controvert, yet he stated in extenuation, that the law permitted the trade in slaves, though he should be as willing as any one to have the system abolished, if the State would grant them compensation for their property. He farther said, that he was born in a slave State, that his mother had been for fifty years a member of the Wesleyan body, and that though he had not joined a Christian church himself, he had never sworn an oath, nor committed an immoral act in his life. He also shewed, I think, convincingly, that dealing in slaves was not worse than slave holding. On leaving the premises, we found the door of his office had been locked upon us during this conference. I subsequently learned that this person, though living in considerable style, was not generally received in respectable society, and that a lady whom he had lately married, was shunned by her former acquaintance. Such is the testimony of the slave-holders of Baltimore against slave dealing, by which they condemn themselves in the sight of God and man, and add the guilt of hypocrisy to their own sin. Some time afterwards I addressed the following letter to this individual, which was published in many of the American papers:

"To HOPE H. SLAUGHTER, _Slave Trader, Baltimore_:

"Since thou courteously allowed me, in company with my friend,
J.G. Whittier, to visit thy slave establishment in the city of
Baltimore, some weeks since, I have often felt a desire to
address a few lines to thee. I need not, perhaps, say that my
feelings were painfully exercised in looking over thy buildings,
fitted up with bolts and bars, for the reception of human beings
for sale. A sense of the misery and suffering of the unfortunate
slaves, who have been from time to time confined there--of their
separation from home and kindred--and of the dreary prospect
before them of a life of unrequited toil in the South and South
West--rested heavily upon me. I could there realize the true
nature of the system of slavery. I was in a market-house for
human flesh, where humanity is degraded to a level with the
brute; and where children of our common Father in Heaven, and
for whom our blessed Redeemer offered up the atoning sacrifice
of his blood, were bargained for and sold like beasts that
perish. And when I regarded thee as the merchant in this
dreadful traffic, and heard thee offer remarks, which might in
some degree be considered as an apology for thy business,
calling our attention to the cleanly state of the apartments,
the wholesome provisions, et cet.; and especially when I heard
thee declare that thou hadst been educated by a pious
mother--that thou wast never addicted to swearing or other
immoralities--and that thy business was a legalized one--that
thou didst nothing contrary to law--and that, while in thy
possession, the poor creatures were treated kindly--that
families were not separated,[A] et cet.,--I was glad to perceive
some evidence that the nature of thy employment had not
extinguished the voice of conscience within thee. In thy
sentiments, and in the manner of their utterance, I thought I
could see that truth had not left itself without a witness in
thy breast, and that a sense of the wrongfulness of thy
occupation still disturbed thee.

[Footnote A: "The latter remark, of course, applies only to the
time they remained with thee. For, on the day we visited thy
establishment, a friend with whom I was dining informed me, that
a few days before a woman and child had been sold to thee, whose
husband and father was a free man, who, in his distress, had
been offering to bind himself for a term of years, in order to
raise the sum (I think $800) demanded for them; but, as he had
been unable to do so, my friend had no doubt they had been sent
off with the very lot of slaves, which, we were told by thyself
had just been forwarded to New Orleans from thy prison. _Who_ is
most guilty in this atrocious transaction--the slave owner, who
sold thee the woman and child at Baltimore--_thou_, the
transporter of them for ever from their husband and parent--_the
purchasers_ of the mother and child at New Orleans, where they
may be for ever separated from each other--or the _citizen_ who,
by his vote and influence, creates and upholds enactments which
legalize this monstrous system, is known only to Him before whom
the secrets of all hearts are unfolded."]

"To thy remark that thy business was necessary to the system of
slavery, and an essential part of it--and if slave-_holding_
were to be justified at all, the slave-_trade_ must be also--I
certainly can offer no valid objection; for I have never been
able to discover any moral difference between the planter of
Virginia and the slave dealer of Baltimore, Richmond, and
Washington. Each has his part to act in the system, and each is
necessary to the other. And if the matter were not, in all its
bearings, painfully serious, it would be amusing to witness the
absurd contempt with which the slave owner of Maryland or
Virginia professes to look upon the trader, whose purchase of
his surplus slaves alone enables him to retain the residue in
his possession; for it seems very evident that the only
profitable part of the system in those States, at the present
time, is the sale of the annual increase of the slaves.

"In passing from thy premises, we looked in upon the Triennial
Convention of the Baptists of the United States, then in session
in the city of Baltimore, where I found slave-holding ministers
of high rank in the church, urging successfully the exclusion
from the Missionary Board of that Society, of all those who, in
principle and practice, were known to be decided abolitionists;
and the results of their efforts satisfied me that the darkest
picture of slavery is not to be found in the jail of the
slave-trader, but rather in a convocation of professed ministers
of the Gospel of Christ, expelling from the Board of a Society
formed to enlighten the heathen of other nations, all who
consistently labor for the overthrow of a system which denies a
knowledge of the Holy Scriptures to near three millions of
heathen at home!

"But allow me, in a spirit, as I trust, of Christian kindness,
to entreat thee not to seek excuses for thy own course in the
evil conduct of others. Thou hast already reached the middle
period of life--the future is uncertain. By thy hopes of peace
here and hereafter, let me urge thee to abandon this occupation.
It is not necessary to argue its intrinsic wickedness, for thou
knowest it already. I would therefore beseech thee to listen to
that voice which, I am persuaded, sometimes urges thee to 'put
away the evil of thy doings,' to 'do justice and love mercy,'
and thus cease to draw upon thyself the curse which fell upon
those merchants of Tyre, who 'traded in the persons of men.'
That these warnings of conscience may not longer be neglected on
thy part, is the sincere wish of one who, while he abhors thy
occupation, feels nothing but kindness and good will towards
thyself.

"Thy friend,

"JOSEPH STURGE.

"_New York, 6th Month 30th, 1841._"

The Baptist Convention alluded to in the foregoing letter was one whose proceedings I regarded with considerable interest, for it had been generally understood that the ministers delegated from the South, as well as some of those from the Northern States, intended to exclude abolitionists from every office on the missionary board, and especially to remove my friend, Elon Galusha, a distinguished Baptist minister, from the station of vice-president, for the offence of attending the London Anti-Slavery Convention, and more particularly for supporting the following resolutions of that assembly:

"1. That it is the deliberate and deeply-rooted conviction of
this Convention, which it thus publicly and solemnly expresses
to the world, that slavery, in whatever form, or in whatever
country it exists, is contrary to the eternal and immutable
principles of justice, and the spirit and precepts of
Christianity; and is, therefore a sin against God, which
acquires additional enormity when committed by nations
professedly Christian, and in an age when the subject has been
so generally discussed, and its criminality so thoroughly
exposed.

"2. That this Convention cannot but deeply deplore the fact,
that the continuance and prevalence of slavery are to be
attributed in a great degree to the countenance afforded by many
Christian churches, especially in the Western world, which have
not only withheld that public and emphatic testimony against the
crime which it deserves, but have retained in their communion,
without censure, those by whom it is notoriously perpetrated.

"3. That this Convention, while it disclaims the intention or
desire of dictating to Christian communities the terms of their
fellowship, respectfully submits that it is their incumbent duty
to separate from their communion all those persons who, after
they have been faithfully warned in the spirit of the gospel,
continue in the sin of enslaving their fellow-creatures, or
holding them in slavery--a sin, by the commission of which, with
whatever mitigating circumstances it may be attended in their
own particular instance, they give the support of their example
to the whole system of compulsory servitude, and the unutterable
horrors of the slave trade.

"4. That it be recommended to the Committee of the British and
Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, in the name of this Convention, to
furnish copies of the above resolutions to the ecclesiastical
authorities of the various Christian churches throughout the
world."

On entering the meeting, we found the question was already before them, previous to balloting for the officers for the ensuing three years. The pro-slavery party were anxious to prevent all discussion, but some on the other side proposed questions which compelled their notice. Among the rest it was plainly asked, if the southern delegates did not come pledged against the re-election of Elon Galusha. This was denied, but certain resolutions which had appeared in the public papers were appealed to in proof of the fact. The inquiry becoming more searching, an expedient was resorted to, which, though quite novel to me, was, I am told, not unfrequently adopted when discussions assume a shape not quite satisfactory to the controlling powers of a synod. It was proposed that they should pray, and then proceed at once to the ballot. The ministers called upon were R. Fuller and Elon Galusha, who were considered to represent the opposite sides of the discussion. The former individual is a large slave-holder, an influential leader in his denomination, and had canvassed and condemned Elon Galusha's views and conduct in the public newspapers. I must avow, this whole proceeding was little calculated to remove my objection to the practice of calling upon any individual to offer supplication in a public assembly. After prayer had been offered, they proceeded to the ballot, and we left the meeting, deeply impressed with the profanation of employing the most solemn act of devotion to serve the exigencies of controversy.

In the evening I met a number of the anti-slavery members of the Convention, from whom I learned that the vote had excluded Elon Galusha and all other known abolitionists from official connection with the board, by an hundred and twenty-four to an hundred and seventeen, which being a much smaller majority than was expected, they considered the result a triumph rather than a defeat.

On the 1st of the 5th Month, (May) we returned to Wilmington, in Delaware, where we remained at the hospitable residence of our friend Samuel Hilles, till the 3d instant, and met a number of "Friends," and others, who treated us with great kindness and hospitality, inspected one of the flour mills on the Brandywine river, and the process of drying Indian corn before it is ground; these are some of the oldest flour mills in the State. A. large peach orchard of one of my friends in the neighborhood, was beautifully in bloom. Great quantities of this delicious fruit are raised in Delaware, New Jersey, and Maryland. Here, as in other parts of the States, much money, has been lost by a silk, or rather mulberry tree, mania. Young mulberry trees rose to a dollar and a quarter each, though they can be multiplied almost without limit in a single year. As might have been expected, a re-action took place, many parties were ruined, and berry trees may now be had for the trouble of digging them up.

The number of slaves in this small State is now reduced to four or five thousand, and from all the information I could collect, I feel convinced that if those who are friendly to emancipation were to exert themselves, they would succeed, without much difficulty, in procuring the abolition of slavery within its limits.

My friend, John G. Whittier, being, from increase of indisposition, unable to go forward, I left Wilmington alone, and arrived in New York in time to be present at a Baptist Anti-Slavery Convention, which I had been invited to attend, and at which I was called upon to make a few observations on the present state of the question. Several important resolutions were unanimously adopted, containing a cordial approval of the principles of proceeding of the London Convention, a recommendation that another Convention should be held at the same place in 1842, and an assurance that exertions should be used to promote a good delegation from the Baptist anti-slavery body.

On that respecting Christian fellowship with slave-holding churches, Dr. Brisbane spoke in a touching manner, and said he must support it, though his friends and relations were in the South, and some of those dearest to him still countenanced slavery, or were themselves slave-holders.

On the 6th I returned to Philadelphia, and that evening attended, by invitation, a meeting of the Juvenile Anti-Slavery Society, but took no part in the proceedings. This Society is one of the most efficient in the State; it is entirely confined to young men. I also received a formal invitation to attend other meetings about to be held, which I felt under the necessity of declining, from a belief that I could not participate in the discussions of the meetings with advantage to the cause which we all had at heart, and from the fact that previous to receiving the invitation I had made other arrangements which would occupy most of my time.

The present organized anti-slavery societies in Pennsylvania insist upon the mixed action of men and women in committees, et cet. Those who do not hold with their views have either silently withdrawn, avoid participating in measures which they disapprove, or do not attend meetings when it is expected any such measures will be brought forward. Among such measures may be reckoned the censures which in a few instances have been passed on the London Convention, and the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society; censures sometimes more decided in sentiment than temperate in expression. My own inclination would have led me to attend several of these meetings, when my other engagements would have permitted, if I could have done so as an ordinary spectator and hearer; but on considering that I might appear on the one hand to give a tacit sanction to acts and sentiments which I disapproved, or on the other hand, that I might be drawn into controversy by explaining my objections, I concluded to forego the gratification which the proceedings might have afforded me, and I subsequently saw no reason to repent the decision I came to.

During this visit to Philadelphia, I made calls upon various individuals who are deeply interested in the anti-slavery cause, but who have not joined any anti-slavery society. Among these I must instance Professor Charles D. Cleveland, an excellent individual, of the Presbyterian persuasion, a man of fine talents and an accomplished scholar, who is the editor of a paper called the American Intelligencer, in which he has reprinted a very large edition of J.J. Gurney's "Letters from the West Indies," and has extensively distributed it through the post office. This effort of judicious zeal, will probably make hundreds of emancipationists, and disarm hostility and rouse indifference to a great extent. No impartial and benevolent mind can read these authentic details of the results of emancipation in the British Colonies, and remain unconvinced of its safety and blessed fruits to every class of the community. The Professor has published and circulated Dr. Channing's "Emancipation," in the same shape. I also called upon the late Governor of Illinois, Edward Coles, who was born in a slave State, but in early life, while at college, from a conviction of the sinfulness of slave-holding, he resolved upon liberating the negroes which would come into his possession on the death of his father. This he faithfully performed, removed the people to Illinois, and presented them; with lands for their subsistence. He himself soon removed there and became Governor of the territory. It was owing to his determined and vigorous efforts that slavery was made unconstitutional in that State. He was a friend of President Jefferson, and corresponded with him on the subject of slavery. All his liberated slaves prospered, all learned to read and write, two are now ministers of the gospel, and one is the Governor's agent, and a man of property. The number thus freed were between thirty and forty, and their value amounted to half his property; but a, blessing has followed the sacrifice, and he has now retired to Philadelphia with a handsome competence. In the course of conversation, the Governor spoke of the prejudice, against color prevailing here as much stronger than in the slave States, I may add, from my own observation, and much concurring testimony, that Philadelphia appears to be the metropolis of this odious prejudice, and that there is probably no city in the known world, where dislike, amounting to hatred of the colored population, prevails more than in the city of brotherly love!

Among the proofs of this, and of the same feeling in the State at large, it may be noticed that two or three years since, a convention was called for amending the State constitution, which among other changes, formally deprived men of color of the elective franchise. Practically this was of little importance, for it was taking away a right, the exercise of which, if attempted, would have roused popular indignation to the peril of their lives. A yet more obvious sign to the stranger in Philadelphia, are the ruins of "Pennsylvania Hall," which most of my readers are probably aware was destroyed by a pro-slavery mob in the spring of 1838. It stood near the centre of the city, and was sixty-two feet front by one hundred deep, and fifty-two feet to the eaves: the large saloon in the second story with its galleries being capable of holding three thousand persons. On the occasion of its opening, a large number of the friends of emancipation assembled in the city, to attend the anniversary of the Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society, and some other meetings connected with the cause. Letters of congratulation on the opening of the hall were received by the managers from ex-president Adams, William Slade and Francis James, members of Congress, Thomas Morris of the U.S. Senate, Judge Jay, Gerritt Smith, and other distinguished friends of equal rights. The letter of the venerable ex-president is written with his characteristic energy, and I quote an extract from it in further proof of the sentiments already expressed on the state of feeling in the land of Penn and Benezet, Pemberton and Franklin, on the subject of slavery.

"The right of discussion upon slavery, and an indefinite extent
of topics connected with it, is banished from one-half the
States of this Union. It is _suspended_ in both houses of
Congress; opened and closed at the pleasure of the slave
representation; opened for the promulgation of nullification
sophistry; closed against the question, What is slavery? at the
sound of which the walls of the capitol staggered like a drunken
man.

"For this suppression of the freedom of speech and press, and
the right of petition, the people of the _free_ States of this
Union are responsible, and the _people of Pennsylvania most of
all_. Of this responsibility, I say it with a pang, sharper than
language can express, _the city of Philadelphia must take
herself the largest share_."

The meetings of the first day passed without disturbance. On the evening of the second day, a meeting of the Female Anti-Slavery Society was held in the hall, the proceedings of which were greatly disturbed by a mob of from 1500 to 2000 persons, assembled without. The windows on all sides were beaten in by stones and other missiles, and one or two persons severely injured. The next day the mob lingered about the building, no effort being made by the pro-slavery authorities to disperse them. In the evening the building was attacked, the doors burst open, and fire communicated to the interior; and in the midst of at least 20,000 persons, the noble and costly hall was consumed, with the exception of its bare walls. My friend John G. Whittier, who was present at the time, states that the most dreadful threats were uttered by the rioters against the prominent abolitionists. The house of Samuel Webb was particularly marked for destruction; and as the mob assembled nightly for several days, it is scarcely possible to conceive a more trying situation than that in which the abolitionists were placed. The "Friends" asylum for colored orphans, a small but useful institution, was attacked by a portion of the mob, and the next day the association to which it belongs publicly disclaimed any connection with the abolition societies. One of the daily papers also contained the following, headed "Communication."

"An opinion having become prevalent that a considerable number of the society of Orthodox Friends were present at the late meetings in Pennsylvania Hall, taking an active part in the proceedings, and that they still uphold the principles in relation to slavery and the colored race there promulgated, it is but justice to this respectable body of people to correct public opinion in relation to the subject, by observing that _very few_ if any attended the meetings; that among the society it is doubtful whether twenty individuals are to be found in this city who embrace their doctrines, and that they, as a body, are opposed to the indiscreet course which has been taken by the ultra abolitionists. Had their views been understood in relation to the subject, their property in Thirteenth street would, no doubt, have been spared the violence it has suffered, being in no way connected with abolitionism, but merely designed as a shelter for an unfortunate class of children who have large claims upon the community; and who, upon application made in their behalf for the purposes for which this asylum was designed, even to the _mob_, I have no hesitation in saying that, as _human beings_, they would not oppose it."

While other portions of the community were in like manner propitiating the mob, the few but faithful abolitionists of the city calmly but firmly maintained their principles, even at the peril of life and estate. On the morning after the burning of the Hall, the State Anti-Slavery Society, pursuant to adjournment, met at the ruins of the Hall, and, amidst the smoking walls, and with the mob lingering about them, they proceeded to their business--Abraham L. Pennock, the Vice President of the Society, presiding. The editor of the Pennsylvania Freeman, John G. Whittier, whose publication office and papers had been destroyed by the mob, in his next paper published the following editorial article, which I have copied simply to show that while the abolitionists on this occasion maintained their sentiments in a clear and unequivocal manner, they did not indulge in the language of revenge or anger.

"We perhaps need offer no apology to our distant readers, for
the want of variety in our present number. Ours must be this
week a record of violence--a story of persecution and outrage.
We hardly dare trust ourselves to speak upon this matter. It is
our desire to do so, if at all, in a tone of calmness,--to hold
ourselves aloof, as far as possible, from the present
excitement,--to utter our abiding testimony, now dearer than
ever to our hearts, not in the language of passion, but firmly
and decidedly.

"Our readers will gather from the statements made in the
different extracts in our paper, and especially from the Address
of the Executive Committee of the State Anti-Slavery Society,
the leading facts of the outrage. Of the course pursued by the
civil authorities, we leave the community to judge. Our own
reliance for protection has been upon that Providence whose
mercy is over all,--in the justice of our cause, and in our
conscious innocence of heart and integrity of purpose. We
rejoice, and in so doing, the abolitionists of Pennsylvania
unite with us, that human life was not sacrificed in defence of
our Hall, our persons, and our property. We know, indeed, that
had the attack been made upon the United States Bank, or any
similar institution in this city, the civil authorities would
have met its fury, not as now, with a speech only, but with
loaded firelocks and fixed bayonets. We know, it is true, that
the mob were in a great measure left free to work their
mischievous will upon us. But if those in authority have, _upon
their own principles_, treated us with neglect in the hour of
our peril, upon them let the responsibility rest. We have thus
far survived the onset. Under God, for to him alone are we
indebted for protection, we are still left to bear our testimony
to the truth. Our consciences are in this matter void of
offence. In cheerful serenity of spirit, and not in the tone of
menace or boasting, we declare our faith in the principles of
emancipation unfaltering--our zeal undiminished--our
determination to persevere unaltered. Our confidence in the
triumphant and glorious issue of the present struggle remains
firm.

'Truth smote to Earth revives again;
The eternal years of God are hers--
But error wounded, shrieks with pain,
And dies among her worshippers.'

"From this time henceforward, Pennsylvania must become the great
battle-field of opinion on the subject of slavery. The light of
that evening's sacrifice has reached already every portion of
our State. Men are every where inquiring why the sacrifice was
made? Why a mighty city was convulsed with violence? Why a noble
hall was burned by incendiaries in the view of gazing thousands?
Why the 'shelter for orphan children' was set on fire, and why
the houses of our citizens were surrounded by a ruffian mob?
They may be told now by the perpetrators of these outrages, that
all has been occasioned by the conduct of the abolitionists. But
the delusion cannot last. Truth will make its way to the abused
ear of the community; and it will be known that the scenes which
have disgraced our city, are directly attributable to the
influence of southern slavery. The spirit of free inquiry, now
fairly awakened, will never again slumber in this state. Like
the Greek fire, it will blaze with fiercer intensity for every
attempt to extinguish it."

The proceedings of the authorities and the public at large, consequent upon this act of incendiarism and outrageous violence, were truly characteristic. It is supposed that the destruction of the Hall was planned beforehand, and there is some evidence to show that strangers from the South were implicated in the conspiracy; but, as usual, the old drama of the wolf accusing the lamb was enacted over again, and a pretext was laid hold of, that, in the peculiar state of feeling existing in the community, was almost deemed a justification of all that had happened; though, in truth, it was in the last degree ridiculous. It was asserted that colored men had been seen walking arm in arm with white ladies, and that white men had handed colored females out of their carriages at the door of the Hall, as politely as if they had not belonged to the proscribed class. In several instances, if not in all, these reports were untrue in point of fact, and originated in the existing paradox, that colored men and women are sometimes white, and that white gentlemen and ladies are not unfrequently of dark complexion. As an illustration, I quote the following scene from a letter addressed to me by Robert Purvis, an intelligent and educated man of color, and the son-in-law of James Forten, a wealthy and venerable colored citizen of Philadelphia, recently deceased.

"In regard to my examination before the jury in the Pennsylvania Hall case, I have to say, that it was both a painful and ludicrous affair. At one time the fulness of an almost bursting heart was ready to pour forth in bitter denunciation--then the miserable absurdity of the thing, rushing into my mind, would excite my risible propensities. You know the county endeavored to defend itself against the award of damages, by proving that the abolitionists were the cause of the destruction of the building, in promoting promiscuous intermingling, in doors and out, of blacks and whites, thereby exciting public feeling, &c. A witness, whose name I now forget, in proof of this point, stated, that upon a certain day, hour, &c., a '_negress_' approached the Hall, in a carriage, when a white man assisted her in getting out, offered his arm, which was instantly accepted, and he escorted her to the saloon of the building! In this statement he was collected, careful, and solemn--minutely describing the dress, appearance of the parties, as well as the carriage, the exact time, &c.--the clerks appointed for the purpose taking down every word, and the venerable jurors looking credulous and horror-stricken. Upon being called to _rebut_ the testimony I, in truth and simplicity, confirmed his testimony in every particular!! The attorney, on our behalf, David Paul Brown, Esq., a gentleman, scholar, and philanthropist, in a tone of irony peculiarly severe, demanded, 'whether I had the unblushing impudence, in broad day-light, to offer my arm to my wife?' I replied, in deep affectation of the criminality involved, that the only palliation I could offer, for conduct so outrageous was, that it was unwittingly done, it seemed so natural. This, as you might well suppose, produced some merriment at the expense of the witness for the county, and of all others, whose gullibility and prejudice had given credit to what would have been considered, had I been what is called a white man, an awful story."

The proceedings in the case are, I believe, still pending. My friend, Samuel Webb, in a letter dated "11th Month 16th, 1841," says:

"Last 7th day, after several years incessant struggle, we
brought the case of the Pennsylvania Hall before the Court of
Criminal Sessions. George M. Dallas, Counsel for the County, in
opposing the award of the appraisers, (thirty-three thousand
dollars, not one-third of what it ought to have been,) spoke for
about one hour--the purport of his speech was--that here was no
mob at all, (!) that the jury appointed to ascertain the facts
had reported to the Court, that the mob, if mob it might be
called, was composed of orderly, respectable citizens; and of,
course, orderly, respectable citizens could not be a mob. After
this I should not be surprised to hear it doubted whether there
ever was such a building, or if there was, whether it was ever
destroyed; but unluckily the ruined walls are still standing,
and if I had my way, _there they should stand_, until slavery
shall be abolished, which it will be, soon after your East India
possessions can grow cotton for six cents per lb. by free
labor."