Chapter XV: Part 15

“_Resolved_, That the only escape for nations, as well as
individuals, from sin and its consequences, is by the way of
unfeigned repentance; and that our proud Republic must go down
in ruin, unless the people shall be brought to repentance,--shall
be persuaded to ‘cease to do evil, and learn to do well; to seek
justice, relieve the oppressed.’ Compromises with the wrong-doers
will only plunge us deeper in their iniquity. Civil war will not
settle the difficulty, but complicate it all the more, and superadd
rapine and murder to the sin of slaveholding. The dissolution of
the Union, even, may not relieve us; for if slavery still remains
in the land, it will be a perpetual trouble to the inhabitants
thereof, whether they be separate or whether they be united;
slavery must be abolished, or there can be no peace within these
borders.

“_Resolved_, That our General Government ought to abolish all
Fugitive Slave Laws; for, unless they can dethrone God, the people
will ever be under higher obligations to obey him than to obey any
laws, any constitutions that men may have framed and enacted. And
the law of God requires us to befriend the friendless, to succor
the distressed, to hide the outcast, to deliver the oppressed.

“_Resolved_, That as the people of the free States have from the
beginning been partakers in the iniquity of slavery,--accomplices
of the oppressors of the poor laborers at the South,--therefore we
ought to join hands with them in any well-devised measures for the
emancipation of their bondmen. Our wealth and the wealth of the
nation ought to be put in requisition, to relieve those who may
impoverish themselves by setting their captives free; to furnish
the freed men with such comforts, conveniences, implements of labor
as they may need; and to establish such educational and religious
institutions as will be indispensable everywhere, to enable them,
and, yet more, their children and children’s children, to become
what the free people, the citizens of self-governing states, ought
to be,--_intelligent_, _moral_, _religious_.

“_Resolved_, That the abolition of slavery is the great concern of
the American people,--‘the one thing needful’ for them,--without
which there can be no union, no peace, no political virtue, no
real, lasting prosperity in all these once United States.

“_Resolved_, That, so far from its being untimely or inappropriate
to stand forth for unpopular truths, in seasons of great popular
excitement, apprehension, and wide passionate denial of them,
it is then pre-eminently timely, appropriate, and all vitally
important, whether regarded in view of the paramount obligations
of fealty to the Supreme King, or the sacred considerations of the
redemption and welfare of mankind; and as it behooved then most of
all to speak for Jesus, when Jesus was arraigned for condemnation
and crucifixion, as it has ever been the bounden and, sooner or
later, the well-acknowledged duty of every friend of the truth in
past history to stand firm, and ever firmer in its behalf, amid
whatever wave of passion, malignity, and madness, even though the
multitude all shout, Crucify! and devils be gathered thick as tiles
on the house-tops of Worms to devour; so at the present hour it
sacredly behooves Abolitionists to abide fast by their principles,
and in the very midst of the present storm of passion and insane
folly, in face of every assault, whether of threat or infliction,
to speak for the slave and for man; and, with an earnestness
and pointed emphasis unknown before, to press home upon their
countrymen the question daily becoming more imminent and vital,
whether the few vestiges of freedom yet remaining shall be blotted
out, and this entire land overswept with tyranny, violence, and
blood.”

The members of the Convention refused to make any further attempt to hold a public meeting, but the citizens who were present at Dr. Pease’s house resolved to attempt a meeting the next forenoon in the hall from which the convention had been expelled, for the express purpose of testing the faithfulness of the city authorities, and manifesting a just indignation at the outrage which had been perpetrated in our midst upon some of the fundamental rights of a free people. But the attempt was frustrated by the same rioters that had ruled the day before.

And the following night the mob celebrated their too successful onslaught upon popular liberty by a procession led by a band of music, with transparent banners, bearing these inscriptions:--

“FREEDOM OF SPEECH, BUT NOT TREASON.”

“THE RIGHTS OF THE SOUTH MUST BE PROTECTED.”

“ABOLITIONISM NO LONGER IN SYRACUSE.”

“THE JERRY RESCUERS PLAYED OUT.”

Prominently in the procession there were carried two large-sized effigies,--one of a man the other of a woman,--the former bearing my name, the latter Miss Anthony’s. After parading through some of the principal streets, the procession repaired to Hanover Square, the centre of the business part of our city, and there amid shouts, hootings, mingled with disgusting profanity and ribaldry, the effigies were burned up; but not the great realities for which we were contending.

* * * * *

For more than thirty years the Abolitionists had been endeavoring to rouse the people to exterminate slavery by moral, ecclesiastical, and political instrumentalities, urging them to their duty by every religious consideration, and by reiterating the solemn admonition of Thomas Jefferson, that “If they would not liberate the enslaved in the land by the generous energies of their own minds and hearts, the slaves would be liberated by the awful processes of civil and servile war.” But the counsels of the Abolitionists were spurned, their sentiments and purposes were shamelessly misrepresented, their characters traduced, their property destroyed, their persons maltreated. And lo! our country, favored of Heaven above all others, was given up to fratricidal, parricidal, and for a while we feared it would be suicidal war.

God be praised! the threatened dissolution of our Union was averted. But discord still reigns in the land. Our country is not surely saved. It was right that our Federal Government should be forbearing in their treatment of the Southern Rebels, because the people of the North had been, to so great an extent, their partners in the enslavement of our fellow-men, that it would have ill become us to have punished them condignly. But our Government has been guilty of great injustice to the colored population of the South, who were all loyal throughout the war. These should not have been left as they have been, in a great measure, at the mercy of their former masters. Homes and adequate portions of the land (they so long had cultivated without compensation) ought to have been secured to every family of the Freedmen, and some provision for their education should have been made. With these and the elective franchise conferred upon them, the Freedmen might safely have been left to maintain themselves in their new condition, and work themselves out of the evils that were enforced upon them by their long enslavement.

May the sad experience of the past prompt and impel our nation, before it be too late, to do all for the colored population of our country, South and North, that righteousness demands at our hands.

APPENDIX.

APPENDIX I.

On page 137 I have alluded to Hon. J. G. Palfrey. He evinced his respect for the rights of man by an act which was incomparably more significant and convincing than the most eloquent words could have been. On the death of his father, who was a slaveholder in Louisiana, he became heir to one third of the estate, comprising about fifty slaves. His co-heirs would readily have taken his share of these chattels and have given him an equivalent in land or money. But he was too conscientious to consent to such a bargain. If his portion of his father’s bondmen should thereafter continue in slavery, it must be by an act of his own will, and involve him in the crime of making merchandise of men. From this his whole soul revolted. Accordingly, he requested that such a division of the slaves might be made as would put the largest number of them into his share. The money value of the women, children, and old men being much less than that of the able-bodied men, twenty-two of the slaves were assigned to him. I presume their market value could not have been less than nine thousand dollars. All of them were brought on, at Mr. Palfrey’s expense, from Louisiana to Massachusetts.

Assisted by his Abolitionist friends, especially Mrs. L. M. Child, Mrs. E. G. Loring, and the Hathaways of Farmington, N. Y., and their Quaker friends, he succeeded after a while in getting them all well situated in good families, where the old were kindly cared for, the able-bodied adults were employed and duly remunerated for their labors, and the young were brought up to be worthy and useful. It has been my happiness to be personally acquainted with some of them and their friends, and to know that what I have stated above is true. Their transportation from Louisiana to Massachusetts; their maintenance here until places were found for them; and their removal to their several homes, must have cost Mr. Palfrey several hundred dollars,--I suppose eight or ten hundred. If so, he nobly sacrificed ten thousand dollars’ worth of his patrimony to his sense of right and his love of liberty.

In 1847 this excellent man was elected a Representative of Massachusetts in the Congress of the United States. As those who knew him best confidently expected, he early took high antislavery ground there.

The following are extracts from his first speech in Congress: “The question is not at all between North and South, but between the many millions of non-slaveholding Americans, North, South, East, and West, and the very few hundreds of thousands of their fellow-citizens who hold slaves. It is time that this idea of a geographical distinction of parties, with relation to this subject, was abandoned. It has no substantial foundation. Freedom, with its fair train of boundless blessings for white and black,--slavery, with its untold miseries for both,--these are the two parties in the field.... I will now only express my deliberate and undoubting conviction, that the time has quite gone by when the friends of slavery might hope anything from an attempt to move the South to disunion for its defence.... I do not believe it is good policy for the slaveholders to let their neighbors hear them talk of disunion. Unless I read very stupidly the signs of the times, _it will not be the Union they will thus endanger, but the interest to which they would sacrifice it_. If they insist that the Union and slavery cannot live together, they may be taken at their word, but IT IS THE UNION THAT MUST STAND.”

At its close, the Hon. J. Q. Adams is reported to have exclaimed: “Thank God the seal is broken! Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace.” And “the old man eloquent” died at his post a month afterwards.

APPENDIX II.

On page 147 I have named, among other members of the Society of Friends who gave us efficient support in the day when we most needed help, Nathaniel Barney, then of Nantucket. He was one of the earliest of the immediate Abolitionists, was most explicit and fearless in the avowal of his sentiments, most consistent and conscientious in acting accordingly with them. He denounced “the prejudice against color as opposed to every precept and principle of the Gospel,” and said, “It betrays a littleness of soul to which, when it is rightly considered, an honorable mind can never descend.” Therefore, he would not ride in a stage-coach or other public conveyance, from which an applicant for a seat was excluded _because of his complexion_.

He was a stockholder in the New Bedford and Taunton Railroad. In 1842 he learned that _colored_ persons were excluded from the cars on that road. Immediately he sent an admirable letter, dated April 14, 1842, to the New Bedford _Mercury_ for publication, condemning such proscription. It was refused. He then offered it to the _Bulletin_, where it was likewise rejected. At length it appeared in the New Bedford _Morning Register_, and was worthy of being republished in every respectable newspaper in our country. In it he said: “The thought never entered my mind, when I advocated a liberal subscription to that railroad among our citizens, that I was contributing to a structure where, in coming years, should be exhibited a cowardice and despotism which I know the better feelings of the proprietors would, on reflection, repudiate.... I cannot conscientiously withdraw the little I invested, neither can I sell my share of the stock of this road, while the existing prescriptive character attaches to it; and with my present views and feelings, so long as the privileges of the traveller are suspended on one of the accidents of humanity, I should be recreant to every principle of propriety and justice, _were I to receive aught of the price_ which the directors attach to them. In the exclusion, therefore, by the established rules of one equally entitled with myself to a seat, _I am excluded from any share of the money_,--the profit of said infraction of right.”

Surely, the name of such a man ought to be handed down to our posterity to be duly honored, when the great and mean iniquity of our nation shall be abhorred.

APPENDIX III.

Speech of Gerrit Smith, referred to on page 169. I have omitted a few passages for want of room.

“On returning home from Utica last night, my mind was so much excited with the horrid scenes of the day, and the frightful encroachments made on the right of free discussion, that I could not sleep, and at three o’clock I left my bed and drafted this resolution:--

“‘_Resolved_, That the right of free discussion, given to us by God, and asserted and guarded by the laws of our country, is a right so vital to man’s freedom and dignity and usefulness, that we can never be guilty of its surrender, without consenting to exchange that freedom for slavery, and that dignity and usefulness for debasement and worthlessness.’

“I love our free and happy government, but not because it confers any new rights upon us. Our rights spring from a nobler source than human constitutions and governments,--from the favor of Almighty God.

“We are not indebted to the Constitution of the United States, or of this State, for the right of free discussion. We are thankful that they have hedged it about with so noble a defence. We are thankful, I say, that they have neither restrained nor abridged it; but we owe them no thanks for our possession of rights which God gave us. And the proof that he gave them is in the fact that he requires us to exercise them.

“When, then, this right of free discussion is invaded, this home-bred right, which is yours, and is mine, and belongs to every member of the human family, it is an invasion of something which was not obtained by human concession, something as old as our own being, a part of the original man, a component portion of our own identity, something which we cannot be deprived of without dismemberment, something which we never can deprive ourselves of without ceasing to be MEN.

“This right, so sacred and essential, is now sought to be trammelled, and is in fact virtually denied.... Men in denying this right are not only guilty of violating the Constitution, and destroying the blessings bought by the blood and toil of our fathers, but guilty of making war with God himself. I want to see this right placed on this true, this infinitely high ground, as a DIVINE right. I want to see men defend it and exercise it with that belief. I want to see men determined to maintain, to their extremest boundaries, all the rights which God has given them for their enjoyment, their dignity, and their usefulness.

* * * * *

“We are even now threatened with legislative restrictions on this right. Let us tell our legislators, in advance, that we cannot bear any. The man who attempts to interpose such restrictions does a grievous wrong to God and man, which we cannot bear. Submit to this, and we are no longer what God made us to be,--MEN. Laws to gag men’s mouths, to seal up their lips, to freeze up the warm gushings of the heart, are laws which the free spirit cannot brook; they are laws contrary alike to the nature of man and the commands of God; laws destructive of human happiness and the divine constitution; and before God and man they are null and void. They defeat the very purposes for which God made man, and throw him mindless, helpless, and worthless at the feet of the oppressor.

“And for what purpose are we called to throw down our pens, and seal up our lips, and sacrifice our influence over our fellow-men by the use of free discussion? If it were for an object of benevolence that we are called to renounce that freedom of speech with which God made us, there would be some color of fitness in the demand; but such a sacrifice the cause of truth and mercy never calls us to make. That cause requires the exertion, not the suppression, of our noblest powers. But here we are called on to degrade and unman ourselves, and to withhold from our fellow-men that influence which we ought to exercise for their good. And for what? I will tell you for what. That the oppressed may lie more passive at the feet of the oppressor; that one sixth of our American people may never know their rights; that two and a half millions of our countrymen, crushed in the cruel folds of slavery, may remain in all their misery and despair, without pity and without hope.

“For such a purpose, so wicked, so inexpressibly mean, the Southern slaveholder calls on us to lie down like whipped and trembling spaniels at his feet. Our reply is this: Our republican spirits cannot submit to such conditions. God did not make us, Jesus did not redeem us, for such vile and sinful uses.

“I knew before that slavery would not survive free discussion. But the demands recently put forth by the South for our surrender of the right of discussion, and the avowed reasons of that demand, involve a full concession of this fact, that free discussion is incompatible with slavery. The South, by her own showing, admits that slavery cannot live unless the North is tongue-tied. Now you, and I, and all these Abolitionists, have two objections to this: One is, we desire and purpose to employ all our influence lawfully and kindly and temperately to deliver our Southern brethren from bondage, and never to give rest to our lips or our pens till it is accomplished. The other objection is that we are not willing to be slaves ourselves. The enormous and insolent demands put forth by the South show us that the question is now, not only whether the blacks shall continue to be slaves, but whether our necks shall come under the yoke. While we are trying to break it off from others, we are called to see to it that it is not fastened on our own necks also.

“It is said: ‘The South will not molest our liberty if we will not molest their slavery; they do not wish to restrict us if we will cease to speak of their peculiar institution.’ Our liberty is not our _ex gratia_ privilege, conceded to us by the South, and which we are to have more or less, as they please to allow. No, sir! The liberty which the South proffers us, to speak and write and print, if we do not touch that subject, is a liberty we do not ask, a liberty which we do not accept, but which we scornfully reject.

“It is not to be disguised, sir, that war has broken out between the South and the North, not easily to be terminated. Political and commercial men, for their own purposes, are industriously striving to restore peace; but the peace which they may accomplish will be superficial and hollow. True and permanent peace can only be restored by removing the cause of the war,--that is, _slavery_. It can never be established on any other terms. The sword now drawn will not be sheathed until that deep and damning stain is washed out from our nation. It is idle, criminal, to speak of peace on any other terms.

* * * * *

“Whom shall we muster on our side in this great battle between liberty and slavery? The many never will muster in such a cause, until they first see unequivocal signs of its triumph. We don’t want the many, but the true-hearted, who are not skilled in the weapons of carnal warfare. We don’t want the politicians, who, to secure the votes of the South, care not if slavery is perpetual. We don’t want the merchant, who, to secure the custom of the South, is willing to applaud slavery, and leave his countrymen, and their children, and their children’s children to the tender mercies of slavery forever.

“We want only one class of men for this warfare. Be that class ever so small, we want only those who will stand on the rock of Christian principle. We want men who can defend the right of free discussion on the ground that God gave it. We want men who will act with unyielding honesty and firmness. We have room for all such, but no room for the time-serving and selfish.”

APPENDIX IV.

Notwithstanding the caution I have given my readers in the Preface and elsewhere, not to expect in this volume anything like a complete history of our antislavery conflict, many may be disappointed in not finding any acknowledgment of the services of some whom they have known as efficient, brave, self-sacrificing laborers in our cause. I was reproached, accused of ingratitude and injustice, because I did not give in my articles in _The Christian Register_ any account of the labors of certain persons, whose names stand high on the roll of antislavery philanthropists. The following is a copy of a part of one of the letters that I received:--

BOSTON, April, 1868.

DEAR SIR,--The writer of this is a subscriber to _The Christian
Register_, and has there read your “Reminiscences of the
Antislavery Reformers.” The numbers thus far (including the
thirty-eighth) contain no notice of, or allusion to, our late
lamented friend, Nathaniel P. Rogers, editor of _The Herald of
Freedom_. His numerous friends in New England have been waiting and
wondering that his name did not appear in your papers. Mr. Rogers
gave up a lucrative profession, in which he had attained a high
rank, and devoted himself _soul, body, and estate_, to the service
of the antislavery cause, in which he labored conscientiously
during the rest of his life, and left his family impoverished in
consequence. That Mr. Rogers was one of the few most talented
Abolitionists no one will deny who knew them; and that he was the
intimate friend and fellow-laborer of Mr. Garrison was equally
well known. He went to Europe with Mr. Garrison, and together
they visited the most distinguished Abolitionists in England and
Scotland; and, after his return, George Thompson, on his first
visit to this country, was received by him in his family, and
passed several days with him.

You have mentioned many names in your papers quite obscure, and of
very little account in this movement, and why you have thus far
omitted one of such prominence has puzzled many of your readers.

Notwithstanding, the writer will not allow himself to doubt that it
is your intention in the end to do to all equal and exact

JUSTICE.

I cordially indorse my unknown correspondent’s eulogium of Nathaniel P. Rogers. I remember hearing much of his faithfulness and fearlessness in the cause of our enslaved countrymen, and of liberty of speech and of the press. Between the years 1836 and 1846 he wrote much, and so well that his articles in the _Herald of Freedom_ were often republished in the _Antislavery Standard_ and _Liberator_. I generally read them with great satisfaction. They were racy, spicy, and unsparing of anything he deemed wrong. Mr. Rogers, I have no doubt, rendered very important services to the antislavery cause, especially in New Hampshire, and was held in the highest esteem by the Abolitionists of that State. But it was not my good fortune to know much of him personally. I seldom saw him, and never heard him speak in any of our meetings more than two or three times. The only reason why I have only named him is that I really have no personal recollections of him. A volume of his writings, prefaced by a sketch of his life and character from the pen of Rev. John Pierpont, was published in 1847 and republished in 1849. It will repay any one for an attentive perusal, and help not a little to a knowledge of the temper of the times,--the spirit of the State and the Church,--when N. P. Rogers labored, sacrificed, and suffered for impartial liberty, for personal, civil, and religious freedom. The fact that he was a lineal descendant of the never-to-be-forgotten Rev. John Rogers--the martyr of Smithfield--and also one of the Peabody race, will add to the interest with which his writings will be read.

APPENDIX V.

An intimation is given on page 272 that I have known some remarkable colored women. I wish my readers had seen, in her best days, _Sojourner Truth_. She was a tall, gaunt, very black person, who made her appearance in our meetings at an early period. Though then advanced in life, she was very vigorous in body and mind. She was a slave in New York State, from her birth in 1787 until the abolition of slavery in that State in 1827, and had never been taught to read. But she was deeply religious. She had a glowing faith in the power, wisdom, and goodness of God. She had had such a full experience of the wrongs of slavery, that she could not believe they were permitted by God. She was sure He must hate them, and would destroy those who persisted in perpetrating them. She often spoke in our meetings, never uttering many sentences, but always such as were pertinent, impressive, and sometimes thrilling.

APPENDIX VI.

On page 283 I have spoken of Harriet Tubman. She deserves to be placed first on the list of American heroines. Having escaped from slavery twenty-two years ago, she set about devising ways and means to help her kindred and acquaintances out of bondage. She first succeeded in leading off her brother, with his wife and several children. Then she helped her aged parents from slavery in Virginia to a free and comfortable home in Auburn, N. Y. Thus encouraged she continued for several years her semi-annual raids into the Southern plantations. Twelve or fifteen times she went. Most adroitly did she evade the patrols and the pursuers. Very large sums of money were offered for her capture, but in vain. She succeeded in assisting nearly two hundred persons to escape from slavery.

When the war broke out she felt, as she said, that “the good Lord has come down to deliver my people, and I must go and help him.” She went into Georgia and Florida, attached herself to the army, performed an incredible amount of labor as a cook, a laundress, and a nurse, still more as the leader of soldiers in scouting parties and raids. She seemed to know no fear and scarcely ever fatigue. They called her their _Moses_. And several of the officers testified that her services were of so great value, that she was entitled to a pension from the Government. The life of this remarkable woman has been written by a lady,--Mrs. Bradford,--and published in Auburn, N. Y. I hope many of my readers will procure copies of it, that they may know more about Harriet Tubman.

APPENDIX VII.

The saddest, most astounding evidence of the demoralization of our Northern citizens in respect to slavery, and of Mr. Webster’s depraving influence upon them, is given in the following letter addressed to him soon after the delivery of his speech on the 7th of March,--signed by eight hundred of the prominent citizens of Massachusetts. I have given the names of a few as specimens of the whole.

From the Boston Daily Advertiser of April 2, 1850.

TO THE HON. DANIEL WEBSTER:

SIR,--Impressed with the magnitude and importance of the service
to the Constitution and the Union which you have rendered by your
recent speech in the Senate of the United States on the subject of
slavery, we desire to express to you our deep obligation for what
this speech has done and is doing to enlighten the public mind, and
to bring the present crisis in our national affairs to a fortunate
and peaceful termination. As citizens of the United States, we wish
to thank you for recalling us to our duties under the Constitution,
and for the broad, national, and patriotic views which you have
sent with the weight of your great authority, and with the power of
your unanswerable reasoning into every corner of the Union.

It is, permit us to say, sir, no common good which you have thus
done for the country. In a time of almost unprecedented excitement,
when the minds of men have been bewildered by an apparent conflict
of duties, and when multitudes have been unable to find solid
ground on which to rest with security and peace, you have pointed
out to a whole people the path of duty, have convinced the
understanding and touched the conscience of a nation. You have met
this great exigency as a patriot and a statesman, and although the
debt of gratitude which the people of this country owe to you was
large before, you have increased it by a peculiar service, which is
felt throughout the land.

We desire, therefore, to express to you our entire concurrence
in the sentiments of your speech, and our heartfelt thanks for
the inestimable aid it has afforded towards the preservation and
perpetuation of the Union. For this purpose, we respectfully
present to you this, our Address of thanks and congratulation, in
reference to this most interesting and important occasion in your
public life.

We have the honor to be, with the highest respect,

Your obedient servants,

T. H. PERKINS,
CHARLES C. PARSONS,
THOMAS B. WALES,
CALEB LORING,
WM. APPLETON,
JAMES SAVAGE,
CHARLES P. CURTIS,
CHARLES JACKSON,
GEORGE TICKNOR,
BENJ. R. CURTIS,
RUFUS CHOATE,
JOSIAH BRADLEE,
EDWARD G. LORING,
THOMAS B. CURTIS,
FRANCIS J. OLIVER,
J. A. LOWELL,
J. W. PAGE,
THOMAS C. AMORY,
BENJ. LORING,
GILES LODGE,
WM. P. MASON,
WM. STURGIS,
W. H. PRESCOTT,
SAMUEL T. ARMSTRONG,
SAMUEL A. ELIOT,
JAMES JACKSON,
MOSES STUART,[S]
LEONARD WOODS,[S]
RALPH EMERSON,[S]
JARED SPARKS,[T]
C. C. FELTON,[U]

And over seven hundred others.

THE END.

Cambridge: Electrotyped and Printed by Welch, Bigelow, & Co.

FOOTNOTES

[A] This chapter was written in June, 1867, and I give it here as it first came from my pen.

[B] Rev. Mr. Pierpont, who afterwards did good service, was absent in Europe during 1835.

[C] See Appendix.

[D] See Appendix.

[E] See “Right and Wrong in Boston,” by Mrs. M. W. Chapman.

[F] I have been told, and I record it here to his honor, that Hon. Joshua A. Spencer made an earnest, excellent speech, in behalf of free discussion.

[G] See Appendix.

[H] Of Leicester, England, who first demanded “immediate emancipation.”

[I] See Appendix.

[J] On that occasion, or another, I am not sure which, Mr. Adams announced another very pregnant opinion which he was ready to maintain; namely, that slaveholders had no right to bring or send their slaves into a free State, and keep them in slavery there; but that whenever slaves were brought into any State where all the people were free, they became partakers of that freedom, were slaves no longer.

[K] Elizabeth Heyrick, of Leicester, England.

[L] I am most happy to preserve and make known the fact that Dr. Henry Ware, Jr., then at the head of the Divinity School, and Professor Sidney Willard, of the college in Cambridge, were also members of that Convention.

[M] Would that justice would allow shame to wipe forever from the memory of man the disgraceful fact that, on the 27th of July, 1840, the Rev. John Pierpont was arraigned before an Ecclesiastical Council in Boston, by a committee of the parish of Hollis Street, as guilty of offences for which his connection with that parish ought to be dissolved,--and was dissolved. His offences were “his too busy interference with questions of legislation on the subject of prohibiting the sale of ardent spirits, his too busy interference with questions of legislation on the subject of imprisonment for debt, _and his too busy interference with the popular controversy on the subject of the abolition of slavery_.”

[N] The one of which Rev. Baron Stow, D. D., was pastor.

[O] See Appendix.

[P] I advertised my request in “Notes and Queries” for August, 1859.

[Q] See “The American Churches the Bulwarks of American Slavery,” by J. G. Birney, “Slavery and Antislavery,” by W. Goodell, and “The Church and Slavery,” by Rev. Albert Barnes.

[R] See Appendix.

[S] Of the Theological Institution at Andover.

[T] President of Harvard University.

[U] Professor of Greek in Harvard University.

Transcriber’s Notes

Punctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made consistent when a predominant preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed.

Simple typographical errors were corrected; occasional unbalanced quotation marks retained.

Ambiguous hyphens at the ends of lines were retained.

The entries in the Table of Contents for pages 389 and 391 do not have corresponding sub-headings on the referenced pages, and the sub-heading on page 85 is not mentioned in the Table of Contents.

Page 28: “de-gradation” was printed with the hyphen; in context, this appears to be intentional.

Page 40: “through the school” was printed as “though the school”; changed here.

Page 111: Extraneous opening quotation mark removed before “Here, too, the”.

Page 191: Unmatched closing quotation mark retained after “national honor and prosperity.”

Page 237: Unmatched opening quotation mark removed before “Pastoral Association of Massachusetts”.

Page 354: The second line of poetry, beginning “And in my soul’s just estimation”, was printed as one very long line. In other books, those lines are in several different ways.