Havana for New York. His fears, not his conscience, were alarmed, for he still carries on his diabolical traffic between Africa and Cuba, and is reported to have gained by it, last year, one hundred thousand dollars. He lives in great splendor, and has the character of a liberal and generous man, but with the most implacable hatred to the blacks. “One murder makes a villain, thousands a hero.” How wide the distinction between this man and the wretches who paid the forfeit of their lives for a solitary murder![A]
[Footnote A: Sir F. Buxton has shown that two lives at least are sacrificed for every slave carried off from Africa.]
On the evening of the 17th, in company with several of my abolition friends, I started for Albany, where the State legislature was then in session. The distance from New York is about a hundred and fifty-five miles, and is frequently performed by the steamers, on the noble river Hudson, in nine hours and a half up the stream, and in eight hours down. On these steamers there is accommodation for several hundred passengers to lodge, and the fare is only one dollar, with an extra charge for beds and meals. For an additional dollar, two persons may secure a state room to themselves.
As night drew on, and the deck began to be cleared, I observed a well-dressed black man and woman sitting apart, and supposing they could obtain no berths on account of their color, I went and spoke to them. I told them I and several others on board were abolitionists. The man then informed us they were escaping from slavery, and had left their homes little more than two days before. They appeared very intelligent, though they could neither read nor write, and described to us how they had effected their escape. They had obtained leave to go to a wedding, from which they were not expected to return till the evening of the day following. Having procured forged certificates of freedom, for which they paid twenty-five dollars, each, they came forward with expedition by railway and steam boat. They had heard of emancipation in the British West Indies, and the efforts of the abolitionists in the States, but they were unacquainted with the existence of vigilance committees, to facilitate the escape of runaway slaves. We assisted them to proceed to the house of a relative of one of our party, out of the track of the pursuer, should they be followed. There is little doubt that they have safely reached Canada, for I was told at Albany, public opinion had become so strong in favor of self-emancipation, that if a runaway were seized in the city, it is probable he would be rescued by the people.
I would also point attention to the fact, which is brought to light by this relation, that the slave-holders have not only to contend with the honest and open-handed means which the abolitionists most righteously employ,[A] to facilitate the escape of slaves, but with the mercenary acts of members of their own community, who live by the manufacture and sale of forged free papers.
[Footnote A: See Deut. xxiii, 15, 16.]
During my stay in Albany, I waited upon William H. Seward, the Governor, and on Luther Bradish, the Lieutenant Governor of the State of New York. It will, I trust, be considered no breach of confidence, if I state that I found their sentiments on the true principles of liberty, worthy of the enlightened legislators and first magistrates of a free republic. They concur in the general sentiment that public opinion in this metropolitan State is making rapid progress in favor of full and impartial justice to the people of color, a movement to which their own example in the high stations which they adorn has given a powerful impulse.
I attended part of the sittings of the Senate and Assembly, and conversed with a number of members of both houses. The public business was transacted with at least as much order and decorum as in the Lords and Commons of Great Britain. I left Albany the same evening, and had the satisfaction of hearing, a few days afterwards, that the repeal of “the nine months law” had passed both houses, and was ratified by the Governor; and that in the Assembly upwards of fifty members had voted for it, although it was thought not ten would have done so two years since. By this change of the law any slave brought by his master within the limits of the State, even with his own consent, is not obliged to return to slavery.
I proceeded by way of New York to Hartford in Connecticut, in order to be present at an anti-slavery meeting of the State Society, to which I had been invited. On my arrival, on the afternoon of the 19th, I found the meeting assembled, and in the chair my friend J.T. Norton, a member of the Connecticut legislature, a munificent and uncompromising friend to the anti-slavery cause, and one of the delegates to the London Convention. A black minister of religion addressed the meeting in an able and interesting manner. Soon after the close of his speech, a circumstance, quite unexpected to me, introduced a discussion on the right of women to vote and publicly act, conjointly with men. The chairman decided that the motion in favor of it was negatived, but the minority required the names on both sides to be taken down; this consumed much time, and disturbed the harmony of the meeting. I attended in the evening a committee of the legislature, which was sitting at the court house, to hear the speeches of persons who were allowed to address the committee in support of a petition that the word “white” should be expunged from the constitution of Connecticut. This change would of course give equal rights to the colored class. When I entered, the same colored minister I had heard in the afternoon, was addressing the committee. He was listened to with great attention, not only by the members, but by near two hundred of the inhabitants, who were present. He was followed on the same side, by a white gentleman in a very strong and uncompromising speech. The next day I paid my respects to William W. Ellsworth, the Governor of the State, and to one of the judges of the court; and afterwards attended the adjourned meeting of the Anti-Slavery Society. The vexed question of “women’s rights” was again brought forward in another shape; the names on both sides again called for, with the same result as before. My belief was fully confirmed, that those who differ so widely in sentiment, have no alternative but to meet and act in distinct organizations.
The Amistad captives arrived at Hartford on the afternoon of the same day, and were to address a meeting in the evening. An anti-slavery bazaar or fair which I visited this day, furnished ample testimony of the zeal of the female friends of the oppressed slave in this district. I returned the same evening to New Haven, and subsequently received a copy of two resolutions, approving the proceedings of the general Anti-Slavery Convention, in which it is stated by the Connecticut anti-slavery committee, “they have abundant evidence that the cause of the slave has been essentially promoted thereby;” also recommending “that a convention of men from all parts of the world, friendly to the cause of immediate emancipation, be again called in London, in the summer of 1842.”
On the 21st, I proceeded to the residence of Judge Jay, where I was very kindly received by his wife and family, the Judge himself being from home. On his return the next day, I had much interesting conversation with him on the prospects of our cause. He is convinced that it is making steady progress, notwithstanding the schism in the anti-slavery ranks. He said also, that of the runaway slaves who called at his house, some have told him that their condition had improved of late years; others saw no change in their treatment; not one has complained that they suffered more than formerly, in consequence of the discussions at the North about abolition. With regard to the free blacks, he fears that the persecution of them by the slave-holders has increased; though at the North the prejudice against them has unquestionably, in his opinion, been much mitigated by the efforts of the abolitionists. It is an interesting fact, and one that ought to encourage the humble and retired laborer in the cause of truth and righteousness, that this able and distinguished advocate of the claims of the oppressed slaves and people of color, was converted to his present views by Elizabeth Heyrick’s pamphlet, “Immediate, not Gradual, Abolition of West India Slavery.” Let me for a moment pause to render a tribute of justice to the memory of that devoted woman. Few will deny that the long and heart-sickening interval that occurred between the abolition of the slave-trade of Great Britain, and the emancipation of her slaves, was owing to the false, but universal notion, that the slaves must be gradually prepared for freedom: a notion that we now confess is as contrary to reason and Christian principle as it is opposed to the past experience of our colonies. Yet a generation passed away while the abolitionists of Great Britain were trying to make ropes of sand–to give practical effect to an impracticable theory; pursuing a delusion, which this honored woman was the first to detect; and that less by force and subtlety of argument, than by the statement of self-evident truths, and by the enforcement of the simple and grand principle that Christianity admits of no compromise with sin. This was an easy lesson, yet it was one which our senators and statesmen, our distinguished philanthropists, and our whole anti-slavery host were slow to learn. The pamphlet produced little immediate effect, but to cause its writer to be regarded as an amiable enthusiast and visionary. It now remains a monument of the indestructible nature, and the irresistible power of truth, even when wielded by feeble and despised hands.
Judge Jay read to me part of a very interesting and important manuscript, which he had prepared on the preservation of international peace. He suggests that any two nations, entering into an alliance, should embody in their treaty a clause mutually binding them to refer any dispute or difficulty that may arise, to the arbitration of one or more friendly powers. As he has concluded to publish his pamphlet, I trust it will shortly be in the hands of the friends of peace in this country, as well as in America. This idea is beautifully simple, and of easy application. Through the kindness of the author, I have been furnished with a long and important extract from his manuscript, which I am permitted to lay before the British public by anticipation, in the Appendix to the present work.[A] On returning from his hospitable mansion, he obligingly sent his carriage with me to Sing Sing, but the steamboat had started earlier than we expected, and I hired a carriage and a pair of horses, with the driver, who was also the proprietor, to convey me the remainder of the way to New York. The distance for which I engaged it, was thirty-six miles, for the moderate sum of five dollars. On the road, the man pointed out the place where Major Andre was taken, whose tragical end excites sympathy even to this day, in the breast of the Americans. On entering the city, we passed a man in livery, and my driver remarked, “There, that is English; I would not wear _that_ for a hundred dollars a day.” Long may the American, who lives by his daily labor, preserve this feeling of honorable independence.
[Footnote A: See Appendix F.]
During my stay at New York this time, I was the guest of my friend William Shotwell, Jr., at whose hospitable dwelling, I afterwards took up my abode, whenever I lodged in the city. From the 24th to the 28th, I was chiefly occupied in attending the sittings of the Friends’ Yearly Meeting of this State; and, during the intervals, in seeing many Friends in private company. I was much encouraged to find among them, a considerable number thoroughly imbued with anti-slavery sentiments; especially, from the western parts of the State. The subject of slavery was introduced, in the Yearly Meeting, by reading the Epistle from the Society in England, which is elsewhere quoted.[A] This was followed on the part of many, by expressions of deep feeling; and the question was referred to a committee, for practical consideration. In consequence of the report of this committee, at a subsequent sitting, five hundred copies of the English address were directed to be printed, and circulated among Friends, within the compass of the Yearly Meeting; and the whole subject was referred to its “meeting for sufferings,” with an earnest recommendation, that they should embrace every right opening for furthering the great object. The clerk of the Yearly Meeting expressed his firm conviction, that the work was on the wheel, and that nothing would be permitted to stop its progress, until, either in mercy or in judgment, the bonds of every slave should be broken. He spoke in a very powerful manner. In most of the epistles sent out from this Yearly Meeting, as well as from that of Philadelphia, the subject of slavery was introduced, and commended to the earnest consideration of the body, here and elsewhere. Previous to the assembling of the Yearly Meeting, I had placed in the hands of one of its members, the following letter:
[Footnote A: See Appendix A.]
My Dear Friend,–Wilt thou have the kindness to ask the Friends with whom it rests to grant such a request, to permit the use of the meeting house at a convenient time, either during the Yearly Meeting, or before those who attend from the country leave the city, for the purpose of affording my friend John Candler an opportunity of giving Friends some outline of emancipation in Jamaica. I should like at the same time to give a little information on the state of the anti-slavery question in other parts of the world. John Candler, it is I believe generally known, visited Jamaica with the full sanction of the “meeting for sufferings,” in London. My visit to this country had no particular reference to the members of our Society, but my friends in England kindly furnished me with the enclosed documents.
Affectionately,
JOSEPH STURGE.
_New York, 5th Month 17th_, 1841.
This request was kindly complied with. The large meeting house was granted for the evening of the 27th. The clerks of the men’s and women’s meetings gave public notice of it in their respective assemblies. The former, the venerable and worthy Richard Mott, encouraged Friends to be present, and said, as a thinking and reasoning people, they need fear no harm from a calm consideration of the subject. The attendance was large, including, I believe, most of those Friends who were from the country. The following brief notice of it in the American and Foreign Anti-Slavery Reporter, will explain the character of the meeting.
“On Thursday evening of last week, the members of the Society of Friends (Orthodox,) assembled in this city at their Annual Meeting, met at their meeting house in Orchard street, to listen to the statements of John Candler, of England, lately returned from a visit to the West India Islands, as to the results of emancipation in those Islands, and also of our esteemed friend, Joseph Sturge, in reference to the general subject of emancipation throughout the world.
“The meeting was largely attended. The successful and happy results of the immediate emancipation of the slaves of the colonies, as detailed by John Candler, were calculated to strengthen the conviction that to do justice is always expedient. Joseph Sturge gave a history of the progress of the anti-slavery cause in Great Britain from the time of the old abolition society, of which Thomas Clarkson was a member, and of which he is sole survivor. He also glanced at the state of the cause in other quarters of the globe–at the efforts for East India emancipation, and at late movements in France, Brazil and Spain, in favor of emancipation; concluding with a most affecting appeal to the members of his religious society to omit no right opportunity for pleading for the slave, and for hastening the day of his deliverance.
“We take pleasure in recording such evidences that the good old testimony of the Society of Friends, on this subject, is still maintained among them. The Friends of the past generation set a noble example to other Christian sects, by emancipating their slaves, from a sense of religious duty; and it seems to us, that those of the present day have great responsibilities resting upon them; and that it especially becomes them to see to it that their light is not hidden in this hour of darkness and prejudice, on the subject of human rights. The slaveholder and his victim both look to them;–the one with deprecating gesture, and words of flattery–the other in beseeching and half reproachful earnestness. We cannot doubt that the agonizing appeal of the latter is listened to by all who truly feel the weight of their religious testimonies resting upon them; and we trust there will be found among them, an increasing zeal to secure to these unhappy victims of avarice and the lust of power, that liberty which George Fox, two centuries in advance of his contemporaries, declared to be ‘the right of all men.'”
When the assembly broke up, the clerk of the Yearly Meeting, who sat by us, expressed to me his entire satisfaction with the proceedings, as did others present. One influential member of the Society, however, who met me the next day in the street, stated very decidedly his disapprobation of the tenor of certain parts of my address; but I found that he condemned me on hearsay evidence, not having attended the meeting himself. On the 29th, I was favored with a call from Lieutenant Governor Cunningham, of St. Kitts, on his way to England, who gave a very favorable account of the continued good conduct of the emancipated slaves in that Island. It is surely an eminent token of the divine blessing on a national act of justice and mercy, that evidence of this kind should have been so abundantly and uniformly supplied from every colony where slavery has been abolished. A fine black man was brought to me about this time, who showed me papers by which it appeared he had lately given one thousand five hundred dollars for his freedom. He had since been driven from the State in which he lived, by the operation of a law, enacted to prevent the continued residence of free people of color, and has thus been banished from a wife and family, who are still slaves. He has agreed with their owner, that if he can pay two thousand five hundred dollars, in six years, his wife and six children shall be free, and he was then trying to get employment in New York, in the hope of being able to raise this large sum within the specified time.
On the 29th, I proceeded to Burlington; while I was there five or six Friends drew up and presented me with a resolution, expressive of their readiness and desire to join with other members of their religious society in active efforts for the abolition of slavery.
On the 30th, I paid a second visit to my venerable friend John Cox. The next morning his grandson kindly accompanied me to Mount Holly, to see the humble dwelling of the late John Woolman. I afterwards received from John Cox a letter, from which I quote the following extract relating to this remarkable man, whose character confers interest even on the most trivial incidents of his life which can now be remembered:
“Since our separation on the morning of the 31st ultimo, when my grandson accompanied thee to Mount Holly, I have been there, it having been previously reported that the ancient, humble dome, which passed under thy inspection as the residence of John Woolman, he never inhabited, though that he built the house (as Solomon built the temple,) is admitted. With a view to remove this erroneous impression, I sought and obtained an interview with the only man now living in the town, who was contemporary with John Woolman, (now eighty years of age,) and in habits of occasional intercourse with him. He informed me that John Woolman’s daughter (an only child,) and her husband resided in the house when her father embarked for London, which was in the year 1772, as recorded in his journal. The fact of residence is corroborated by the circumstance of the search for and destruction of caterpillars in the apple orchard, which I think, was related to thee.
“The sage historian of by-gone days, whom I met at Mount Holly, spake of his being at John Woolman’s little farm, in the season of harvest, when it was customary, and so remains to the present time, for farmers to slay a young calf or a lamb; the common mode is by bleeding in the jugular vein; but with a view to mitigate the sufferings of the animal in that mode, he had prepared, and kept by him for that express purpose, a large block of wood with a smooth surface, and after confining the limbs of the animal, it was laid gently thereon, and the head severed from the body at one stroke.”
While in this neighborhood, I made a call on Nathan Dunn, the proprietor of the “Chinese collection.” He resided many years at Canton, and since his return has built himself a mansion in the Chinese style. His museum of Chinese curiosities is by far the most extensive and valuable which has ever been seen out of that country, and forms one of the most attractive and instructive exhibitions in Philadelphia; one whose character and arrangement are quite _unique_, and which has some pretensions to the title of “China in miniature.” It occupies the whole of the lower saloon of that splendid building recently erected at the corner of Ninth and George streets, by the Philadelphia Museum Company. The visitor’s notice is first attracted by a series of groups of figures, representing Chinese of nearly every grade in society, engaged in the actual business of life. The figures, in their appropriate costume, are modeled in a peculiarly fine clay, by Chinese artists, with exquisite skill and effect. All are accurate likenesses of originals, most of whom are now living. The following enumeration of one of the cases, expanded in the subsequent description, which I quote from the catalogue, will give an idea of the manner in which Chinese life and manners are illustrated:
“CASE VIII.–_No_. 21. _Chinese Gentleman_.–22. _Beggar asking alms_.–23. _Servant preparing breakfast_.–24. _Purchaser_.–25. _Purchaser examining a piece of black silk. The proprietor behind the counter making calculations on his counting board_.–_Clerk entering goods_.–_Circular table, with breakfast furniture_.
“This has been arranged so as to afford an exact idea of a Chinese retail establishment. Two purchasers have been placed by the counter: one of whom is scrutinizing a piece of black silk that lies before him. The owner, behind the counter, is carelessly bending forward, and intent on casting an account on the ‘calculating dish,’ while his clerk is busy making entries in the book, in doing which he shows us the Chinese mode of holding a pen, or rather brush, which is perpendicularly between the thumb and all the fingers. A servant is preparing breakfast. A circular eight-legged table, very similar to those used by our great grandfathers, is spread in the centre of the shop. Among its furniture, the ivory chopsticks are the most novel. On the visitor’s right hand sits a gentleman, with a pipe, apparently a chance comer, ‘just dropped in’ about meal time; on the left, a blind beggar stands, beating two bamboo sticks against each other, an operation with which he continues to annoy all whom he visits, till he is relieved by some trifling gratuity, usually a single _cash_. A gilt image of Fo is inserted in the front part of the counter, and a small covered tub, filled with tea, with a few cups near by, standing on the counter, from which customers are always invited to help themselves.
“The merchants and shop-keepers of Canton are prompt, active, obliging, and able. They can do an immense business in a short time, and without noise, bustle, or disorder. Their goods are arranged in the most perfect manner, and nothing is ever out of its place. These traits assimilate them to the more enterprising of the Western nations, and place them in prominent contrast with the rest of the Asiatics. It is confidently asserted by those who have had the best opportunities of judging, that as business men, they are in advance of Spanish, Italian, and Portuguese merchants.
“There is a variety of amusing inscriptions on the scrolls hung up in the interior of some of the shops, which serve at the same time to mark the thrifty habits of the traders. A few specimens are subjoined:–‘Gossipping and long sitting injure business.’ ‘Former customers have inspired caution–no credit given.’ ‘A small stream always flowing.’ ‘Genuine goods; prices true.’ ‘Trade circling like a wheel,’ et cet.”
In addition to the above models, the collection includes an almost innumerable variety of specimens of the fine arts and manufactures, comprising almost every article of use and luxury–furniture, modern and antique porcelain, models houses, pagodas, boats, junks, and bridges; pieces of silk, linen, cotton, grass-cloth, and other fabrics manufactured in China for home consumption; books and drawings, costume, idols, and appendages of worship; weapons, musical instruments, signs, mottoes, and entablatures, and numerous paintings, which last, it is justly observed, “will satisfy every candid mind that great injustice has been done to the Chinese artists, in the notion hitherto entertained respecting their want of skill. They paint insects, birds, fishes, fruits, flowers, with great correctness and beauty; and the brilliancy and variety of their colors cannot be surpassed. They group with considerable taste and effect, and their perspective–a department of the art in which they have been thought totally deficient–is often very good.”
Many of the paintings represent actual scenes and occurrences; and thus, like the models before mentioned, bring living China before the mind’s eye. The following is a good example.
“910. _View of the interior of the Consoo House, with the court in session, for the final decision of the charge of piracy committed by the crew of a Chinese junk on a French captain and sailors, at a short distance from Macao_.
“The French ship, Navigatre, put in to Cochin China in distress. Having disposed of her to the government, the captain, with his crew, took passage for Macao in a Chinese junk belonging to the province of Fokien. Part of their valuables consisted of about 100,000 dollars in specie. Four Chinese passengers bound for Macao, and one for Fokien, were also on board. This last apprised the Frenchmen in the best manner he could, that the crew of the junk had entered into a conspiracy to take their lives and seize their treasure. He urged that an armed watch should be kept. On reaching the Ladrone Islands, the poor Macao passengers left the junk. Here the Frenchmen believed themselves out of danger, and exhausted by sickness and long watching, yielded to a fatal repose. They were all massacred but one, a youth of about nineteen years of age, who escaped by leaping into the sea, after receiving several wounds. A fishing boat picked him up and landed him at Macao, where information was given to the officers of government, and the crew of the junk, with their ill-gotten gains, were seized, on their arrival at the port of destination in Fokien.
“Having been found guilty by the court, in their own district, they were sent down to Canton, by order of the Emperor, to the Unchat-see, (criminal judge) to be confronted with the young French sailor. This trial is represented in the painting. The prisoners were taken out of their cages, as is seen in the foreground. The Frenchman recognized seventeen out of the twenty-four; but when the passenger, who had been his friend, was brought in, the two eagerly embraced each other, which scene is also portrayed in the painting. An explanation of this extraordinary act was made to the judge, and the man forthwith set at liberty. A purse was made up for him by the Chinese and foreigners, and he was soon on his way homeward. The seventeen _were_ decapitated, in a few days, in the presence of the foreigners; the captain, was to be put to a ‘lingering death,’ the punishment of traitors, and the stolen treasures were restored.”
I do not quote the above for the sake of the anecdote, though the relation is authentic, but as, affording a striking illustration of the advanced civilization of the Chinese. It shows that the supremacy of the law is universal, and its administration efficient. The criminals, in this instance, are promptly seized, tried, and condemned on strong evidence; but, before they are executed, reference is made to the distant metropolis, Pekin. Here it is observed, that the most important witness was not ‘confronted with the prisoners,’ and they are forthwith directed to be conveyed to Canton, to be examined in his presence. Seventeen are recognized by him and are executed. The rest escape. Now this is just what might have taken place under the best ordered governments of Europe. The humane maxims of British jurisprudence, if not acknowledged in theory, may be here witnessed in practical operation, and the single circumstance of referring capital convictions to the Emperor, in his distant metropolis, for confirmation, before they are carried into effect, shows a respect for human life, even in the persons of criminals, which is one of the surest tokens of a high state of civilization. Such is the criminal jurisprudence of China, in practice; in theory, its just praise has been awarded, some years ago, by an able writer in the Edinburgh Review. He says:–
“The most remarkable thing in this code, is its great reasonableness, clearness, and consistency; the businesslike brevity and directness of the various provisions, and the plainness and moderation of the language in which they are expressed. It is a clear, concise, and distinct series of enactments, savoring throughout of practical judgment and European good sense. When we turn from the ravings of the Zendavesta, or the Puranas, to the tone of sense and of business of this Chinese collection, we seem to be passing from darkness to light–from the drivellings of dotage to the exercise of an improved understanding; and, redundant and minute as these laws are in many particulars, we scarcely know any European code that is at once so copious and so consistent, or that is nearly so free from intricacy, bigotry and fiction.”
In addition to what have been noticed, the Chinese exhibition includes a copious and very interesting collection of specimens of the natural history of China.
I trust the extended notice I have given to the subject, will at least prove that this is not an ordinary exhibition, but a representation of a distant country and remarkable people, in which amusement is most skilfully and philosophically made subservient to practical instruction. A beneficent Creator has implanted within us a thirst for information about other scenes and people. To be totally devoid of this feeling would argue, perhaps, not merely intellectual but moral deficiency. Such being the case, the founder of the “Chinese collection” deserves to be regarded as a public benefactor, for, by spending a few hours in his museum, with the aid of the descriptive catalogue, one may learn more of the Chinese than by the laborious perusal of all the works upon them that have ever been written.[A]
[Footnote A: While the above was passing through the press, I have learned that this interesting Collection has arrived for exhibition in this country.]
I cannot dismiss this subject without expressing my deep regret that the British public should appear to view with indifference, or complacency, the cruel and unjust war which our Government is now waging against this highly cultivated and unoffending people, at the instigation of a handful of men, who have acquired wealth and importance in the vigorous pursuit of an immoral and unlawful traffic, by means the most criminal and detestable. I have attempted, since my return from the United States, to give some expression to my sentiments, in a letter which has been widely circulated, and which will be found reprinted in the Appendix.[A] I trust none under whose notice this subject may come will endeavor to evade their share of responsibility. If the present war with China were the sole consideration, perhaps no course would be left to the Christian citizen, but to record his protest and mourn in silence; but the conclusion of the war _per se_ would not terminate the difficulty, for trade and mutual intercourse between the two countries, _on the basis of a reciprocation of interests_, can never be restored till the EAST INDIA COMPANY’S OPIUM TRADE, a traffic, like the slave trade, hateful in the sight of God and man, is suppressed; or at least, until British connection with it is severed; If asked who are the guilty persons, I would say, in the first instance, the East India Company; secondly, the opium smugglers; thirdly, the British government, and lastly, the British people, who, by silent acquiescence, make the whole guilt, and the whole responsibility their own.
[Footnote A: See Appendix G.]
The author of the most popular modern work on China, who long superintended the interests of the British merchants at Canton, and whose work, to a considerable extent, reflects their views, after stating the increasing discouragements imposed by the authorities on foreign commerce, the effect for the most part of opium smuggling, and other lawless proceedings, observes:–“These (discouragements) are their (the British merchants) real subjects of complaint in China; and whenever the accumulation of wrong shall have proved, by exact calculation, that it is more profitable, according to merely commercial principles, to remonstrate than submit, these will form a righteous and equitable ground of quarrel!!”[A]
[Footnote A: Davis’s China and the Chinese, (Murray’s Family Library,) vol. i. p. 195.]
The remonstrance here alluded to is WAR, as is apparent from the context of the passage, as well as from the fact, that by the author’s own showing no other kind of remonstrance remained to be tried. The true “casus belli” is set forth by anticipation in this passage without disguise, and by one who knew well, and has clearly described the causes that were operating to produce a rupture. The opium merchants have discovered that now, in the fulness of time, it is _profitable_ to go to war with China, and forthwith the vast power of Great Britain, obedient to their influence, is put in motion to sustain their unrighteous quarrel, to the unspeakable degradation of the character of this professedly Christian nation. The morality of the war on our side, is the morality of the highwayman; that morality by which the strong in all ages have preyed upon the weak. And though a handful of unprincipled men find their account in it, before the people of Great Britain have paid the expenses of the war, and the losses from derangement and interruption of commerce, it will cost millions more than all the profit that has ever accrued to them from the opium trade. From what motive then, do we uphold a traffic, which is the curse of China, the curse of India, and a calamity to Great Britain? Such a war may be fruitful in trophies of military glory, if such can be gained by the slaughter of the most pacific people in the world; but to expect that it will promote the reputation, the prosperity, or the happiness of this country, would be to look for national wickedness to draw down the Divine blessing. The descriptive catalogue of the “Ten thousand Chinese things,” concludes with sentiments on this subject which do equal honor to the head and heart of the writer.
“Alas for missionary efforts, so long as the grasping avarice of the countries, whence the missionaries go, sets at nought every Christian obligation before the very eyes of the people whom it is sought to convert! Most devoutly do we long for the auspicious day, when the pure religion, that distilled from the heart, and was embodied in the life of Jesus, shall shed its sacred influence on every human being; but, in our inmost soul we believe it will not come, till the principles of religion shall take a firmer hold on the affections of those who profess to receive it, and rear a righteous embankment around their sordid and stormy passions. When the missionary shall find an auxiliary in the stainless life of every compatriot who visits the scene of his labors, for purposes of pleasure or of gain,–when he can point not only to the pure maxims and sublime doctrines proclaimed by the Founder of his faith, but to the clustering graces that adorn its professors,–then indeed will the day dawn, and the day star of the millennium arise upon the world.”
During my short stay in Philadelphia on this occasion, I visited several of its prisons, philanthropic institutions, et cet. These are pre-eminently the glory of this beautiful city; yet as they have been often described, I shall pass them by in silence, with the exception of two, the Refuge, and the Penitentiary; which I briefly notice because I may offer a few general remarks in another place, on the important subject of prison discipline. The Refuge is an asylum for juvenile delinquents, founded on the just and benevolent principle that offences against society, committed by very young persons, should be disciplined by training and education, rather than by punishment. In this establishment there are from eighty to ninety boys, and from forty to fifty girls, of ages varying from eight to twenty-one years. The former are employed in various light handicraft trades, and the latter in domestic services, and both spend a portion of their time in school. They remain from six months to four years. From the statements of the superintendent and matron, it appeared that about three-fourths of the male, and four-fifths of the female inmates become respectable members of society, and the remainder are chiefly such as are fifteen or sixteen years of age when first admitted into the Refuge, an age at which character may be considered as in a great measure formed. The labor of the children pays about one-fifth of the expense of the establishment, the rest being defrayed by the legislature.
The prejudice of color intrudes even here, no children of that class being admitted into the Refuge. Colored delinquency is left to ripen into crime, with little interference from public or private philanthropy. As might have been expected, colored are more numerous than white criminals, in proportion to relative population; and this is appealed to as a proof of their naturally vicious and inferior character; when in fact the government and society at large are chargeable with their degradation.
The Penitentiary contained, at the time of my visit, about three hundred and forty male, and thirty-five female prisoners. In this celebrated prison, hard labor is combined with solitary confinement, an arrangement which is technically known as the “separate system.” Silence and seclusion are so strictly enforced as to be almost absolute and uninterrupted; even the minister who addresses the prisoners on the Sabbath is known to them only by his voice. A marked feature of this institution is security without the aid of any deadly weapon, none being allowed in the possession of the attendants, or indeed upon the premises. As compared with the “silent system,” exhibited in the not less famed prisons of the State of New York, this is much less economical, as the mode of employing the prisoners, in their solitary cells, greatly lessens the power of a profitable application of their labor. If prisoners exceed their allotted task, one-half of their surplus earnings is given to them on being set at liberty. My visit was too cursory to enable me to give a decisive opinion on the “separate system,” but I confess my impression is, that the punishment is one of tremendous and indiscriminating severity, and I find it difficult to believe that either the safety of society, or the welfare of the prisoner, can require the infliction of so much suffering. Criminals are sometimes condemned for very long periods, or for life; and in these cases, I was informed, occasionally manifested great recklessness and carelessness of their existence. I am also not quite convinced that the reformation of prisoners is effected to the extent sometimes inferred from the small number of recommittals. A statistical conclusion cannot be drawn from this datum, unsupported by other proofs.
On the 2d of the 6th Month, (June,) I proceeded to Wilmington, Delaware, with my friend John G. Whittier. Here we met a company of warm-hearted and intelligent abolitionists, with whom we discussed the prospects of the cause. It was calculated that if compensation were conceded, to which many would on principle object, a tax of less than one dollar per acre would buy up all the slaves in the State for emancipation. It was admitted by all, that the abolition of slavery would advance the price of land in a far greater ratio; probably ten or twenty dollars per acre.
We went forward the same evening to Baltimore, accompanied by one of our Wilmington acquaintance, and in the railway carriage was a member of the Society of Friends from North Carolina, who, though a colonizationist, appeared to be a man of candor. He gave it as his opinion that the majority of the free people of that State are in favor of the abolition of slavery. We also had the company, a part of the way, of Samuel E. Sewall, Counsellor at Law, in Boston, an early and tried abolitionist, and a faithful friend and legal adviser of the free people of color.
The next morning, we left Baltimore for Washington, two hours’ ride by railway. The railroads of this country being often extremely narrow, the trains frequently pass almost close to the piers of the bridges and viaducts, a circumstance which explains the following printed notice in the carriages: “Passengers are cautioned not to put their arms, head, or legs out of the window.”
In passing from a free to a slave State, the most casual observer is struck with the contrast. The signs of industry and prosperity on the broad face of the country are universally in favor of the former, and that to a degree which none but an eye witness can conceive. This fact has been often noticed, and has been affirmed by slaveholders themselves, in the most emphatic terms. In cities the difference is not less remarkable, and was forcibly brought to our notice in the hotel at which we took up our residence on arriving at Washington, and which, though the first in the city, and the temporary residence of many members of Congress, was greatly deficient in the cleanliness, comfort, and order, which prevail in the well-furnished and well-conducted establishments of New York, Philadelphia, Boston, &c. At this house, I understood, some of the servants were free, and others slaves.
We were now in the District of Columbia, the seat of this powerful Federal Government, and in the city of Washington, the metropolis of the United States. Here are concentrated as it were into one focus, the associations of the past, connected with the great struggle for independence, and the memory of those names and events which already belong to history. Whatever may be our political principles, or the opinions of those who like myself consider all resort to arms as forbidden under the Christian dispensation, it is impossible to recall without emotion, transactions which have exerted and will continue to exert, so marked an influence on the destinies of mankind. This city was not the scene of those events, but it was erected to be a perpetual monument of them, and in the limited district of ten miles square, in which it stands, the Government which was then called into existence reigns sole and supreme. If a stranger were to inquire here for the monuments of the fathers of the Revolution, the American would proudly point to the Capitol, with the national Congress in full session, and to the levee of the President, crowded by free citizens, and representatives of foreign nations. The United States were thirteen dependent colonies, they are now twenty-six sovereign States, rich and populous, covering the face of this vast continent, and compacted into one powerful confederacy. But notwithstanding the glowing emotions which seem naturally called forth by the locality, there is many an American who bitterly feels that the District of Columbia is the shame, rather than the glory of his country. Here is proclaimed to the whole world by the united voice of the American people, “We hold these truths to be self-evident–that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights–that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;” and here also by a majority of the same people expressing their deliberate will, through their representatives, this declaration is trampled under foot, and turned into derision.[A]
[Footnote A: “Large establishments have grown up upon the national domain, provided with prisons for the safe keeping of negroes till a full cargo is procured; and should, at any time, the factory prisons be insufficient, the public ones, erected by Congress, are at the service of the dealers, and the United States Marshal becomes the agent of the slave trade.”–_Judge Jay’s View of the action of the Federal Government in behalf of Slavery_, _page_ 93. “But the climax of infamy is still untold. This trade in blood,–this buying, imprisoning, and exporting of boys and girls eight years old,–this tearing asunder of husbands and wives, parents and children,–is all legalized, in virtue of authority delegated by Congress!! The 249th page of the laws of the city of Washington is polluted by the following enactment, bearing date 28th July, 1838:–‘For a _license_ to trade or traffic in slaves for profit, four hundred dollars.'”–_Ibid_, _page_ 98.]
The District of Columbia is the chief seat of the American slave trade; commercial enterprize has no other object! Washington is one of the best supplied and most frequented slave marts in the world. The adjoining and once fertile and beautiful States of Virginia and Maryland, are now blasted with sterility, and ever-encroaching desolation. The curse of the first murderer rests upon the planters, and the ground will no longer yield to them her strength. The impoverished proprietors find now their chief source of revenue in what one of themselves expressly termed, their “crop of human flesh.” Hence the slave-holding region is now divided into the “slave-breeding,” and “slave-consuming” States. From its locality, and, from its importance as the centre of public affairs, the District of Columbia has become the focus of this dreadful traffic, which almost vies with the African slave trade itself in extent and cruelty, besides possessing aggravations peculiarly its own.[A] Its victims are marched to the south in chained coffles, overland, in the face of day, and by vessels coastwise. Those who protest against these abominations are the abolitionists; a body whose opinions are so unpopular that no term of reproach is deemed vile enough for their desert; yet if these should hold their peace, the very stones would surely cry out. The state of things in this District has one peculiar feature; being under the supreme local government of Congress, it presents almost the only tangible point for the political efforts of those hostile to slavery. Against slavery in any but their own States, the abolitionists have neither the power nor the wish to exert that constitutional interference which they rightfully employ in the States of which they are citizens; but with respect to the District of Columbia, they are, in common with the whole republic, responsible for the exercise of political influence for the abolition of slavery within its limits. Hence this is the grand point of attack. They have experienced a succession of repulses, but their eventual success is certain; the political influence of the slave-holding interest, which is now paramount, and which controls and dictates the entire policy of the general Government will be destroyed. Then will the abolition of American slavery be speedily consummated.
[Footnote A: “Human flesh is now the great staple of Virginia, In the legislature of this State, in 1833, Thomas Jefferson Randolph declared that Virginia had been converted into ‘one grand menagerie, where men are reared for the market, like oxen for the shambles.’ This same gentleman thus compared the foreign with the domestic traffic: ‘The trader (African) receives the slave, a stranger in aspect, language and manner, from the merchant who brought him from the interior. But _here_, sir, individuals whom the master has known from infancy,–whom he has seen sporting in the innocent gambols of childhood,–who have been accustomed to look to him for protection,–he tears from the mother’s arms, exiles into a foreign country, among a strange people, subject to cruel task-masters. In my opinion, it is much worse.’–Mr. Gholson, of Virginia, in his speech in the legislature of that State, January 18, 1831, says: ‘The master forgoes the service of the female slave, has her nursed and attended during the period of her gestation, and raises the helpless and infant offspring. The value of the property justifies the expense; and I do not hesitate to say, that in its increase consists much of our wealth.’–Professor Dew, now President of the College of William and Mary, Virginia, in his review of the debate in the Virginia legislature, 1831-3, speaking of the revenue arising from the trade, says: ‘A full equivalent being thus left in the place of the slave, this emigration becomes an advantage to the State, and does not check the black population as much as at first view we might imagine; because it furnishes every inducement to the master to attend to the negroes, to _encourage breeding_, and to cause the greatest number possible to be raised. Virginia is, in fact, a negro-raising State, for other States.’–Mr. C.F. Mercer asserted, in the Virginia Convention of 1829, ‘The tables of the natural growth of the slave population demonstrate; when compared with the increase of its numbers in the commonwealth for twenty years past, that an annual revenue of not less than a million and a half of dollars is derived from the exportation of a part of this population.'”–_Judge Jay’s View_, _pages_ 88, 89.]
Very soon after our arrival, we proceeded to the House of Representatives, then sitting, and were favored, by introductions from a member, with seats behind the Speaker’s chair. The subject before the House was, of course, peculiarly interesting to me, being the proposed re-enactment of the “gag;” a rule of the House, by which petitions for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, are laid upon the table, without being read or referred, and thus are virtually rejected. One of the speakers, William Slade, of Vermont, who was opposed to the “gag,” told the pro-slavery members that they were greatly mistaken in supposing that such a measure would suppress the anti-slavery feeling of the country. They might, for a time, block up the Potomac, but it would only be to direct its waters into a new channel; in the same way as the rejection of anti-slavery petitions had resulted in the formation of a third abolition political party, which was now regularly organized and in the field. Having previously heard much of the virulence of the pro-slavery members, I was particularly impressed with the silence and attention with which they listened to this speech, and with the feeling which seemed evidently to prevail, that the subject could no longer be met with contempt and ridicule. One of the liberal members told me afterwards, that they felt themselves in a different atmosphere to what they did two years ago, both in the House and in the city, when touching upon this subject. Before the debate closed, the House divided on the question, whether ex-president Adams, the veteran defender of the constitutional right of petition, and who had brought forward this motion for the repeal of the “gag,” was entitled to the right of reply. This was decided in his favor, and the House adjourned till the beginning of the following week.
In the afternoon, I proceeded, by a steam packet, with one of my friends, to Alexandria, about six miles distant, on the other side of the Potomac. A merchant, to whom I had an introduction, kindly accompanied us to a slave-trading establishment there, which is considered the principal one in the District. The proprietor was absent; but the person in charge, a stout, middle-aged man, with a good-natured countenance, that little indicated his employment, readily consented to show us over the establishment. On passing behind the house, we looked through a grated iron door, into a square court or yard, with very high walls, in which were about fifty slaves. Some of the younger ones were dancing to a fiddle, an affecting proof, in their situation, of the degradation caused by slavery. There were others, who seemed a prey to silent dejection. Among these was a woman, who had run away from her master twelve years ago, and had married and lived ever since as a free person. She was at last discovered, taken and sold, along with her child, and would shortly be shipped to New Orleans, unless her husband could raise the means of her redemption, which we understood he was endeavoring to do. If he failed, they are lost to him for ever. Another melancholy looking woman was here with her nine children, the whole family having been sold away from their husband and father, to this slave-dealer, for two thousand two hundred and fifty dollars. This unfeeling separation is but the beginning of their sorrows. They will, in all probability, be re-sold at New Orleans, scattered and divided, until not perhaps two of them are left together. The most able-bodied negro I saw, cost the slave-dealer six hundred and eighty-five dollars.
Our guide told us that they sometimes sent from this house from fifteen hundred to two thousand slaves to the South in a year, and that they occasionally had three hundred to four hundred at once in their possession. That the trade was not now so brisk, but that prices were rising. The return and profits of this traffic appear to be entirely regulated by the fluctuations in the value of the cotton. Women are worth one-third less than men. But one instance of complete escape ever occurred from these premises, though some of the slaves were occasionally trusted out in the fields. He showed us the substantial clothing, shoes, &c., with which the slaves were supplied when sent to the South; a practice, I fear, enforced more by the cupidity of the buyers, than the humanity of the seller. Our informant stated, in answer to inquiries, that by the general testimony of the slaves purchased, they were treated better by the planters than was the case ten years ago. He also admitted the evils of the system, and said, with apparent sincerity, he wished it was put an end to.
We went afterwards to the city jail, to see a youth whose case I had heard of in Delaware, who had come to Alexandria on board a vessel, and had here been seized and imprisoned on suspicion of being a slave, not having any document to prove his freedom. He had now been incarcerated for near twelve months, and though admitted by the jailer and every one else to be free, he was about to be sold in a few days into slavery for a term, in order to pay the jail-fees, amounting to eighty dollars. In the evening on returning to Washington, we paid a visit by appointment to John Quincy Adams, ex-president of the United States; who though considerably more than seventy years of age, is yet one of the most assiduous and energetic members of the House of Representatives, and one of the most influential public men of the day. To this must be added the far higher praise that his distinguished powers are employed in the service of humanity, truth, and justice. How rare is it to witness such a union of intellectual and moral greatness! Posterity will do justice to his fame, when slavery shall exist only in the records of the past, and when it shall be related with wonder, that this venerable man, standing almost alone in his defence of the right of petition, received daily anonymous letters threatening him with assassination. He received us very kindly, and in the course of conversation expressed how much importance he attached to the late repeal of the “nine months law,” in the State of New York, as a favorable indication of the current of public feeling. He did not appear sanguinely to anticipate that he should be in a majority on his pending motion for the repeal of the “gag.”
One of the principal objects of my visit to Washington was to present an Address to the President, from the Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society. In the course of my inquiries of various official persons, members of Congress, et cet., I found that to obtain an audience for the express purpose would be very difficult, as no member of Congress appeared willing to undertake the unpopular service of introducing the bearer of such a document. I was not disposed to apply to the British Ambassador, who on some occasions had shown a want of sympathy with the anti-slavery cause. I found, however, that it was not contrary to etiquette, in this country, for a private individual to address a note to the President, to which, in ordinary courtesy, according to the custom of the place, he has a right to expect a reply. I would remark, however, that nothing is more easy than to gain access to the President; but I felt that to avail myself of those facilities, to place in his hands a document which he might object to receive, would be uncandid. I therefore addressed a note to him, stating that I was the bearer of a memorial from the Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-slavery Society, signed by Thomas Clarkson, addressed to the President of the United States, in which I said, “It may, perhaps, be right to state, that the memorial refers to slavery and the slave-trade in the United States, and that it was written before the death of General Harrison was known in Europe.” I then asked permission to present it.
To this I received no reply. We were afterwards introduced to the President, by a member of Congress, who evinced an anxiety that I should make no reference to the memorial; and the President, on his part, made no allusion to it, or to my letter to himself. After this interview, we proceeded to the Senate, but it had risen just as we entered. I had a short conversation with Henry Clay, who alluded to Joseph John Gurney’s work on the West Indies, which I need scarcely add, is written in a series of letters to this statesman. He said that the recent short crop of sugar in Jamaica was a proof that the author had been misled in the favorable information he had collected, and also that this deficiency in the crop was a proof not only of the idleness, but of the immorality of the negroes. He accused my companion, John G. Whittier, of deserting him, after having been his warm friend; and on J.W.’s giving his reasons for so doing, he complained that the abolitionists improperly interfered with the affairs of the South, though he made an exception in favor of the Society of Friends. He inquired if J.G. Whittier was a “Friend” in regular standing, evidently intimating a doubt on that point, on account of his being so decided an abolitionist. The praise of such men is the strongest testimony that could be adduced to the declension of the Society of Friends in anti-slavery zeal. To a great extent I fear their sentiments on this subject have been held traditionally; and that in many cases, they have not only done nothing themselves, but by example and precept have condemned the activity of others; I trust, however, a brighter day in regard to their labors is approaching. I feel disinclined to take leave of Henry Clay, without some animadversions which, on the public character of a public man, I may offer without any breach of propriety. In early life, that is in some part of the last century, he supported measures tending to the “eradication of slavery” in Kentucky, and at various periods since, he has indulged in cheap declamation against slavery, though he is not known to have committed himself by a solitary act of manumission. On the contrary, having commenced life with a single slave, he has industriously increased the number to upwards of seventy. As a statesman, his conduct on this question has been consistently pro-slavery. He indefatigably negotiated for the recovery of fugitive slaves from Canada, when Secretary of State, though without success. In the Senate he successfully carried through the admission of Missouri into the Union, as a slave State. He has resisted a late promising movement in Kentucky in favor of emancipation; and lastly, in one of his most elaborate speeches, made just before the late presidential election, the proceedings of the abolitionists were reviewed and condemned, and he utterly renounced all sympathy with their object. By way of apology for his early indiscretion, he observes, “but if I had been then, or were _now_, a citizen of any of the planting States–the southern or southwestern States–I should have opposed, and would continue to oppose, any scheme whatever of emancipation, gradual or immediate.”
In this extract, and throughout the whole speech, slavery is treated as a pecuniary question, and the grand argument against abolition, is the loss of property that would ensue. Joseph John Gurney, who appears to have been favorably impressed by Henry Clay’s professions of liberality, his courteous bearing, and consummate address, manifested a laudable anxiety that so influential a statesman should be better informed on the point on which he seemed so much in the dark; he therefore addressed to him his excellent “Letters on the West Indies,” of which the great argument is, that emancipation has been followed by great prosperity to the planters, and attended with abundant blessings, temporal and spiritual, to the other classes, and that the same course would necessarily be followed by the same results in the United States. He has accumulated proof upon proof of his conclusions supplied by personal and extensive investigation in the British Colonies. But Henry Clay shews no sign of conviction. Yet though he made to us the absurd remark, already quoted, on Joseph John Gurney’s work, I have too high an opinion of his understanding to think him the victim of his own sophistry. He is a lawyer and a statesman. He is accustomed to weigh evidence, and to discriminate facts. I have little doubt that all my valued friend would have taught him, he knew already. He could not be ignorant of the contrast presented by his own State of Kentucky, and the adjoining State of Ohio, and that the difference is solely owing to slavery. If J.J. Gurney could have shewn that abolition would soon be the high road to the President’s chair, it is not improbable that he would have made an illustrious convert to anti-slavery principles. Henry Clay’s celebrated speech before alluded to, was delivered in the character of a candidate for the Presidency just before the last election–it was prepared with great care, and rehearsed beforehand to a select number of his political friends. The whig party being the strongest, and he being the foremost man of that party, he might be looked upon as President-elect, if he could but conciliate the south, by wiping off the cloud of abolitionism that faintly obscured his reputation. He succeeded to his heart’s desire in his immediate object, but eventually, by this very speech, completely destroyed his sole chance of success, and was ultimately withdrawn from the contest. Thus does ambition overleap itself.[A]
[Footnote A: As a practical commentary on Henry Clay’s professions of a regard for the cause of human liberty, I append the following advertisement, which, about two years ago, was circulated in Ohio:
“THREE HUNDRED DOLLAR’S REWARD.
“_Run away_ from James Kendall, in Bourbon County, Ky., to whom he was hired the present year, on Saturday night last, the 14th instant, a negro man, named Somerset, about twenty-six years of age, five feet, seven or eight inches high, of a dark copper color, having a deep scar on his right cheek, occasioned by a burn, stout made, countenance bold and determined, and voice coarse. His clothing it is thought unnecessary to describe, as he may have already changed it.
“ALSO,
“From E. Muir, of the same county, on the same night, (and supposed to have gone in company,) a negro man, named Bob, about twenty-nine years old, near six feet high, weighing about 180 or 90 pounds, of a dark copper color, of a pleasant countenance, uncommonly smooth face, and a remarkable small hand for a negro of his size. He spells and reads a little. His clothing was a greenish jean coat and black cloth pantaloons.
“We will give the above reward for the delivery of said negroes to the undersigned, or their confinement in jail, so that we get them; or 150 dollars for either of them, if taken out of the State, or 100 dollars for them, or 50 dollars for either, if taken out of the county, and in the State.
“HENRY CLAY, Senior,
“E. MUIR.
“_Bourbon Co. Ky., Sept_. 17, 1839.”
]
On leaving the Senate House, we drove to a slave-dealer’s establishment, near at hand, and within sight of the _Capitol_. I have given some particulars of this visit elsewhere, which I need not repeat. I cast my eye on some portraits and caricatures of abolitionists, British and American, among whom Daniel O’Connell figured in association with Arthur Tappan, and the ex-president Adams. The young man in charge of the establishment began to explain them, for our amusement; on which, one of my companions pointed to me, and informed him I was an English abolitionist. He looked uneasy at our presence, and evidently desirous we should not prolong our stay. He told us there were five or six other dealers in the city who had no buildings of their own, and who kept their slaves here, or at the public city jail, at thirty-four cents per diem, the difference in comfort being wholly on the side of the private establishments.
We subsequently visited the city jail, to which reference is made in the letter below, and were able to confirm this statement from our own observation.
We left for Baltimore this afternoon. Although I had not succeeded in presenting the address before-mentioned to the President, I little regretted the failure, being convinced that it would not be less generally read by the public on that account, and in this I have not been disappointed. I proceeded at once, the next morning, to Philadelphia; and here I concluded to print and publish the following letter, which, was sent, through the post, to the President, and to each member of the Senate and House of Representatives.
“_To the Abolitionists of the United States_.
“I was commissioned by the committee of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, to present a memorial from them to your President, and proceeded to Washington, a few days ago, accompanied by John G. Whittier, of Massachusetts, and a friend from the State of Delaware.
“It was my first visit to the seat of legislation of your great republic. On our arrival we went to the House of Representatives, then in session. A member from Maryland was speaking on our entrance, who was the author of a resolution, which had been carried in a former Congress, excluding nearly three millions of your countrymen, on whom every species of wrong and outrage is committed with impunity, from all right of petition, either by them selves or their friends. He was advocating the re-enactment of this very resolution for the present Congress, and stated that he had a letter from your President approving the measure. Although I believe I do not speak too strongly when I say an attempt to enforce such a resolution by any crowned head in the civilized world, would be inevitably followed by a revolution, yet it seemed evident that no small portion of your _present_ members were in favor of it. It was with no ordinary emotion that I saw the venerable ex-president Adams at his post, nobly contending against this violation of the rights of his countrymen, and I could not but regret that, with one or two exceptions, be appeared to find little support from his younger colleagues of the free States.
“The same day we visited one of the well-known slave-trading establishments at Alexandria. On passing to it we were shewn the costly mansion of its late proprietor, who has lately retired on a large property acquired by the sale of native born Americans. In an open enclosure, with high walls which it is impossible to scale, with a strong iron-barred door, and in which we were told that there were sometimes from three to four hundred persons crowded, we saw about fifty slaves. Amongst the number thus incarcerated was a woman with nine children, who had been cruelly separated from their husband and father, and would probably be shortly sent to New Orleans, where they would never be likely to see him again, and where the mother may be for ever severed from every one of her children, and each of them sold to a separate master. From thence we went to the Alexandria city jail, where we saw a young man who was admitted to be free even by the jailer himself. He had been seized and committed in the hope that he might prove a slave, and that the party detaining him would receive a reward. He had been kept there nearly twelve months because he could not pay the jail fees, and instead of obtaining any redress for false imprisonment, was about to be sold into slavery for a term to reimburse these fees.
“The next morning I was desirous of handing to the President the memorial, of which the following is a copy:
“‘_Address to the President of the United States, from the Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society_.
“‘SIR,–As the head of a great Confederacy of States, justly valuing their free constitution and political organization, and tenacious of their rights and their character, the Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-slavery Society, through their esteemed coadjutor and representative, Joseph Sturge, would respectfully approach you in behalf of millions of their fellow-men, held in bondage in the United States. Those millions are denied, not only the immunities enjoyed by the citizens of your great republic generally, and of the equal privileges and the impartial protection of the civil law, but are deprived of their personal rights, so that they cease to be regarded and treated, under your otherwise noble institutions, as MEN, except in the commission of crime, when the utmost rigor of your penal statutes is invoked and enforced against them; but are reduced to the degraded condition of “chattels personal in the hands of their owners and possessors, to _all intents, constructions, and purposes, whatsoever_.”
“‘This is the language and the law of slavery; and under this law, guarded with jealousy by their political institutions, the slaveholders of the South rest their claims to property in man But, sir, there are claims anterior to all human laws, and superior to all political institutions, which are immutable in their nature,–claims which are the birthright of every human being, of every clime, and of every color,–claims which God has conferred, and which man cannot destroy without sacrilege, or infringe without sin. Personal liberty is among these, the greatest and best, for it is the root of all other rights, the conservative principle of human associations, the spring of public virtues, and essential to national strength and greatness.
“‘The monstrous and wicked assumption of power by man, over his fellow man, which slavery implies, is alike abhorrent to the moral sense of mankind; to the immutable principles of justice; to the righteous laws of God; and to the benevolent principles of the gospel. It is, therefore, indignantly repudiated by all the fundamental laws of all truly enlightened and civilized communities, and by none more emphatically than by that over which, Sir, it is your honor to preside.
“‘The great doctrine, that God hath “created all men equal, and endowed them with certain inalienable rights, and that amongst these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” is affirmed in your Declaration of Independence, and justified in the theory of your constitutional laws. But there is a stain upon your glory; slavery, in its most abject and revolting form, pollutes your soil; the wailings of slaves mingle with your songs of liberty; and the clank of their chains is heard, in horrid discord with the chorus of your triumphs.
“‘The records of your States are not less distinguished by their wise provisions for securing the order and maintaining the institutions of your country, than by their ingenious devices for riveting the chains, and perpetuating the degradation of your colored brethren; their education is branded as a crime against the State–their freedom is dreaded as a blasting pestilence–the bare suggestion of their emancipation is proscribed as treason to the cause of American independence.
“‘These things are uttered in sorrow; for the committee deeply deplore the flagrant inconsistency, so glaringly displayed between the lofty principles embodied in the great charter of your liberties, and the evil practices which have been permitted to grow up under it, to mar its beauty and impair its strength. But it is not on these grounds alone, or chiefly, that they deplore the existence of slavery in the United States. Manifold as are the evils which flow from it–dehumanizing as are its tendencies–fearful as its reaction confessedly is on its supporters,–the reproach of its existence does not terminate on the institutions which gave it birth: the sublime principles and benign spirit of Christianity are dishonored by it. In the light of Divine Truth it stands revealed, in all its hideous deformity, a crime against God,–a daring usurpation of the prerogative and authority of the Most High! It is as a violation of His righteous laws, an outrage on His glorious attributes, a renunciation of the claims of His blessed gospel, that they especially deplore the countenance and support it receives among you; and, in the spirit of Christian love and fraternal solicitude, would counsel its immediate and complete overthrow, as a solemn and imperative duty, the performance of which no sordid reasons should be permitted to retard–no political considerations prevent. Slavery is a sin against God, and ought, therefore, to be abolished.
“‘The utter extinction of slavery, and its sister abomination, the internal slave-trade of the United States, second only in horror and extent to the African, and in some of its features even more revolting, can only be argued, by the philanthropy of this country, on the abstract principles of moral and religious duty; and to those principles the people of your great republic are pledged on the side of freedom beyond every nation in the world!
“‘The negro, by nature our equal, made like ourselves in the image of his Creator, gifted by the same intelligence, impelled by the same passions and affections, and redeemed by the same Savior, is reduced by cupidity and oppression below the level of the brute, spoiled of his humanity, plundered of his rights, and often hurried to a premature grave, the miserable victim of avarice and heedless tyranny! Men have presumptuously dared to wrest from their fellows the most precious of their rights–to intercept as far as they may the bounty and grace of the Almighty–to close the door to their intellectual progress–to shut every avenue to their moral and religious improvement, to stand between them and their Maker! It is against this crime the committee protest as men and as Christians, and earnestly but respectfully call upon you, Sir, to use the influence with which you are invested, to bring it to a peaceful and speedy close; and, may you in closing your public career, in the latest hours of your existence on earth, be consoled with the reflection that you have not despised the afflictions of the afflicted, but that faithful to the trust of your high stewardship, you have been “just, ruling in the fear of the Lord,” that you have executed judgment for the oppressed, and have aided in the deliverance of your country from its greatest crime, and its chiefest reproach.
“‘On behalf of the Committee,
“‘THOMAS CLARKSON.
“‘British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, for the Abolition of Slavery and the Slave-trade throughout the world.
“’27, _New Broad Street, London, March 5th_, 1841.’
“I thought it most candid to address a letter to the President informing him of the character of the foregoing memorial, rather than take advantage of a merely formal introduction to present it, without a previous explanation. To this letter no reply was received, and no allusion was made to it by the President at a subsequent introduction, which we had to him. It may be proper to mention in this connection, that memorials of a similar character, bearing upon slavery and the slave-trade, signed by the venerable Clarkson, have been presented to different Heads of Governments, in other parts of the world, and have been uniformly received with marked respect.
“Previous to our departure, we visited a private slave-trading establishment in the city, and looked in upon a group of human beings herded together like cattle for the market, within an enclosure of high brick walls surrounding the jail. The young man in attendance, informed us that there were five or six other regular slave-dealers in the city, who, having no jails of their own, either placed their slaves at this establishment, or in the public CITY PRISON. The former was generally preferred, on account of its superior accommodations in respect to food and lodging. On my making some remarks to the young man on the nature of his occupation, he significantly, and as I think, very justly replied, that he knew of no reasons for condemning slave-traders, which did not equally apply to slave-holders. You will bear in mind that this was said within view of the Capitol, where slave-holders control your national legislation, and within a few minutes’ walk of that mansion where a slave-holder sits in the presidential chair, placed there by your votes; and it is certainly no marvel, that, with such high examples in his favor, the humble slave-dealer of the District should feel himself in honorable company, and really regard his occupation as one of respectability and public utility.
“From thence we proceeded to the city prison, an old and loathsome building, where we examined two ranges of small stone cells, in which were a large number of colored prisoners. We noticed five or six in a single cell, barely large enough for a solitary tenant, under a heat as intense as that of the tropics. The keeper stated that in rainy seasons the prison was uncomfortably wet. The place had to us a painful interest, from the fact that here Dr. Crandall, a citizen of the free States, was confined until his health was completely broken down, and was finally released only to find a grave, for the crime of having circulated a pamphlet on emancipation, written by one of the friends who accompanied me.[A] On inquiry of the keeper, he informed us that slaves were admitted into his cells, and kept for their owners at the rate of thirty-four cents per day, and that transfers of them from one master to another sometimes took place during their confinement; thus corroborating the testimony of the keeper of the private jail before mentioned, that this city prison, the property of the people of the United States, and for the rebuilding of which, a large sum of your money has been appropriated, is made use of by the dealers in human beings as a place of deposit and market; and thus you, in common with your fellow citizens, are made indirect participators in a traffic equal in atrocity to that foreign trade, the suppression of which, to use the words of your President in his late message, ‘is required by the public honor, and the promptings of humanity.’
[Footnote A: On being released from prison, Dr. Crandall went to Kingston, Jamaica, to recruit his health. A gentleman of that city, W. Wemyss Anderson, found him in his lodgings, solitary and friendless, and rapidly sinking under his disease. He took him, though a perfect stranger, into his own house; and the last days of Dr. Crandall were soothed by the kind sympathy and attentions of a Christian family. It was also manifest, that he enjoyed the sunshine of inward peace, and the rich consolations of the gospel. His kind host, whom I count it a privilege to call my friend, obeyed, in this instance, the apostolic injunction, and experienced the consequent reward, “Be not forgetful to entertain strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.”]
“As one who has devoted much of his humble labors to the cause you wish to promote, I perhaps shall be excused for thus stating these facts to you, as they all passed before my personal observation in the course of a few hours. I shall deem it right to publish them in Europe, where I am about shortly to return. Recollect, they all occurred and exist within the District of Columbia, and that those who elect the legislators who uphold the slave system, are justly responsible for it in the sight of God and man. Is it not all the natural consequence of your electing slave-holders and their abettors to the highest offices of your State and nation? Some of your most intelligent citizens have given it as their opinion that fully two-thirds of the whole population of the United States are in favor of the abolition of slavery; and my own observation, since I landed on these shores, not only confirms this opinion, but has convinced me that there is a very rapid accession to their numbers daily taking place; and yet we have the extraordinary fact exhibited to the world, that about two hundred and fifty thousand slave-holders–a large proportion of whom, bankrupt in fortune and reputation, have involved many of the North in their disgrace and ruin–hold in mental bondage the whole population of this great republic, who permit themselves to be involved in the common disgrace of presenting a spectacle of national inconsistency altogether without a parallel. I confess that, although an admirer of many of the institutions of your country, and deeply lamenting the evils of my own government, I find it difficult to reply to those who are opposed to any extension of the political rights of Englishmen, when they point to America and say, that where all have a control over the legislation but those who are guilty of a dark skin, slavery and the slave-trade remain not only unmitigated, but continue to extend; and that while there is an onward movement in favor of its extinction, not only in England and France, but even in Cuba and Brazil, American legislators cling to this enormous evil, without attempting to relax or mitigate its horrors. Allow me, therefore, to appeal to you by every motive which attaches you to your country, seriously to consider how far you are accountable for this state of things, by want of a faithful discharge of those duties for which every member of a republican government is so deeply responsible; and may I not express the hope that, on all future occasions, you will take care to promote the election of none as your representatives who will not _practically_ act upon the principle that in every clime, and of every color, ‘all men are equal?’
“Your sincere friend,
“JOSEPH STURGE.
“_Philadelphia, 6th Month 7th_, 1842.”
This letter was extensively reprinted, not only in the anti-slavery but in pro-slavery newspapers, both in the North and South. In the numerous angry comments upon it, no attempt that has come to my knowledge was made to deny any one of my statements. One of the papers intimates that the vote by which the house soon after refused to adopt a specific and exclusive rule against abolition petitions, was brought about by “the sinister influence of Mr. Sturge.” I need not add how happy I should have been to have possessed the influence with which this writer has so liberally invested me, and that I should have regarded it as a talent to be employed and improved to the very utmost.
I spent from the 5th to the 11th of the Sixth Month, (June) in Philadelphia and the vicinity, during which time, I made numerous calls, and met several large parties in private.
During this stay, in company with John G. Whittier, I paid a visit to my excellent friend, Abraham L. Pennock, at his residence in Haverford, Delaware county, about ten miles from the city. He is an influential member of the Society of Friends, and until recently he has been a resident in the city. He has, for many years, been an uncompromising abolitionist, and an active member and officer of anti-slavery societies; yet he appears to enjoy the respect and confidence not only of his anti-slavery associates, but of the Society of Friends, and the community generally. I found him a warm advocate, in practice as well as theory, of entire abstinence from the products of slave labor, as well as of independent political action on the part of abolitionists. He expressed much regret that he was unable to attend the General Anti-Slavery Convention, in London, and gave his cordial approbation to its proceedings.[A]
[Footnote A: See Appendix H.]
We reluctantly bade farewell to our kind friend and his interesting family, all the members of which appear to share his zeal and untiring devotion to the cause of the oppressed, and returned to our lodgings in the city. Even now I look back to this visit as among the most grateful recollections of my sojourn in the United States.
I may mention, in this connection, that A.L. Pennock, as well as others with whom I conversed on the subject, spoke with much regret of the want of faithfulness on the part of members of the Society of Friends, in maintaining their testimony against slavery, while exercising their civil rights as citizens and electors. From all I could learn, I have been led to fear that “Friends” in the United States, with few exceptions, are in the practice of voting for public officers, without reference to their sentiments on the important subject of slavery. At the late Presidential election it is very evident that the great body of “Friends” who took any part in it, voted for John Tyler, the slaveholder.
Among the active friends of emancipation, who occupy a high station in our society, I can scarcely omit mentioning Enoch Lewis, of Chester county, Pennsylvania, whose talents and literary acquirements, devoted as they are, to the maintenance and promulgation of the principles and Christian testimonies of our religious society, deservedly command a high degree of respect.
Among the members of the society which have separated from “Friends” in Philadelphia and elsewhere, I met with many warm and steady friends of emancipation, some of whom have proved their sincerity by great sacrifices. Amongst these I cannot omit mentioning James and Lucretia Mott, James Wood, Dr. Isaac Parish, and Thomas Earle, of this city.
I republished in Philadelphia, with the permission of the author, in two separate pamphlets, for distribution amongst those to whom it was addressed, “A Letter to the Clergy of various Denominations, and to the Slave-holding Planters in the Southern parts of the United States of America, by Thomas Clarkson.” This remarkable production was written after its venerable author had attained his eightieth year, and has been pronounced by a very competent judge the most vigorous production of his pen. As its circulation had but just commenced when I left the United States, I could not judge of the effect produced by this energetic appeal from one whose name must command respect, even from the slave-holders; but I have since been informed it has been read with interest and attention.
I had several conferences with “Friends” who were interested in the cause, to discuss the best mode of engaging the members of the Society to unite their efforts on behalf of the oppressed and suffering slaves; and though no immediate steps were resolved on, yet I found so much good feeling in many of them, that I cannot but entertain a hope, that fruit will hereafter appear. I had spent much of my time and labor in Philadelphia, particularly among that numerous and influential body with whom I am united in a common bond of religious belief, and I trust of Christian affection. Of the kindness and hospitality I experienced I shall ever retain a grateful recollection; yet I finally took my leave of this city, under feelings of sorrow and depression that so many of the very class of Christian professors who once took the lead in efforts for the abolition of slavery, efforts evidently attended with the favor and sanction of the Most High, should now be discouraging, and holding back their members from taking part in so righteous a cause. Among the warmest friends of the slave, sound both in feeling and sentiment, are a few venerable individuals who are now standing on the brink of the grave, and whose places, among the present generation, I could not conceal from myself, there were but few fully prepared to occupy. I had found in many Friends much passive anti-slavery feeling, and was to some extent cheered by the discovery. May a due sense of their responsibility rest upon every follower of Christ, to remember them that are in bonds, and under affliction, not only with a passive, but with an active and self-denying sympathy, a sympathy that makes common cause with its object.
Apart from the fact, that Philadelphia is one of the most beautiful cities in the world, to a member of the Society of Friends it must ever be an object of peculiar interest. Here William Penn made his great experiment of a Christian government. Here, to the annual assemblies of Friends, came Warner Mifflin, and John Woolman, and James Pemberton, and George Dillwyn, and other worthies of the past, who have now gone from works to rewards. A few miles distant, in Frankford, is still to be seen the residence of the excellent Thomas Chalkley. Here Benezet exemplified, in the simplicity, humility, and untiring benevolence of his daily life, the lessons inculcated in his writings. And here, at this day, are a larger number of members of our religious society than can be found congregated elsewhere, within an equal space of territory. They are, in general, in easy circumstances, many of them wealthy, and occupying a high rank in the community.
Who can recur, without a lively feeling of interest, to the hopes and prayers of the benevolent founder of the city, as expressed in affecting terms in his farewell letter, written as he was about taking his final departure for England.
“And thou, Philadelphia, the virgin settlement of this province, named before thou wert born, what love, what care, what service, and what travail has there been to bring thee forth, and preserve thee from such as would defile thee! Oh, that thou mayest be kept from the evil that would overwhelm thee! that faithful to the God of Mercies, in a life of righteousness, thou mayest be preserved to the end!”
On the 11th, with John G. Whittier, I left for New York, and the next day we proceeded by steam packet to Newport, on Rhode Island, to attend the New England yearly meeting of the Society of Friends, which was to be held the next week. We arrived about seven o’clock in the morning. I found the change of climate particularly refreshing and agreeable. During the last fortnight, the range of the thermometer had frequently reached 94 degrees or 96 degrees in the shade: a tropical heat, without those alleviations which render the heat of the tropics not only tolerable, but sometimes delightful. In Rhode Island, the climate, while we were there, was almost as temperate as an English summer.
Some parts of the New England States are much resorted to by southern families of wealth; and their annual migrations have the effect of materially adding to the vast amount of complicated pro-slavery interests which exist in the free States, as well as of diffusing pro-slavery opinions and feelings throughout the entire community. We may hope this current will soon set in the opposite direction. The season was too early for the arrival of these visitors, and the hotels were generally filled with “Friends,” collected from near and distant places, to attend the yearly meeting. There were upwards of a hundred boarding at the same house with ourselves. Soon after our arrival I addressed a letter, making the same application for the use of the meeting house for my friend, John Candler, who was also here, and myself, which had been complied with at New York, forwarding at the same time my credentials. My request, however, in this instance was not granted. Yet there was plainly a willingness on the part of many to receive information, and we caused it to be known that we should be at home at our hotel, on the evening of the sixteenth. About two hundred friends assembled, and appeared interested in a brief outline of the state and prospects of the cause in Europe which I endeavored to give them.
The subject of slavery was brought before the yearly meeting by a proposition from one of its subordinate, or “quarterly meetings,” to encourage more action, on the part of the society, for its abolition. A proposal was immediately made, and assented to without discussion, that the consideration of it should be referred to a committee. On the reading of the address on slavery from the London yearly meeting, it was, in like manner, immediately proposed and agreed to, that it should be referred to the same committee. At a subsequent sitting, this committee reported, that they should recommend the whole subject to be left under the care of their “Meeting for Sufferings,” which was adopted. With the exception of reading the documents, and going through the necessary forms of business, these proceedings passed almost in silence; yet, in the several epistles drawn up to be forwarded to the other yearly meetings, allusion was made to the deep exercise of Friends at this meeting, on the subject of slavery, and their strong desire and wish to encourage others to embrace every right opening for promoting its abolition; with a plain intimation, however, in their epistle to Great Britain, of their disapproval of Friends uniting with any of the anti-slavery associations of the day. These passages in the epistles passed without remark or objection. The Meeting for Sufferings, of Rhode Island, has thus virtually undertaken to do, or at least to originate, all that is to be done, during the present year, by Friends of New England, to help the helpless, and to relieve the oppressed slaves. Sincerely do I desire, that it may not incur the responsibility of neglecting so solemn a charge. I subsequently met, on board the steamer in which we left Newport, many members of this body; with one of whom I had some conversation, in the presence of other Friends, to whom I felt it right to state, that the declarations of sympathy for the slaves, in the epistles which had been sent out, were stronger, in my judgment, than was justified by any thing which had been expressed, or had been manifested, in the Yearly Meeting. This conviction I yet retain. I afterwards obtained some authentic extracts from the laws of Rhode Island, affecting the people of color, and under which slavery is very distinctly recognized and sanctioned, even in this _free_ State. I felt it my duty to forward a copy of these to the “Meeting for Sufferings,” accompanied by the following letter:–
“_To the Meeting for Sufferings of New England_
_Yearly Meeting of Friends._
“On passing through Providence, from the Yearly Meeting at Rhode Island, a solicitor of that place kindly furnished me with the annexed extracts from the laws of the State of Rhode Island. I thought it best to send a copy to you, as it is probable some members of your meeting may not be aware of their precise nature; and it is a source of regret to me, and I know it will be so to my friends in England, to know that in the State in which your Yearly Meeting is held, slavery is fully legalized, if the slaves are the property of persons not actually citizens of that place;–the most odious distinctions of color also remain on the statute book, including one (Section 10, No. 2,) which is a disgrace to any civilized community. I may add, that two very respectable solicitors in Providence expressed their decided opinion, that if Friends heartily promoted the repeal of these obnoxious laws, which throw all the moral influence of the State on the side of slavery, it might easily be accomplished. I cannot but hope the subject will receive your prompt attention.
“Truly your friend,
“JOSEPH STURGE.”
To soften the impression which I fear the preceding detail will give, I may remark, that I am convinced, from extensive private communication with Friends in New England, that there is yet among them much genuine anti-slavery feeling, especially where the deadening commercial intercourse with the South does not operate; and though, at present, with some bright individual exceptions, this is a talent for the most part hidden or unemployed, I trust that many faithful laborers in this great cause will yet be found among them.
During our stay in Rhode Island, we twice visited Dr. Channing, at his summer residence, a few miles from Newport. The delicacy which ought ever to protect unreserved social intercourse, forbids me to enrich my narrative with any detail of his enlightened and comprehensive sentiments; yet I cannot but add, that, widely differing from him as I do, on many important points, I was both deeply interested and instructed by his modest candor and sincerity, and by the spirit of charity with which he appeared habitually to regard those of opposite opinions. Our conversation embraced various topics. I may be allowed to mention, that he highly approved of Judge Jay’s suggestion for the promotion of permanent international peace. He also made a practical suggestion on the anti-slavery movement, which I trust will be acted on–That petitions should be sent to Congress, praying that the free States should be relieved from all direct or indirect support of slavery. As the South has loudly complained of Northern interference, this will be taking the planters on their own ground.
Sixth Month, (June) 19th.–We went on to New Bedford, where, the next day, we called on a number of persons friendly to abolition, and met a large party of them the same evening, at the house of a Friend. A public meeting for worship was appointed during our stay, at the request of a minister of the Society of Friends from Indiana, which we attended. I had the pleasure of witnessing the colored part of the audience, placed on a level, and sitting promiscuously with the white, the only opportunity I had of making such an observation in the United States; as, on ordinary occasions, the colored people rarely attend Friends’ meetings. One of the waiters at our hotel told me he had escaped from slavery some years before. The idea of running away had been first suggested to his mind, by reflecting on his hard lot, being over-worked, and kept without a sufficiency of food, and cruelly beaten, while his owner was living in luxury and idleness, on the fruits of his labor. He had been flogged for merely speaking to one of his master’s visitors, in reply to a question, because it was suspected he had divulged matter that his master did not wish the stranger to know.
On the 21st, we arrived at Boston, and stopped at the Marlborough hotel. One of the first things noticed by a visitor to the States is the number and extent of the hotels, almost all of which are on the principle of the English boarding houses. Besides the number of casual visitors in a population which travels from place to place, perhaps more than any other in the world, the hotels are the permanent homes of a numerous and important class of unmarried men, engaged in business, and often indeed of young married persons, who choose to avoid expense and the cares of housekeeping. At many, if not most of the hotels, cleanliness, regularity, and order, pervade all the arrangements, and as much comfort is to be found as is compatible with throng and publicity. Still the domestic charm of private life is wanting, and its absence renders the system of constant residence most uncongenial to English habits and feelings. An unsocial reserve lies on the surface of English character, and the love of privacy, or at least of a retirement which can be closed and expanded at will, is an extensive and deep-seated feeling. Yet the Anglo-American, even of the purest descent, has early lost the latter characteristic, while he often retains the first unimpaired. What law governs the hereditary transmission of such traits? Several first rate hotels in New England are strictly on the temperance plan, and among them is the Marlborough, in Boston, the second in extent of business in this important city, and which makes up from one hundred to two hundred beds. No intoxicating liquor of any kind can be had in the house. Printed notices are also hung up in the bed rooms, that it is the established rule to take in no fresh company and to receive no accounts on the first day of the week, and the cooking and other preparations are as much as possible performed before hand, that the servants may enjoy the day of rest, and partake of the moral and Spiritual benefit of a weekly pause from the whirl and turmoil of secular engagements.
I had scarcely ventured to hope that I should ever witness a large hotel like this, conducted on such principles; but having now seen it, it adds additional strength to my conviction, that in proportion as Christianity is carried out in common life, in the same proportion is the lost happiness of man recovered. Too many in the present day, who are not behind-hand in profession, keep their principles more for show than use. They acknowledge the purity of them, and have some faint perception of their moral beauty, but secretly believe, and sometimes, openly avow them to be impracticable in the present state of the world. They who exhibit proof of the contrary, are benefactors to their fellow men; and among these, justly deserves to be classed Nathaniel Rogers, the proprietor of the Marlborough Hotel, in Boston.
We called upon several of our anti-slavery friends on the day of our arrival, and in the evening, took tea with a number of those who approve of the proceedings of the London Convention, and who concur in the principles of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society. The subjects discussed were the time and place of a future convention of the friends of the slave of different nations. London was unanimously approved as the place, and the preponderance of sentiment was in favor of 1842 as the time.
On the 22d we went on to Lynn. Here are a very considerable number of the Society of Friends, who are desirous of taking part in active anti-slavery exertion, when they can do so without compromise of principle. It is greatly to be regretted that in this vicinity, a few individuals, formerly members of our religious society, have embraced, in connection with their abolition views, the doctrines of non-resistance, or non-government, in church and state, and thus greatly added to the difficulties in the way of efficient action on the part of consistent members; but whatever may be the errors and indiscretions of these individuals, they furnish no valid excuse for the apathy and inaction on the part of “Friends,” nor lessen, in the slightest degree, their responsibility for the firm and faithful maintenance of our Christian testimony against oppression. We proceeded, the same evening, to Amesbury, where the family of my friend and companion John G. Whittier reside, in whose hospitable and tranquil retreat we remained till the 25th. Here I found myself in a manufacturing district, and paid a visit to a large woollen mill, and was much pleased with the cleanliness and order displayed, and with the evident comfort and prosperity of the working people, who are chiefly young women, none of whom are admitted under sixteen years of age. Any person given to intoxication would be instantly discharged. All the manufactories in this place are joint-stock companies, and the mills are worked by water power, of which there is an abundant supply.
I had agreed, on my return to Boston, to meet my abolition friends at a tea party, and found an entertainment provided from the Marlborough Hotel, in a large room adjoining one of the chapels, on a scale of great profusion, a little to my disappointment, as I had anticipated one of a social rather than of a public character, though I could not but feel the kindness which it was intended to manifest. Charles Stewart Renshaw, from Jamaica, was opportunely present, and his information on the state of that Island added much interest to the evening, the proceedings of which, I hope, gave pretty general satisfaction. In condescension to my wish, my valued friend, Nathaniel Colver, suggested to the company to dispense with the usual form of public prayer, and substitute an interval of silence, after the reading of a portion of scripture, which was kindly complied with.
Before leaving Boston, I had a long interview with William Lloyd Garrison. His view of “women’s rights” is so far a matter of conscience with him, as to be made an indispensable term of union; yet though widely differing on this, and other important points, we parted, I trust, as we met, on personally friendly terms; and certainly on my part with a desire to promote a spirit of forbearance, and with a deeper and stronger conviction that the friends of the bleeding and oppressed slave, should not spend their strength in unprofitable contention upon points in regard to which both parties claim to act conscientiously, while the common cause requires their undivided energies.
On the 28th I left Boston for the beautiful town of Worcester, about forty miles distant, on the principal line of railway to New York, where I had the pleasure of visiting, at his own residence, my friend, Cyrus P. Grosvenor, one of the delegates to the Anti-Slavery Convention last year. There are here a considerable number of sincere abolitionists, of whom we met a small company in the evening, in a room used as the Friends’ meeting house. I gave them a brief account of the state of the anti-slavery cause in other parts of the world. In company with John M. Earle, editor of one of the Worcester papers, with whom I had formed a previous acquaintance at the Yearly Meeting, I also called on the Governor of the State of Massachusetts, who resides in this place. We had some friendly conversation, but he seemed cautious on the subject of abolition. The temperance cause in Worcester has made so much progress that at the three largest and best hotels, which make up nearly one hundred beds each, no intoxicating liquor of any kind is sold. A people thus willing to carry out their convictions, to the sacrifice of prejudice, appetite, and apparent self-interest, cannot long remain a nation of slave-holders. In common with the rest of New England, this town is remarkable for the number, size, and beauty of its places of worship. I calculated, with the aid of a well-informed inhabitant, that if the entire population were to go to a place of worship, at the same hour, in the same day, there would be ample accommodation, and room to spare. Yet here there is no compulsory tax to build churches, and maintain ministers. By the efficacy of the voluntary principle alone is this state of things produced.
My dear friend, John G. Whittier returned home from Worcester on account of increased indisposition, while I proceeded alone to New York. The journey from Boston to the latter city is a remarkably pleasant one. Leaving Boston at four in the afternoon, we proceed on one of the best railways in the States, at the rate of upwards of twenty miles an hour, through a very beautiful and generally well cultivated country, to the city of Norwich, in the State of Connecticut, where the train arrives about eight in the evening, and the passengers immediately embark on a handsome steamer, for New York, enjoying, as long as daylight lasts, the fine scenery on the banks of the Thames. The night I went was moonlight; and, after long enjoying the coolness of the evening on deck, the company retired to their berths, and arrived at New York at the seasonable hour of six the following morning.
I remained in New York until the 7th of the Seventh Month (July). My friends, William Shotwell and wife, had left the city during the hot months, but very kindly placed their town house at my service, and I found the retirement thus at my command both refreshing and very serviceable, in enabling me to bring up arrears of writing. During this interval, I spent one very pleasant day with Theodore and Angelina Grimke Weld, and their sister, Sarah Grimke, who reside on a small farm, a few miles from Newark. To the great majority of my readers these names need no introduction; yet, for the benefit of the few, I will briefly allude to their past history. When the American Anti-Slavery Society was formed, in 1833, Theodore D. Weld was at the Lane Seminary, near Cincinnati, Ohio. He was unable to attend on that occasion, but wrote a letter, declaring his entire sympathy with its object. Soon after, through the influence and exertions of himself and Henry B. Stanton, a large majority of the students at Lane Seminary, comprising several slave-holders and sons of slave-holders, became members of an Anti-Slavery Society. The Faculty opposed the formation of this society, and finally expelled its members from the seminary. For two or three years after, Theodore Weld was engaged in anti-slavery effort, principally in the States of Ohio and New York. His voice failed at last, and for several years he was unable to address a public assembly. Angelina Grimke Weld, and her sister, Sarah Grimke, were natives of South Carolina, the daughters of a distinguished Judge of that State; for several years they resided in Philadelphia. Having long felt a deep interest in the condition of the slaves, in the year 1837 they, in accordance with what they believed to be a sense of religious duty, visited New York and New England, to plead the cause of those, with whose sorrows, degradation, and cruel sufferings, they had been familiar in their native State. They are evidently women of superior endowments, kind-hearted and energetic, and still retain something of the warmth and fervor of character peculiar to the South.
Few, even of the well informed abolitionists of England, have an adequate idea of the extent, variety, and excellence of the anti-slavery literature of the United States, or of the amount of intellectual power which has been willingly consecrated to this service. Of the cause itself, with all its exigencies, we may adopt, in a yet more limited sense, the sentiment of the Christian poet, on the transient nature of all sublunary things,
“These, therefore, are occasional, and pass.”
The time approaches when the shackles of the slave will fall off–when his suffering and despairing cry will be no more heard. Slavery itself is a temporary exigency; but its removal has called, and will yet call forth, works bearing the impress of intellectual supremacy, which will be embodied in the permanent literature of the age, and will contribute to raise the character, and to extend the reputation, of that literature. The names of Channing, Jay, Child, Green, and Pierpont, are already their own passport to fame. Other names might be mentioned; but, one instance excepted, selection might be invidious. That exception is Theodore D. Weld, whose palm of superiority few would be disposed to contest. His principal works are, “The Bible against Slavery;” “Power of Congress over Slavery in the District of Columbia;” and “Slavery as it is.”
All his writings are marked by varied excellence; yet their chief characteristic is an irresistible and overwhelming power of argument. Although brief and compressed in style, he exhausts his subject; and his two principal works, though on warmly controverted topics, have never been replied to. He would be a bold antagonist who should enter the lists against him: he would be a yet bolder ally who should attempt to go over the same ground, or to do better what has been done so well.
One of the most voluminous and popular writers that ever lived, observed to a friend, “that he was more proud of his compositions for manure, than of any other compositions with which he had any concern.” My friend, has the same love of rural occupations, and has found severe manual labor essential for the recovery of health, broken by labor of another kind. I found him at work on his farm, driving his own wagon and oxen, with a load of rails. When he had disposed of his freight, we mounted the wagon, and drove to his home. Two or three of his fellow-students at the Lane Seminary arrived about the same time, and we spent the day in agreeable, and, I trust, profitable intercourse. In the household arrangements of this distinguished family, Dr. Graham’s dietetic system is rigidly adopted, which excludes meat, butter, coffee, tea, and all intoxicating beverages. I can assure all who may be interested to know, that this Roman simplicity of living does not forbid enjoyment, when the guest can share with it the affluence of such minds as daily meet at their table. The “Graham system,” as it is called, numbers many adherents in America, who are decided in its praise.
My friends, Theodore D. and Angelina Weld, and Sarah Grimke, sympathize, to a considerable extent, with the views on “women’s rights,” held by one section of abolitionists; yet they deeply regret that this, or any other extraneous doctrine, should have been made an apple of discord; and, since the rise of these unhappy divisions, they have held aloof from both the anti-slavery organizations, though, as among the most able and successful laborers in the field, they may justly be accounted allies by each party. Difference of opinion on these points did not, for a moment, interrupt the pleasure of our intercourse; and I could not but wish, that those, of whatever party, who are accustomed to judge harshly of all who cannot pronounce their “shibboleth,” might be instructed by the candid, charitable, and peace-loving deportment of Theodore D. Weld.
During my visit to New York, I became acquainted with many who were deeply interested in the abolition cause, not a few of whom were members of my own religious society. Among these, I may particularly mention my venerable friends, Richard Mott and Samuel Parsons. I paid a second visit to the residence of the latter at Flushing, but regret to say, I found him too unwell to enjoy company.[A] His sons are anxiously desirous of furthering the abolition cause on every suitable occasion. One evening I spent with a respectable minister, who is a man of color, and who assured me that most of the intelligent persons of his class in New York approve of the course pursued by the late Convention in London, and the Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society. I saw at his house a man who had purchased his freedom for twelve hundred dollars, intending to remain in the same State, but, as in a precisely similar case already noticed, he afterwards found he had no alternative but to emigrate, leaving his still enslaved family behind him, or to be again sold into slavery himself, under the laws enacted to drive out free people of color. He was trying to raise the large sum of fourteen hundred dollars, to purchase his wife and four children.
[Footnote A: This illness terminated fatally. One of his intimate friends in this country, has favored me with the following communication respecting him. “Samuel Parsons had been from early life, a warm friend to the African race; his love of peace rendered him at the first accessible to prejudice against the American Anti-Slavery Society, through the misrepresentations respecting its violent and rash measures; which misrepresentations it was much more easy to believe than to investigate. Yet his interest for the negro and colored population of the United States continued, and he extended acts of protection and kindness towards them, whenever opportunity for it was afforded. In the Eleventh Month, last year, I find the following paragraph in one of his letters to us, viz. ‘Though sensible that I am drawing towards the close of time, I cannot avoid taking a deep interest in the moral reformation, relative to slavery and intemperance, which is progressing in the earth; my son Robert and I look at these publications as they appear, with deep solicitude. The proceedings of the Anti-Slavery Convention of the world, and its movements, are of great moment to the whole civilized world. The