_The Society of Friends in America and the Colonization Society_.
The "Friends" alluded to in the text as supporting the Colonization
Society in a collective capacity, are those of North Carolina. In 1832
two influential "Friends" appeared at the Annual Meeting of the
Colonization Society, as delegates from the Society of Friends in North
Carolina. One of the resolutions passed at the time, is as
follows:--"That the thanks of this Meeting be presented to the Society
of Friends in North Carolina, for the aid they have liberally bestowed
and repeatedly rendered to the cause of African Colonization." The
Yearly meeting of Friends in North Carolina stands among the donors of
that year, as having contributed five hundred dollars to the
Colonization Society. I fear no change has since taken place in the
favorable disposition of "Friends" of that region towards this
institution, for during one of my visits to Philadelphia, I was informed
by a "Friend," just returned from North Carolina, that an agent of the
Colonization Society had been recently permitted to make an appeal
before the members of the "Meeting of Sufferings" of that Yearly
Meeting, which had afterwards granted him two hundred dollars out of the
common stock of the Society. Nothing is more certain than that
approbation of the principles and measures of the Colonization Society,
cannot co-exist with any lively desires for the extinction of slavery,
by the only practical means--_emancipation_; and accordingly I was not
surprised to find it urged by some prominent individuals as a reason for
their own inactivity, and that of the Society at large, on this subject,
that "Friends" living within the slave States, urged their brethren at
the North not to unite with the Anti-slavery Societies. It appears,
however, that "Friends" of North Carolina do not, at all events, object
to uniting or co-operating with those of other denominations, in
promoting an object which they approve. Their objection to abolition
societies evidently rests on quite different grounds.
I must here be permitted to say a few words, respecting the character
and objects of the society, thus officially patronized by the Friends of
North Carolina.
The greatest objection to this society, is its representing slavery, and
the prejudice against color, as necessary and incurable evils, for which
its own mockery of a remedy is the only palliative; and thus
administering an opiate to the consciences, not only of slave-holders,
but of others who are unwilling to part with their sinful prejudices,
and to enter into that fellowship of suffering with the enslaved,
without which no efforts for the removal of slavery will be effectual.
The following extracts, elucidating this subject, are from a printed
letter written by a friend of high station and extensive influence, then
residing in North Carolina, but now of the State of Indiana, in defence
of the Colonization Society. It is dated "Third Month 4th, 1834," and I
suppress his name, because time and reflection have, I believe, in some
degree modified his views.
Speaking of the opposition of Friends in England to the Colonization
Society, he says, "I have supposed that they would think it more
consistent with Christian principles to emancipate them in the Southern
States, and let them remain there, as they have done in the Northern
States. I apprehend that Friends in England are not fully apprised of
some important circumstances, which place the Southern States in a very
different situation from the Northern. In the first place, there never
were so many people of color in the Northern States, as there are in the
Southern; and another circumstance that diminished them there, and
increased them greatly here, was while the Northern States were
legislating on the subject of gradual emancipation, avaricious masters
sent them by thousands to the Southern markets, before the emancipating
laws were actually passed, which left a small proportion in those
States, in comparison to the whites; not many more, perhaps, than they
were willing to have for laborers, waiting men, waiting women, et cet.
And notwithstanding they have freed their slaves, for which they are
entitled to applause, yet they never dreamed of raising them to equal
citizenship and privileges with the white people. No, my friend, they
can no more reconcile to themselves the idea of sitting down by the side
of a colored African, (American?) in any legislative or judiciary
department, than the high spirited Southern slaveholder; _and not only
so, they never intend to admit them to these privileges, while the State
Government, and the United States' Government continue in existence_."
Again, after stating various objections to emancipation, he goes on to
say, "I need not dwell much upon the subject of universal emancipation,
in stating the best, or the worst, or most probable results of such a
measure, because the Southern people have no more idea of the general
emancipation of slaves, without colonizing them, than the Northern
people have of admitting the few among _them_ to equal rights and
privileges. Not even the friends of humanity here, think that a general
emancipation, to remain here, would better their condition," et cet.
The inferences plainly to be drawn from all this, and from much besides
to the same purport, are, that the wicked determination of the white
people to retain their sinful prejudices, is, like the laws of the Medes
and Persians, immutable; and must, therefore, be accommodated by the
transportation of the unoffending objects of their intense dislike. On
this point I will observe that, if it be so, the remedy is worse than
the disease; but that Christian principle is powerful enough, as daily
experience testifies, to combat and destroy this unholy prejudice. The
next inference is, that because the slave population in the Southern
States is much more numerous than it was in the Northern, _therefore_
the same reasons for emancipation do not exist. Is not the true
conclusion from such premises, the very reverse of this? The motives to
abolition increase, both in weight and number, in proportion to the
absolute and relative increase of the slave population. The British West
Indies present an example of the safety and advantages of the measure in
a community, where the whites are a mere handful compared to the colored
population.
That state of feeling from which the Colonization Society sprung, is
well illustrated by this writer, in giving, in natural language, a
picture of his own mind. After again repeating his statement of the vast
proportion which the colored population bears to the white, in the Slave
States, he says, "Now, my friend, the general emancipation of such a
number of these poor, degraded creatures, say more than two millions,
always to remain here with the white people, even if the Government
should take the necessary care for their education and preparation for
freedom and civilized life, which to be sure it ought, they must or will
be a degraded people, while the reins of government remain in the hands
of the whites. Supposing the very best consequences that could follow
such a measure, even that both classes should generally exercise
Christian feelings towards each other, which is very improbable, if not
morally impossible, the peculiarly marked difference of features and
color, will be always an insurmountable barrier to general
amalgamation." Again, "Were they of the same color and features that we
are, in an elective republican government like this, where talents and
merit are the common footsteps to esteem and preferment, there would be
no difficulty in universal emancipation, without a separation. I have no
idea that they are at all inferior to the white people in intellect;
give them the same opportunity for enterprise and improvement." Their
only sin, it appears, after all, is being "guilty of a skin not colored
like our own." I may observe, in passing, that amalgamation, the bugbear
of anti-abolitionists, is the necessary result of slavery, not of
emancipation.
The preceding extracts present a faithful picture of colonization
principles, though it is not every colonizationist who would avow them
with so much simplicity. The writer notwithstanding, manifests some
benevolent feeling towards the slaves. His conscience cannot be
satisfied with the present state of things, and he, like too many
others, takes refuge in the pleasing delusion that it would be
practicable to convey these colored Americans across the Atlantic and
make them comfortable in Africa, because their ancestors were born
there. As reasonably and as justly might he talk of transporting the
white Americans to England because their ancestors removed from this
country.
It is very easily demonstrable, that this could not possibly be
accomplished--that neither the means of transport could be found, nor
the means of settlement provided; and were these impossibilities
removed, it might also be shown, very easily, that it would be suicidal
policy to remove the entire laboring population of the Southern States
from a soil and climate for which they only are adapted. Yet
emancipation by removal is the theory of the Colonization Society, and
in this point of view that Society must be characterized as a grand
imposture. What must be the power of that delusion which can render
intelligent and philanthropic men the victims of such a fallacy? If the
whites, who hold the reins of government, could but be brought to
exercise Christian feelings towards the people of color, which this
worthy friend thinks is perhaps "morally impossible," how rapidly would
all difficulties vanish? To accomplish this desirable end is the object
of the abolitionists; they feel it to be difficult, but they know it to
be not impossible.
The writer of this pamphlet uniformly couples "ultra slaveholders" and
"northern manumissionists" in the same censure. They are the two
objectionable extremes; colonizationists and moderate slave-holders
being, I suppose, the golden mean. One illustration more of the animus
with which he regards a black population.
"And so it is with the New England immediate manumissionists; they have
so few people of color that they do not consider them an evil; and hence
they conclude that the Southern States may do as they have done--free
them at once; but I have no doubt at all, if there was as large a
proportion of colored people in the New England States as in the
Southern, there would be but one voice, and that would be for colonizing
them somewhere."
The following passage is historically interesting:
"The Yearly Meeting of Friends of North Carolina have sent several
hundreds of those they have had under their care to Liberia, for whose
emancipation in this State they could never obtain a law, though they
petitioned for it oftentimes for the space of fifty years, always
finding the chief objection of the legislature to be that of the great
number and degraded and low character of the free persons of color
already in the State. We prefer sending them to Africa rather than to
any of the free States or to Canada--because we believe _that_ is their
proper home. We sent some to the State of Ohio; and since then hundreds
of blacks have been in a manner compelled, by the laws of that State, or
the prejudices of some of its citizens, to leave it and go to Canada. We
have sent some to Indiana, but that State has passed laws, we hear, to
prevent any more coming. We have sent some to Pennsylvania, but, about
two years ago, we shipped near one hundred from Newbern and Beaufort to
Chester; they were not suffered to land, neither there nor at
Philadelphia, nor yet on the Jersey shore opposite, but had to float on
the Delaware river until the Colonization Society took them into
possession; then they were landed in Jersey, ten miles below
Philadelphia, and re-shipped for Africa. North Carolina Yearly Meeting
has contributed thousands of dollars to the Colonization Society; it has
probably done more for it than any other religious community has in
America, not merely because it has provided us an asylum for the people
of color under our care, but upon the ground of our belief that it is a
great, humane, and benevolent institution. I am not informed of a single
member of the Society of Friends in this country, not even in any of the
slave States, who is not in favor of colonizing them in Africa. We
believe generally that colonizing them there gradually is the most
likely way to put a peaceful end to slavery, and place them in the great
scale of equality with the rest of the civilized world."
I have devoted a space to this letter for several reasons; first,
because the writer is a man of note and influence in his own country,
and has plainly uttered what many of the Society of Friends even now
feel, secondly, he has shown what was the prevalent sentiment among
Friends not longer than seven years since, though I hope and believe a
considerable change has taken place in the interval; and lastly,
because, within a few months past, a well-known American, a zealous
agent of the Colonization Society, has privately employed this very
letter to induce abolitionists in England to look favorably on that
Society.
I would add, also, that I learn, on the authority of an English
"Friend," who has lately visited the various Yearly Meetings in America,
that in those parts of the slave States in which "Friends" chiefly
reside, their influence is very perceptible in mitigating the treatment
of the slaves in their neighborhood. This, I willingly believe; indeed
the example of a body who refuse to hold slaves, cannot but be highly
beneficial.
APPENDIX L.--Page 96.
"_Memorial of citizens of Boston, United States, to the Lords of the
Admiralty, Great Britain_.
"To the Right Honorable the Lords of the Admiralty of Great
Britain.
"The undersigned, the citizens of Boston, in the United States
of America, of different religious denominations, respectfully
represent--
"That by existing arrangements for the sailing of the Cunard
line of steamers between Boston and Liverpool, it becomes
necessary for them to leave this port on the Sabbath, whenever
that happens to be the regular day appointed for sailing; and
that this occurs a number of times in the course of a year. That
the sailing of a steamer on that day is a source of deep regret
to many good citizens, who are compelled, whenever the event
happens, either to defer their departure to a future day, or to
yield to an arrangement which violates their Christian feelings.
And what is still more to be lamented, as a consequence growing
out of the present regulation, is that aside from the tumult
necessarily attendant on the sailing of these vessels on the
Lord's day, it furnishes an occasion for the needless
profanation of the day by thousands who assemble as spectators
on our wharves to witness their departure.
"The undersigned regard a proper observance of the Sabbath as
vital to the general peace, good order, and welfare of society;
and they are deeply impressed with the belief that nothing of a
secular or worldly nature should be done on that day by
individuals, by governments, or by any of their departments,
Which is not in the strictest sense a work of necessity or
mercy; and they most respectfully represent, that they are
unable to perceive any reasons which render the sailing of
steamers from this port on the Lord's day such a work. And
believing as they do, that it will be the pleasure of your
lordships at all times to cherish and promote, so far as you may
be able, a due observance of the Sabbath, they respectfully and
earnestly request your lordships so to vary the present
arrangements as to the times for the sailing of these steamers,
that their departure from this port shall be changed to another
day, whenever the appointed day for sailing shall fall upon the
Christian Sabbath. And they venture to express their confident
belief that not only the public welfare, but also the private
advantage of individuals concerned in the enterprize, would be
ultimately promoted by the arrangements here prayed for.
"The undersigned cannot conclude their memorial without
adverting to the high and responsible station that has been
assigned by Providence to the English and American people, in
the great work which they and we rejoice to know is now so
rapidly progressing, of improving the moral and religious
character and condition of the world; nor can they be unmindful
of the fact, that to the same extent as their standing before
the world in this respect is permanent, so will be the influence
of their example on the nations around them, whether it be good
or bad.
"That the subject here presented may receive your Lordship's
favorable and Christian consideration is the sincere and earnest
desire of your Lordships' most respectful memorialists."
The signatures to this document included the late mayor and one of the
former ones, who was also Lieutenant-Governor of the State of
Massachusetts, one bishop, upwards of forty clergymen of different
denominations, nine gentlemen, upwards of one hundred and twenty
merchants, seventeen presidents of insurance companies, the postmaster
of Boston, five physicians, seven members of the legal profession, two
editors of newspapers; and it was accompanied by the following
memorandum from one of the gentlemen who had taken it round for
signature.
"The undersigned having been personally engaged in obtaining the
signatures to the memorial, asking a change in the sailing of
the Cunard steamers, when the regular sailing day occurs on the
Sabbath, hereby certifies that the memorialists are among the
most respectable and influential of their respective
professions, that the memorial was received with almost
universal favor, and that, had time been allowed, and had it
been deemed necessary to do it, thousands of names might have
been obtained.
"AMOS A. PHELPS."
"Boston, July 31, 1841."
On my arrival in this country, I found that Lord Melbourne's
administration was about to resign; I therefore deferred forwarding the
memorial until the present ministers had entered upon the duties of
their respective offices; when I called at the Admiralty, and placed it
in the hands of the Secretary, having little doubt the application would
have been at once granted; but a few days after it was presented I
received the following reply:--
"Admiralty, September 21, 1841.
"Sir,--Having laid before my Lords Commissioners of the
Admiralty the communications of the citizens of Boston, United
States, representing their wish that the departure of Mr.
Cunard's steamers on a Sunday, from their port, should, for the
future be discontinued; I am commanded by their lordships to
acquaint you, that after having given that attention to the
subject, which their respect for the citizens of Boston, and for
the religious opinions expressed by them, could not fail to
dictate, my lords have, upon mature consideration, come to the
conclusion, that, with a due regard to the exigencies of the
public service, the proposed alteration cannot be carried into
effect. My lords, therefore, beg you will have the goodness to
convey their decision to the citizens of Boston, together with
the assurance of their respect for the opinions they have
expressed, and their consequent regret at being unable to comply
with their request.
"I am, Sir,
"Your most obedient humble servant,
"JOHN BARROW.
"Joseph Sturge, Esq., Birmingham."