CHAPTER I.

ABOLITION A SEDITION.

BY A NORTHERN MAN.

PHILADELPHIA:

GEO. W. DONOHUE,

NO. 22, SOUTH FOURTH STREET.

MDCCCXXXIX.

Entered according to the Act of Congress, in the

year 1839, by GEO. W. DONOHUE, in the Clerk’s

Office of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

+---------------------------------------------+

| Transcriber’s Notes: |

| |

| 1. Obvious printer and typographical errors |

| silently corrected. |

| 2. Archaic and inconsistent spelling and |

| punctuation retained. |

+---------------------------------------------+

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.

The character of the Abolition organization

CHAPTER II.

The American Anti-slavery Society a seditious organization

CHAPTER III.

The seditious character of the Annual Report of the American

Anti-slavery Society, of 1838

CHAPTER IV.

The seditious character of the American Anti-slavery Society

farther considered

CHAPTER V.

Violent reforms, and their connexion with Abolitionism

CHAPTER VI.

The Abolition organization borrowed from the religious world

CHAPTER VII.

The anarchical principles of Abolitionism

CHAPTER VIII.

The incendiary doctrines of Abolitionism

CHAPTER IX.

Political responsibility in regard to slavery

CHAPTER X.

The romance of Abolitionism

CHAPTER XI.

Every man mind his own business

CHAPTER XII.

Perfectionism

CHAPTER XIII.

Liberty and Equality

CHAPTER XIV.

Social and political effects of Abolitionism

CHAPTER XV.

The bad effects of Abolitionism on the free colored population,

and on the condition and prospects of the slaves

CHAPTER XVI.

A hypothetical view of Abolitionism

CHAPTER XVII.

Abolitionism considered as proposing no compensation for slave

property

CHAPTER XVIII.

The condition of American slaves as compared with other portions

of the African race

CHAPTER XIX.

The example of the Quakers, or Society of Friends

CHAPTER XX.

The South have done with argument

CHAPTER XXI.

Reasons why the Abolition movement, under its present

organization, will overthrow the Government

CHAPTER XXII.

The Abolition organization destructive of republican liberty

PREFACE.

We trust it will be obvious to all, that it was impossible to treat

Abolitionism according to its merits, or to exhibit its true

character, without regarding it as a RELIGIOUS MOVEMENT. There are two

prominent features of the moral and religious history of our country,

with which we have been compelled to come in contact. We, therefore,

take this opportunity so far to explain, as to bar the accident of

being misapprehended. First, then, we have averred the philosophical

connexion of antecedent and consequence between _Abolitionism_ and

_violent reforms_. It is proper, therefore, that we should state how

much we are willing to be understood as meaning by this couplet of

terms, having such a relation to the subject of this work. We say,

then, that by _violent reforms_, we mean those religious and moral

agitations of our country, which have proved alike unfriendly to

religious and social order, which are generally disapproved by sober

Christians, and we believe by the great majority of Christians, of

all, or nearly all, denominations. It is possible, that on a single

point we have hit hard a cherished opinion of many persons, for whom

we have the greatest respect; but as it relates merely to a _mode_ of

action, we must claim to be indulged in our own opinion in that

matter, as we allow the same privilege to others.

In the next place, we have found it necessary, in the _exhibit_ we

have made of the political machinery of the Abolition movement, to

enquire into its origin; and it will be manifest to all, that it was

brought from the religious world. The fact, that the model of the

American Anti-slavery Society was borrowed from the Religious and

Benevolent Society system, could not implicate those institutions, in

the estimation of the public, unless they should see fit to follow the

same example, and so far as they might do it, by going over from the

religious and moral, into the political sphere; which, we trust, they

will be wise enough not to do. It was necessary to describe the

machinery of those Societies in order to give the true picture of the

one under particular consideration; but we have taken care at the same

time to state, that the American Anti-slavery Society has betrayed

and violated the principles of the Religious and Benevolent Society

system, by first assuming its model, and then passing over into the

field of political action. That all these machineries are well adapted

to political ends, whenever they may be perverted and applied in that

direction, it is unnecessary to say; and the only way to escape the

charge, is to avoid the fault. The Abolition Society has gone openly

into that field, on which account we have considered it fair and

exactly true to represent it as a _political organization_, and as

being necessarily such from the work it has taken in hand.

Having, therefore, explained on these two points, we submit the work,

without farther comment, to speak for itself.

_January 1, 1839._

CHAPTER I.

THE CHARACTER OF THE ABOLITION ORGANIZATION.

There seems to have been a uniform impression among the great majority

of the citizens of the United States, that the Abolition movement in

this country is wrong, as it stands related to our political fabric;

but the exact character and extent of this wrong have not been so well

defined in the public mind, as to enable the people to see how a

remedy can be applied to arrest and control the mischief that appears

to be growing out of this agitation. Every reflecting person in the

land sees and feels, that it threatens to break asunder the American

Union; and few doubt, that such will be the result, if it is permitted

to go on. We take for granted, that the almost unanimous voice of the

whole country would concur in the opinion, that a violent dissolution

of the American Republic would be the greatest calamity that could

happen in this Western world. Can it be, then, that there is no

Constitutional power to suppress an organization, the rise and course

of which tend so directly and so inevitably to the disruption and

demolition of the Federal Government? Certainly, it would be a great

and notable defect in the political structure of the United States,

if there were to be found in it no principle of conservation against

such a danger, and if the people of this country were compelled to see

an enemy start up among themselves, and march directly to the

overthrow of the Government, without any power to resist. Doubtless,

in a last resort, the Union is too dear to the American people

generally to allow it to be sacrificed without an attempt to maintain

it, even if there should prove to be no provision in the Constitution

and laws. The necessity and importance of the case would create a law

for the occasion. The people would feel, that they have a better right

to defend the Union, than an enemy has to destroy it. But if the law

of necessity be waited for, the scale of chances as to the final issue

may have become doubtful--too doubtful and too portentous to be

prudently staked on such a hazard; and the American Union might be

lost forever.

If, however, it can be shown, that the Abolition movement is at war

with the genius and letter of the National Constitution and of the

Constitutions of the States respectively, and with that social compact

which created the Union, and under which it has hitherto been

maintained, then clearly there will be presented a Constitutional

basis on which this movement can be opposed, and by which, if it shall

become necessary, it can be suppressed. We propose an attempt to

establish the position, that such _is_ the character of this movement,

and consequently, that there is a remedial power against its action in

the Constitution and laws of the land.

Before we proceed to an array of the law which applies to the case, it

may be useful to inquire into the nature and character of the

organization, under which the Abolition movement is carried on. As

this machinery is so well known to the public, it will only be

necessary to refer to such general facts as the Abolitionists

themselves will not deny, however they may differ from us in the

character and name ascribed to them as a whole.

We observe, then, that the American Anti-Slavery Society, under the

authority and by the action of which, this movement is conducted, is a

_grand and permanent political organization, self-elected,

self-governed, independent, and irresponsible, having no connexion

with the Government of the country, but yet usurping the appropriate

business of that Government_.

It is an _organization_. This, certainly, will require no proof, as

nobody will deny it. It is formed after the model of the Religious and

Benevolent Society system, which has been in action for about thirty

years past, and which, in the later parts of this period, has grown

into considerable importance in the United States and in Great

Britain. The social influence of this system has been much greater in

this country than in the father land. But so long and so far as it was

confined to religious and benevolent objects, the political

authorities and feeling of the community seem to have taken little or

no alarm. It was obvious, from experience and observation, that these

organizations were armed with a wide spread, and many of them with an

all pervading influence; and that they were admirably calculated to

acquire power, and to bring to bear an efficient and energetic action

on their specific objects. In their history and progress, as their

exigencies have seemed to require, they have severally erected a sort

of State machinery, with a Constitution as a general basis of polity;

with the customary law-making, executive and judicial powers; with

principal and under secretaries; with a fiscal department; and with

numerous subsidiary agencies, according to the nature and extent of

their operations. Some of these institutions are engaged in

enterprises as wide as the globe, have numerous foreign establishments

of no mean consideration, and foreign colonies have been erected and

are governed by them. Nothing but a state machinery, with a

corresponding polity, was adequate to the execution of such designs.

And while they were confined to religious and benevolent operations,

they had not excited the jealousy of the political world; at least, so

far as we know, not to any considerable extent.

And it may be remarked--as we shall have occasion hereafter to notice

more particularly--that the Abolition movement, under its present

organization, originated in religious sentiment, and commenced as a

benevolent enterprise. It was natural, therefore, in view of the

success which had attended these other institutions, and of the great

power and efficiency they had acquired over the public mind, to adopt

the same model--the same sort of State machinery in the several

departments of its organization. And thus, in the American

Anti-Slavery Society, we have an independent and powerful

Commonwealth, organized, like every other State, on the basis of a

Constitution declarative of its great and fundamental principles,

with a head, with a cabinet, with its various State departments and

secretaries, with a productive and regular system of fiscal

operations, with a polity of its own, with a vast republic of

subsidiary combinations, multiplying rapidly, and each constantly

increasing in numbers and influence, acquiring talent, wealth, and

power on a large scale, creating and sending forth upon the public a

world of literature of its own chosen character, in the various

forms of books, periodicals, journals, tracts, and pictorial

representations; and able, on the principle of such an organization,

while unresisted by any opposing power, to extend and wield an

influence, which, sooner or later, will dissolve the Union, and send

the Government of this proud Republic, in broken fragments, to the

winds of heaven.

And it is a _political_ organization. It is true, indeed, that when

Abolition first broke out in New York, in 1834, the most prominent

leaders there disclaimed all participation in political matters, as

will appear from the following note, unless it is to be regarded as a

_ruse de guerre_ for the occasion: “It has been our object to address

the hearts and consciences of our fellow citizens, and to defend our

principles by facts and arguments; to encourage the people of color to

great circumspection of conduct and forbearance; _and to abstain from

mingling the objects of our society with either of the political

parties_.”

Signed, “Arthur Tappan, John Rankin, E. Wright, jr., Joshua Leavitt,

W. Goodell, Lewis Tappan, Samuel E. Cornish.

New York, July 16th, 1834.”

The following _Circular_, from the Anti-slavery office in New York,

issued for electioneering purposes, in the New York political campaign

of 1838, would seem to show, that great advances have been made in

regard to the political character of this society, since 1834:--

“Dear Sir,

“Enclosed you have a list of the publications of this society,

to which you will please direct any of our _Whig_ friends, who

may desire a knowledge of the _truth_. I am gratified that our

Abolition friends are to be found on the _Whig side_, rather

than the _Loco Focos_; for the cause of the country and of

humanity ought to go together. _If we can_ RIVET _ourselves

firmly on one of these parties, we can gain our object. Be

careful._

I am yours, &c. per Arthur Tappan.

B. LE ROY.”

New York, Nov. 1, 1838.

This _Circular_ was addressed to P. W. Wesley, jr., and marked No.

126. How many _more_ were sent out, of course we do not know--it might

be _hundreds_, or it might be _thousands_.

It is no more than fair, however, to observe, that Mr. Arthur Tappan

has disclaimed having authorized Mr. Le Roy the use of his name in

this instance; which, indeed, is of very little consequence, and in no

way affects the object we have in view by these references. Whether

the gentlemen, who signed the note of July 16, 1834, were really so

blind as not to see the _necessary_ connexion of their cause with

politics, we cannot pretend to say. If they _did_ see it, their

disclaimer, to say the least, was unbecoming. As men of common

discernment, they _ought_ to have known as well then as now, that they

could do nothing in this business, in the way they propose, without

affecting the politics of the country; and that the movement _in

toto_, from beginning to end, is political in its character and

bearings. Certainly, since that time, the Abolitionists have better

learned the position which they occupy. What shall we say? That their

early disclaimer was a cloak to conceal their designs? We would rather

suppose, that they did not know what they were about. Would, that we

could say, they are equally ignorant now, that thereby they might be

proved more innocent. Evidently, the disguise, if disguise it was, is

thrown aside. By their own public avowals and acts, official and

other, they are now fairly and openly in the political field. The

following resolution was passed at the Annual meeting of the American

Anti-Slavery Society, at New York, May, 1838: “_Resolved_, that we

deprecate the organization of any Abolition political party; but that

we recommend to Abolitionists throughout the country, to interrogate

candidates for office, with reference to their opinions on subjects

connected with the abolition of slavery; and to vote, irrespective of

party, for those only who will advocate the principles of universal

liberty.”

Three of the Corresponding Secretaries of this Society, James G.

Birney, E. Wright, jr., and Henry B. Stanton, issued a circular from

the office at New York, in July 1838, to Agents in the country,

quoting the above resolution, and remarking, that “resolutions

embodying the same idea have been passed by the New England

Anti-Slavery Convention, and we believe, by nearly all, if not all,

the State Anti-Slavery Societies;” and that “they think the time has

come, when the friends of the slave, throughout the free States,

should act fully up to the letter and the spirit of these resolutions.

We hope, therefore, you will, without delay, confer with Abolitionists

in your region on the subject, by correspondence, by holding meetings,

and in such other ways as may be deemed expedient, and take prompt and

efficient measures, _to secure the election of such candidates for the

National and State Legislatures_, as the friends of the slave can

cheerfully support. By order of the Executive Committee.”

The following is an extract from a letter written by Mr. Stanton, one

of the Secretaries who signed the above Circular, showing how well he

himself had been engaged in these duties: “From Lockport I returned to

Utica. By request I delivered an address in the Bleeker street Church,

the evening of the 10th inst. _on the political duties of the 40,000

Abolition voters in this State_, (New York) _with reference to the

fall elections_.”

The following are extracts from the public, well considered,

authoritative and solemn document of the Annual Report of the American

Anti-Slavery Society for 1838:--“It is often said, that religion has

nothing to do with our republican politics; and hence it is inferred,

that a cause which is based upon and inseparable from religion,

should not presume to meddle with political affairs. But to make

the proposition true, we must read instead of _religion,

sectarianism_.... The religious principles of Abolitionism have

nothing to do with _sects_.... They are but the thoughts and opinions

of all who truly love God.... Abolitionism _must_ have much to do with

politics.... Abolitionists have resolved, _from the first_, to act

upon slavery _politically_.... During the year this principle has

produced the happiest results. The candidates of the opposing parties

have been questioned, and their answers published; and in cases too

numerous to mention, the election has resulted in favour of those who

most decidedly pledged themselves to Anti-Slavery measures.”

The _religious_ character of Abolitionism, as here confessed, will be

considered in a subsequent place. We do not dissent from the

suggestion conveyed, that religion has its political _rights_, under

the Constitution, as much as any other interest, feeling, or

principle; but we do not see the force of the distinction drawn

between _religion_ and _sectarianism_ for this particular purpose;

although the distinction is in fact obvious. Are not Abolitionists a

_sect_, and as strongly marked as any that can be named? They fall,

therefore, under the ban of their own rule. But, although religion has

its political _rights_, not excepting even _sectarianism_--and we have

yet to learn that there is any religion in the country, which is not

sectarian, both in its principles and modes of operation, not only in

relation to other religious bodies, but to Christianity itself, the

catholic standard--it must yet be very careful not to usurp political

_powers_ in this country--not to have _too much_ “to do with our

republican politics.” “Abolitionism _must_ have much to do with

politics.” The word “must,” is italicised in the Report, and _may_,

therefore, be taken as intended to be emphatically significant. We

agree with them perfectly. But, that “Abolitionists have resolved,

_from the first_, to act upon slavery _politically_,” is a matter

which they must settle among themselves, inasmuch as when they _first

set out_, they disclaimed it, as would appear from the note of July

16th, 1834, above introduced.

Our object in these quotations, is not to inform the public generally

in regard to facts of this kind, as they are sufficiently well

known--but merely to throw out a few tangible materials, connected

with volumes of the same class, which might easily be collected, for

the purpose of justifying in our pages the conclusions we deduce from

them. We will trouble our readers with but one more which is from a

_clerical_ Agent of the Society in the western part of New York, dated

Aurora, Oct. 8, 1838. It is a letter to a fellow laborer in Chetauque

County.

“Dear Sir,

“I have just had assigned to me, by the Executive Committee of

the New York State Anti-Slavery Society, as my field of labor

for several months to come, Niagara, Erie, Chetauque, and

Cataraugus Counties. The first object to which I am bending all

my energies, is the holding of County meetings _before the

coming election, with a view especially of preparing and

exciting Abolitionists to carry their principles to the polls,

and wield all their_ POLITICAL, _as well as moral and

religious power_ for the redemption, &c. ... Can you not create

a _tremendous reaction_ at this time, &c.? ... The only way in

which we can move the proslavery and dough-faced politicians,

is by showing them our _political strength_, &c.... Now, will

you call together your Executive Committee, and fix on a time

and place for a Convention? Let me know immediately, and write

letters all over the County,--_have notices given out in the_

CHURCHES, &c. ... and have town Abolition Meetings held before

the County Convention.

“Yours for the crushed slave,

“T. M. BLAKESLEY.”

These extracts may serve to indicate the zeal and activity of the

Secretaries and numerous Agents of this society, _clerical_ and other,

previous to the New York elections, and the modes adopted to secure

their ends. The interrogation of “candidates for the National and

State Legislatures,” and for other civil and political stations, as

resolved upon and recommended by the parent Society, has been

scrupulously carried out. The correspondence between Messrs. Seward

and Bradish on the one side, and the official organs of the Society on

the other, while these two gentlemen stood before the people of the

State of New York as candidates, the first for Governor, and the

second for Lieutenant Governor, has been laid before the public--all

tending to the same point. Not being exactly satisfied with the result

of the election in New York, so far as it demonstrated the influence

of the Anti-Slavery Society, it has been suggested by Gerritt Smith,

Esq., who seems to be a sort of Dictator General in these matters,

that the Abolition societies should undergo a new organization, with a

view to the expurgation of the baser and unsound materials, by

requiring the despotic test of binding the conscience in the use of

the elective franchise. How this will go down, we are unable to say;

though it seems to us to be carrying matters with a high hand.

Doubtless, the business, in one form or another, will go ahead, in

despite of the imprudence of individuals, until the people of this

country can be made to see the real character and tendency of the

movement. Suffice it to say, as is sufficiently evident, that the

American Anti-Slavery Society is now a _grand political organization_,

aiming, by the use of political agencies and powers, at a radical and

great change in the American political fabric. We shall yet have

occasion to show, that this change, urged in this mode and under

present circumstances, unless the movement can be checked and

suppressed, must necessarily and inevitably dissolve the Union, and

consequently overthrow the Government, as it now exists. But our

immediate object is to establish the proposition, as stated in

_Italics_ on page 3, in order to prepare the way for the application

of those principles of American Constitutional law, which will prove

this Society to be a _seditious organization_.

The most essential point of the proposition now under consideration,

is the fact, that the American Anti-Slavery Society is a _political_

organization. That, we think, may be regarded as already established;

but it may still be fortified by the consideration, that it is

_necessarily_ so from the object it has in view, apart from the

position it has assumed before the public by its own avowals and

measures, and by the agencies it has taken in hand. Slavery, as is

well known, and as will hereafter be made apparent by the introduction

of authorities, is a corporate part of the American political fabric,

established by Constitutional law, and interwoven with the frame of

the Federal Government. It is not only a thoroughly pervading element,

and main pillar of political society in the slave-holding States, but

it is made a part of the supreme law of the land in the Federal

Constitution. It is impossible, therefore, from the nature of the

case, to institute any action, private or public, individual or

combined, in any form, or by any agency, to abolish or eradicate

slavery from American society, which will not be of a political

character. Consequently, the Abolition movement, which, as before

remarked, originated in religious sentiment, which was prompted and is

still sustained principally by religious men, and which borrowed the

model of its organization from the action of the religious world, by

instituting an exact copy, the moment it entered the field, was

transformed into a political body from the very nature of the work it

had undertaken, notwithstanding it was, and still is, actuated by

religious sentiment. It is nevertheless political, and it is all the

more dangerous, because religion is in it--not Christianity. We shall

by and by attempt to show the difference between Christianity and that

religion, which lies at the bottom, and is the instigator, of this

movement. We have seen, that, in the first setting out, the leaders

professed to disclaim political alliance; but, allowing they were

sincere in that disclaimer, they soon discovered it was a false step.

Throwing aside all disguise, they have now gone _the whole_ for

political action. At first, they were timid, perhaps--did not know

their strength, which might be a reason for not coming out under their

own flag. But, _crescit eundo_--the cause soon obtained sympathy, and

found way to importance; and behold! it dares to face the Government

of the country in open conflict, and to erect its batteries against

that Constitutional fabric, which has hitherto been so dear to

American citizens.

We have stated, that this political organization is _permanent_. The

meaning under which we propose to sustain the application of this

epithet in this case, refers, by contradistinction, to a mode of

popular political action, which, we conceive, is authorised by the

Constitutional law of the land, and which proves equally, that a

_permanent_ organization of this kind is unauthorised and prohibited.

For the present we simply state, what we suppose will not be

contradicted, that the American Anti-Slavery Society is a _permanent_

body, in distinction from those popular assemblages or conventions,

which are customarily held in this country for political purposes,

under the specific sanction of the Constitution and laws, which exist

only for the time being, which do not presume to arm themselves with a

distinct and separate polity, or to set up an imperium in imperio,

independent and irresponsible.

We have stated also, that it is a _grand_ political organization. This

term is of no farther importance than simply to indicate, what is very

well known, that this Society is great and powerful. It claims to

wield 40,000 of the political votes of the State of New York. Whether

this be over or under the true estimate, we take it from themselves;

and it is probably fair to conclude, that they are equally strong in

most of the other free States. Admitting that they have one-half, or

even one-fourth, of this power, it is enough to justify the

application of this term. It is a _grand_ organization also, in

consideration of its vast and complicated machinery, of the variety

and extent of its operations, and of its means of influence. In 1838,

this Society reports 1350 auxiliaries, of which 12 were State

Societies, now 13, and 340 of these organized in the course of the

previous year; 38 travelling Agents, so constantly engaged, as to have

performed jointly 27 years’ labour in one; 75 local lecturers,

circulating in adjacent towns, as far as convenient; money raised in

the course of the year, $40,000, being $5,000 in excess of the

previous year, notwithstanding the pecuniary embarrassments of the

community; the issues of the press, 187,316 copies of Human Rights,

193,800 of the Emancipator, 42,100 Circulars and Prints, 12,054 bound

volumes, 72,732 Tracts and Pamphlets, 97,600 of the Slaves’ Friend,

and 40,000 of the Anti-Slavery Record. Total: 646,502.

This society, therefore, is a _grand_, and in its moral and political

influence, a stupendous machinery.

And it is _self-erected_, _self-governed_, _independent_, and

_irresponsible_. The truth of these statements, we think, is

self-evident in all that we intend, or desire to be understood, by

them. The first, certainly, is true. For what authority, independent

of its component parts, suggested, or sanctioned it? And the second is

equally true. For, where is the power, out of itself, that dictates,

or controls, its proceedings? The third and fourth are also true. For

what authority will they acknowledge, as competent to call them to

account? They are, indeed, responsible to public opinion; but the

relation we intend to express, is responsibility to some constituted

authority; and in this view our proposition is sustained, so far as

their designs are concerned. We presume they do not recognize the

right of any known authority to call them to account. We think it

fair, therefore, to represent this Society as _self-erected_,

_self-governed_, _independent_, and _irresponsible_. So far as our

individual opinion is concerned, we do indeed believe and hold, that

they are responsible to an authority that is competent to act upon

them, when a sense of public duty may require it, and that it is

sufferance only that screens the action of this Society from

uncomfortable rebuke. But we mean only to assert in our proposition,

what we suppose is true: that they do not _hold_ themselves

responsible; that there is no constituted, or official, connexion

between them and a superior power; and that they consider themselves

entitled to carry on the operations in which they are engaged, under

their present organization, without check, control, or interference of

any authority.

Moreover, _there is no such connexion between them and the Government

of the country_, as is prescribed by constitutional law to popular

assemblages, or associations, for political purposes. There is,

indeed, no connexion at all. The government is not even advised of

the existence of this society by its own official acts; at least we

have never heard of it.

And yet further--which is the last point of our proposition--this

society _has usurped the appropriate business of the Government_. They

have formally and solemnly declared, in various forms, so far as their

authority goes, that slavery is wrong by a higher and more imperative

law than that of the country, and set themselves directly to do it

away, by all the means they can employ, in the application of a

stupendous machinery of their own creation, and under their own

independent control. The elective franchise is only one means, and as

yet by far the least efficient. Without any balance of influence to

oppose and counteract the effect of their proceedings on the public

mind, they have been enabled, by the advantages and power of their

organization, to agitate the whole country, to throw the South into a

state of consternation, and to menace the overthrow of the Government.

No one doubts--and therefore we think we are justified in

saying--that, had it not been for the necessary posture of

self-defence, assumed by the slave-holding States, the Agents of this

Society, without waiting for the action of Government, would have

carried their incendiary measures directly into the South, and raised

a servile insurrection and civil war. It is true, indeed, that this

Society have commenced working hard at the polls, as a means of

accomplishing their end, and so far have recognized the principle,

that Government is to be consulted. But all their other operations,

which comprehend the principal sum of their labors, have been of a

character which would seem to imply, that the removal of slavery was

their business. They have never entered on that course of action for a

change in the political fabric of the country, which Constitutional

law prescribes, by acting on the Government, the only legitimate

organ. They have not even approached the Government, nor recognised

either its existence or authority for such a purpose. We speak of the

action of the Society _as such_, and not of the action of its

individual members in their capacity as citizens. If citizens,

desiring such an object, are required to address the Government,

instead of seeking to undermine the Constitution and laws, by indirect

and independent operations; and if this rule has been wisely enacted

for the public peace and safety, much more is it incumbent on a

powerful combination, in undertaking to change the laws of the

country--if it be lawful for such a combination to be formed--to

advise the Government of their wishes and proceedings. Just in

proportion as they are more influential and more powerful than

individuals, by virtue of association, is it more incumbent on them,

and more important, to consult the regular and constituted

authorities.

But what has been the fact in regard to the operations of the American

Anti-slavery Society? Simply, that they have gone to this work just as

if it were their own proper business--as if there were no government

in the land. They have never addressed the Government; they have never

consulted it; they have never asked leave to be, to act, or to enter

this field; but have erected a republic of their own, with a State

machinery, and set themselves to change the government of the country,

as if it devolved upon them by original and indefeasible right. In a

word, they have taken in hand, by a virtual usurpation, the most

delicate, and the most disturbing political question, which could

possibly be agitated--a question, which, by the Constitutional frame

of our Government, belongs properly and only to the States where

slavery exists, and which, for that reason, the General Government

itself can never meddle with, without the consent of those States.

Clearly, the National Government is the only channel through which the

subject can be lawfully approached from the free States; by the

Federal compact the National Government is the public guardian of

slavery; and consequently, when ever its abolition is attempted under

the jurisdiction of the United States, independent of the action of

the General Government, and without the consent of the slave States,

it is a direct invasion of chartered rights, and a usurpation.

We have now done with the proposition laid down for the argument of

this chapter, and will only repeat it in form for the consideration of

the reader: _That the American Anti-slavery Society is a grand and

permanent political organization, self-erected, self-governed,

independent, and irresponsible, having no connexion with the

Government of the country, but yet usurping the appropriate business

of that government._

Abolition a Sedition, by a Northern Man · 第 1 / 22 章