THE PRINCIPLES, &C. OF THE LEADERS OF ABOLITIONISM EXHIBITED.
As Abolitionists are constantly taunting the friends of Colonization
with the charge, that the founders of it were Slave-holders, (which, by
the by, like almost all their other statements, as will be shown in a
subsequent chapter, is destitute of truth,) they cannot complain at
their opponents taking a _peep_ into the _principles_ of some of their
_Chief Champions_, and Promoters of Abolitionism--And, as WILLIAM LLOYD
GARRISON, Esq. stands pre-eminently distinguished as their great
Apostle, we shall let the public know what this Gentleman's _principles_
are; with his abilities, character, moral or religious worth, we have
nothing to do--And as they have made him their head, and sent him as
their representative to England, we are fully justified, in concluding
that he spoke his sentiments not as an individual, but as the deputed
representative of those who sent him there; viz. the Promoters of
Abolition in this Country:--Therefore we need not further or stronger
evidence of the nature of sentiment, opinions, and objects of these
Gentlemen. Ex uno disce omnes.
To begin,--
Who was sent to Europe, a few years ago, as the REPRESENTATIVE of the
American Anti-Slavery Society?
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON, Esq.!
Who, in that Country, publicly pronounced the American Union to be, "the
most bloody and heaven-daring arrangement ever made by man"?
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON, Esq.!
Who, in said Country, and in said year, called the said _Union_, "A
wicked and ignominious compact"?
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON, Esq.!
Who, in said place, and said year, denounced the SIGNERS of the
Declaration, to be men who, "virtually dethroned the MOST HIGH GOD"?
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON, Esq.!
Who pronounced the _American Union_ to be, "the most atrocious villany
ever exhibited on earth"?
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON, Esq.!
Who declared, "he recognized the Union with feelings of shame and
indignation"?
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON, Esq.!
Who predicted that the Union "would be held in everlasting infamy
throughout the World"?
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON, Esq.!
Who pronounced the Union an "unholy Alliance"?
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON, Esq.!
Who has pronounced the Union "to be null and void from the beginning"?
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON, Esq.!
Who has asserted, "that the Signers of the Union had no _lawful_ power
to bind themselves, or their posterity for one hour--for one moment"?
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON, Esq.!
_Finally_, who in the same country and year announced that the American
Union "was not valid when it was made, _and is not valid now_?"
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON, Esq.![18:A]
Again, who, on Tuesday, May 14th, 1838, in "Pennsylvania Hall,"
Philadelphia, Pa., in the presence of nearly two thousand persons,
announced that "he hated, from the bottom of his heart, _prudence_,
_caution_, and _judiciousness_?"
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON, Esq.!
What can be thought of a system which has such a person for its head,
its chief champion--its Apostle? Was this gentleman _in earnest_ when he
used this language last week; or was he only "in fun"(!) (to use the
expression by which one of his friends attempted to excuse him) or was
he out of his senses? The last excuse is the only justifiable one--for
if _in earnest_, the public need not be surprised at the Utopian scheme
(abolitionism) of which he is the principal promoter.--If on the
contrary, he was only "_in fun_," it proves what an adept he is in
assuming to weep over the evils of slavery, while he was actually
_quizzing_ his audience! But peradventure he meant only _colonization_
caution and prudence! Well did Dr. Reese say of him, in his letters to
the Hon. William Jay, (page 7) that "just so far as he (Mr. Garrison)
was believed in Great Britain, the (American) Society and Nation, would
be viewed with _abhorrence_!" This is the gentleman sent to this city of
_brotherly love_, who during the last week insulted not only the public
at large, but the tried, and disinterested, friends of the slave! He
opened his mouth with a tirade of abuse against that unremunerated
friend and advocate of the oppressed African, _David Paul Brown_, Esq.,
whose judgment and talents would adorn the cabinet of any nation under
heaven.--He could not spare even this gentleman, whose person and
property have so frequently been threatened by the populace, for the
part he has so often taken in gratuitously defending the man of colour.
And all this because forsooth Mr. Brown, not having the fear of William
Lloyd Garrison before his eyes, but being tempted and seduced by a love
for his country, ventured to say, "if the question was, whether the
Union, or slavery, should be preserved, he would say the UNION." For
this unpardonable expression of love and attachment for his country, Mr.
Garrison said that either Mr. Brown, or his speech (I did not distinctly
hear which he said) ought to be tied to a millstone and cast into the
depths of the sea! He next assailed Elliott Cresson, Esq., who has by
his talents, property and zeal, done more service to the African, than
the whole Abolition Society has, or ever will, do.--Lastly, he could not
let pass the humble Author, whose _nothingness_, as yet, in the cause of
the poor man of colour, ought to have sheltered him from notice; but
even the professed _intention_ of exposing the designs of Abolitionists
appears quite sufficient to stir up the ire of this gentleman; hence he
denounced me, "as a foreign adventurer!" In this instance he has truly
proved the truth of his declaration, "that he hates caution and
prudence," for verily if ever I can get the opportunity of meeting him
on a platform before the public, he may ever after go to the South with
perfect impunity. His friends say, the Southerners have offered _five
thousand_ dollars for his head. If this be like the numerous other
misstatements respecting the South, little confidence is to be placed in
it; but if it be true, and that the above event ever takes place, I
guarantee they will no longer offer one dollar for it, except they have
a particular fancy for purchasing empty skulls, as I shall demonstrate
there is little or nothing in _his_. This is the only retaliation I
shall seek for his _urbanity_ towards me; and in this, it will be
perceived, I will be returning only good for evil.
Let not Abolitionists at large mistake me--I do not intend to accuse
them, directly or indirectly, of impure motives--quite the reverse--I do
really believe all the Abolitionists, with very few exceptions, are the
best, and the most moral, and philanthropic men, in America; and are
actuated by the purest motives of doing good to all--relieving the
oppressed, and crushing tyranny. But at the same time, I do confess I
perceive strong symptoms of other motives actuating _some_--we know not
the heart of man--God only knows that--therefore, we can only judge of
men's views by their acts and deeds. I do not accuse even the gentleman
whose name has occurred so often in the preceding pages--he may be one
of the best, and sincerest men on earth, for aught I know, and I hope he
is; but then he must, _if that be the case_, be labouring under
_monomania_: and in that case, he certainly is not the most judicious
person to _lead_--to _advise_--or to _govern_ a political party
composed of thousands! One fatal _step_--one fatal _word_, of such a
man, may plunge thousands into ruin! He is, or he is not, a
fanatic--even he himself tells us, "he hates _caution_, _prudence_, and
_judiciousness_." Therefore, if we are to believe himself, and far be it
from me to doubt his word _on this occasion_, he is not a cautious man,
nor is he a prudent man, nor is he a judicious man! Who, therefore, can
for the future adhere to the principles of such a person, if he were
almost an angel from heaven?
Is he a fanatic? I hope so, for his own sake: but then, he is equally
disqualified from advising, planning, guiding, or advocating, any
doctrine, let the doctrine be ever so good!
But if he be not a fanatic--then, his principles, his declarations, his
doctrines, are most suspicious! unless peradventure, he is a
_simpleton_, while some crafty, designing persons, are behind the
curtain, urging him forward in his imprudent, and mad, career!
Men are generally actuated by motives--_self_ rules more or less in _us
all_--the person who says, he has least of _self_, will generally be
found to possess most of it. "As in water, face answereth unto face, so
doth the heart of man to man." When pure charity, or philanthropy,
actuates men, they are never driven by it to malicious acts, to
falsehoods, to misrepresentation, or to hatred, for this evident reason,
because charity and philanthropy come from God, hence cannot give rise
to malice, hatred, or misrepresentation, for these proceed from Satan
and from Satanic motives, such as pride, ambition, love of money,
revenge, &c. As well might it be expected that a pure fountain could
send forth impure streams, as that charity or philanthropy could
produce malice or false testimony. The more I hear men boasting of their
philanthropy, while yet exhibiting those symptoms of a Satanic Spirit,
the more convinced am I that their motives are impure, that they are not
actuated by charity or love, but by pride, ambition, or malice.
Know you not that Europe is looking on these States with a jealous eye?
America is deemed the cradle of republicanism--the Asylum for all who
venture to raise their voice against tyranny. Is there no gold in
Russia, nor in Austria? Were plans (religious and philanthropic!) never
devised by European Powers to divide the friends of liberty--to break up
Unions--and crush that goddess (Liberty) who ever haunts the bed of
Tyrants? What characters think you, would most likely be employed for
such purposes? Fools? No certainly. Notorious bad men? Certainly not. It
would be men of _good report_--_outwardly_ righteous. Would such persons
make known their plans? Certainly not. Would they declare that their
object was to ruin and break up the Union? No! No! They know better than
that. On the contrary, they would laugh at the very idea of the
possibility of a disturbance--they would turn the apprehension into
ridicule; and scoff at the very hint of so preposterous a dream! They
would exclaim, _Pshaw!_ This is the old story. The Union has been
threatened one time by the Banks--another time by the Tariff! another
time by the Indians--another time by Texas--another time by the
"_bursting of a steam-boat_!" And forsooth _now_ by Abolitionism! By
this kind of wit, of sophistry, of bombast, they would allay all
suspicion, delude their innocent and unsuspecting hearers, who would
mightily applaud the erudition and talent of the orator!
But who can listen to such advice as the following without suspicion,
"go forward, no matter the consequences--if slavery cannot be instantly
abolished without the disunion of this Nation, the sooner the better,"
&c! And this proceeding, from an imprudent, incautious, and injudicious
man--from one, who not six years ago, pronounced in a foreign land, that
the Union was an "_unholy alliance_"--"_a wicked_, and _ignominious_
compact"--and, "_null_ and _void_ from the beginning"! Can such
sentiments be propagated throughout _any_ Country with impunity? If such
were uttered in England respecting the King of that Nation, the speaker
would soon get a halter as his reward! And the Father of this Country,
the immortal Washington, penetrating, as it were, into futurity, and
well knowing how error _commences_, gave the following advice, as his
last and dying admonition, "Frown _indignantly_ (said he) on the _first
dawning_ of every attempt to alienate any portion of our Country from
the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the
various parts." Was it, I wonder, the recollection of this admonition
that called forth the abuse, (if general report be true,) so abundantly
poured forth by the same champion, in "Pennsylvania Hall" on the memory
of Washington? But it is only justice to add that all the Trustees of
that Building, with whom I conversed on the subject, one excepted,
expressed their decided disapprobation of the course adopted by the
Gentleman alluded to. Now the question is, shall the advice of
Washington, or the doctrines inculcated by the Champions of
Abolitionism, be followed? The one is so diametrically opposed to the
other, that both cannot be regarded--If Abolitionism is to be
supported, then the principles of Washington must be abandoned--Now is
the time for every man to take his stand--Check the evil in the bud--"a
little leaven, leaveneth the whole lump"--Now it may be stopped without
blood--In a year or so, it may be impossible to say this--Again I say,
let every man, woman, and child, bind round his neck the advice of
Washington, "Frown _indignantly_ at the first _dawning_ of every attempt
to alienate any portion of our Country," and let the whole Nation shout,
AMEN! Then the _Champions_ of Abolitionism will soon find their
level--the _true_ friends of the black will all unite together, and with
open hearts, and open purses, use their utmost endeavours to make him
happy.