THE PHILADELPHIA CONVENTION.

The committee of ten, appointed at the close of the first day to

prepare a declaration of the sentiments and purposes of the American

Antislavery Society, felt that the work assigned them ought to be most

carefully and thoroughly done, embodying, as far as possible, the

best thoughts of the whole Convention. Accordingly, about half of the

members were invited to meet, and did meet, the committee early at the

house of our chairman, Dr. Edwin P. Atlee.

After an hour’s general conversation upon the importance of the

document to be prepared, and the character it ought to possess, we

agreed that each one present should, in his turn, utter the sentiment

or announce the purpose which he thought ought to be given in the

declaration. This was done, and revealed great unanimity, and at the

same time not a little individuality of opinion among the members. I

cannot now recall many of the suggestions thrown out. One, however, was

so pregnant that it contained the text and the substance of several

of my lectures afterwards. “I wish,” said Elizur Wright, “that the

difference between our purpose and that of the Colonization Society

should be explicitly stated. We mean to exterminate _slavery_ from our

country with its accursed influences. The Colonizationists aim only

to _get rid of the slaves_ so soon as they become free. Their plan is

unrighteous, cruel, and impracticable withal. Our plan needs but a good

will, a right spirit amongst the white people, to accomplish it.”

After a session of more than two hours thus spent a sub-committee of

three was appointed to prepare a draft of the proposed declaration, to

be reported next morning at nine o’clock to the whole committee, in the

room adjoining the hall of the Convention. William L. Garrison, John

G. Whittier, and myself composed that sub-committee. We immediately

repaired to the house of Mr. James McCrummel, a colored gentleman,

with whom Mr. Garrison was at home; and there, after a half-hour’s

consultation, it was of course determined that Mr. Garrison, our

Coryphæus, should write the document, in which were to be set before

our country and the world “the sentiments and purposes of the American

Antislavery Society.” We left him about ten o’clock, agreeing to come

to him again next morning at eight.

On our return at the appointed hour we found him, with shutters closed

and lamps burning, just writing the last paragraph of his admirable

draft. We read it over together two or three times very carefully,

agreed to a few slight alterations, and at nine went to lay it

before the whole committee. By them it was subjected to the severest

examination. Nearly three hours of intense application were given

to it, notwithstanding repeated and urgent calls from the Convention

for our report. All the while Mr. Garrison evinced the most unruffled

patience. Very few alterations were proposed, and only once did he

offer any resistance. He had introduced into his draft more than a page

in condemnation of the Colonization scheme. It was the concentrated

essence of all he had written or thought upon that egregious

imposition. It was as finished and powerful in expression as any part

of that Magna Charta. We commented upon it as a whole and in all its

parts. We writhed somewhat under its severity, but were obliged to

acknowledge its exact, its singular justice, and were about to accept

it, when I ventured to propose that all of it, excepting only the first

comprehensive paragraph, be stricken from the document, giving as my

reason for this large erasure, that the Colonization Society could not

long survive the deadly blows it had received; and it was not worth

while for us to perpetuate the memory of it, in this Declaration of

the Rights of Man, which will live a perpetual, impressive protest

against every form of oppression, until it shall have given place to

that brotherly kindness, which all the children of the common Father

owe to one another. At first, Mr. Garrison rose up to save a portion

of his work that had doubtless cost him as much mental effort as any

other part of it. But so soon as he found that a large majority of

the committee concurred in favor of the erasure, he submitted very

graciously, saying, “Brethren, it is your report, not mine.”

With this exception, the alterations and amendments which were made,

after all our criticisms, were surprisingly few and unessential; and we

cordially agreed to report it to the Convention very much as it came

from his pen.

Between twelve and one o’clock we repaired with it to the hall. Edwin

P. Atlee, the Chairman, read the Declaration to the Convention. Never

in my life have I seen a deeper impression made by words than was made

by that admirable document upon all who were there present. After the

voice of the reader had ceased there was a profound silence for several

minutes. Our hearts were in perfect unison. There was but one thought

with us all. Either of the members could have told what the whole

Convention felt. We felt that the word had just been uttered which

would be mighty, through God, to the pulling down of the strongholds of

slavery.

The solemn silence was broken by a Quaker brother, Evan Lewis, or

Thomas Shipley, who moved that we adopt the Declaration, and proceed

at once to append to it our signatures. He said, “We have already

given it our assent; every heart here has responded to it; and there

is a doctrine of the ‘Friends’ which impelled me to make the motion

I have done: ‘_First impressions are from heaven_.’ I fear, if we go

about criticising and amending this Declaration, we shall qualify its

truthfulness and impair its strength.”

The majority of the Convention, however, thought it best, in a matter

so momentous, to be deliberate; to weigh well every word and act by

which our countrymen and the world would be called to justify or

condemn us and our enterprise. Accordingly, we adjusted ourselves to

hear the Declaration read again, paragraph by paragraph, sentence

by sentence, and to pass judgment upon it in every particular. The

whole afternoon, from one o’clock until five, was assiduously and

patiently devoted to this review. Discussion arose on several points;

but no one spoke who had not something to say. Never had I heard in

a public assembly so much pertinent speech, never so little that was

unimportant. The result of the afternoon’s deliberations was a deeper

satisfaction with the Declaration. Some expressions in it were called

in question, but few were changed. And just as the darkness of night

had shut down upon us we resolved unanimously to adopt it. On motion of

Lewis Tappan we voted that Abraham L. Cox, M. D., whom the mover knew

to be an excellent penman, be requested to procure a suitable sheet of

parchment, and engross thereon our magna charta before the following

morning, that it might then receive the signatures of each one of the

members.

At the opening of the meeting next morning the Doctor was there, with

the work assigned him beautifully executed. He read the Declaration

once and again. Another hour was expended in the consideration of

certain expressions in it. But no changes were made. It was then

submitted for signatures; and Thomas Whitson, of Chester County,

Pennsylvania, being obliged to leave the city immediately, came forward

and had the honor of signing it first. Sixty-one others subscribed

their names on the 6th day of December, 1833.

If I ever boast of anything it is this: that I was a member of the

Convention that instituted the American Antislavery Society. That

assembly, gathered from eleven different States of our Republic, was

composed of devout men of every sect and of no sect in religion, of

each political party and of neither; but they were all of one mind.

They evidently felt that they had come together for a purpose higher

and better than that of any religious sect or political party. Never

have I seen men so ready, so anxious to rid themselves of whatsoever

was narrow, selfish, or merely denominational. I was all the more

affected by the manifestation of this spirit, because I had been living

for ten years in Connecticut, where every one who did not profess a

faith essentially “Orthodox” was peremptorily proscribed. In the

Philadelphia Convention there were but two or three of my sect, which

you know at that time had but few avowed adherents anywhere except in

the eastern half of Massachusetts, and was then, much more than now,

especially obnoxious to all other religionists in the land. Yet we were

cordially treated as brethren, admitted freely, without reserve or

qualification, into that goodly fellowship. They were indeed a company

of the Lord’s freemen, a truly devout company. And the scrupulous

regard for the rights of the human mind, no less than for the other

natural rights of man, was shown from the beginning to the end of the

Convention.

Much the largest number of any sect present were what were then, and

are now, called Orthodox, or Evangelical. There were ten or twelve

ministers of one or the other of those denominations that claim to be

Orthodox; yet I distinctly remember that some of them were the most

forward and eager to lay aside sectarianism, and their generous example

was gladly followed by all others. At the suggestion of an Orthodox

brother, and without a vote of the Convention, our President himself,

then an Orthodox minister, readily condescended to the scruples of our

Quaker brethren, so far as not to _call upon_ any individual to offer

prayer; but at the opening of our sessions each day he gave notice that

a portion of time would be spent in prayer. Any one prayed aloud who

was moved so to do.

It was at the suggestion also of an Orthodox member that we agreed to

dispense with all titles, civil or ecclesiastical. Accordingly, you

will not find in the published minutes of the Convention appendages to

any names,--neither D. D., nor Rev., nor Hon., nor Esq.,--no, not even

plain Mr. We met as fellow-men, in the cause of suffering fellow-men.

When the resolution was read recommending the institution of a monthly

“concert of prayer” for the abolition of slavery, a Quaker objected to

its passage, on the ground that he believed not in stated times and

seasons for prayers, but that then only can we truly pray when we are

moved to do so by the Holy Spirit. Effingham L. Capron, a member of

the “Society of Friends,” immediately and earnestly expressed regret

that his brother had interposed such an objection. “For,” said he,

“this measure is only to be recommended by the Convention, not insisted

on, much less to be incorporated into the constitution of the society

we have formed; and such is the liberal, catholic spirit of all here

present,” he added, “that I do not suspect any one wishes to urge the

measure upon those who would have conscientious scruples against it.”

“Certainly not, certainly not,” said the mover of the resolution.

“Certainly not, certainly not,” was responded from all parts of the

hall. On this explanation the brother withdrew his opposition, and the

resolution passed, _nem. con._

Some Recollections of Our Antislavery Conflict · 第 18 / 79 题