THE ALTON TRAGEDY.

Rev. Elijah P. Lovejoy was a young Presbyterian minister, a native

of Maine, who soon after his graduation from college settled in the

city of St. Louis, first as a school-teacher, then as a preacher,

and lastly as the editor of a religious paper. In all these offices

he had commended himself to the respect and affectionate regards of

a large circle of friends. He conducted his paper to very general

acceptance, until he became an Abolitionist. An awful, a diabolical

deed perpetrated in or near St. Louis, compelled him to look after the

evil influences which could have prepared any individuals to be guilty

of such an atrocity, and the community in which it was done to tolerate

it.

Some time in the latter part of 1836, or the beginning of 1837, a

slave was accused of a heinous crime (not worse, however, than many

white men had been guilty of). He was tried by a Lynch Court, over

which a man most appropriately named Judge Lawless presided. He was

found guilty, sentenced _to be burned alive_, and actually suffered

that horrid death at the hands of American citizens, some of whom

were called “most respectable.” Mr. Lovejoy faithfully denounced

the horrible outrage as belonging to the Dark Ages and a community

of savages, and thenceforward devoted a portion of his paper to the

exposure of the sinfulness and demoralizing influence of slaveholding.

This was not long endured. His printing-office was broken up, his press

destroyed, and he was driven out of the State of Missouri. He removed

about twenty miles up the Mississippi River to Alton, Illinois, and

there commenced the publication of a similar paper, called the _Alton

Observer_. But though in a nominally free State, he was not beyond the

power of the slaveholders. The people of that town, obsequious to the

will and tainted with the spirit of their Southern and Southwestern

neighbors, soon followed the example of the Missourians, demolished his

printing-office and threw his press into the river.

Mr. Lovejoy was a man whose determination to withstand oppression was

a high moral principle rather than a resentful passion. He therefore

set about, with calm resolution, to re-establish his office and his

paper. In this he was encouraged and assisted by the sympathy and the

contributions of some of the best people in Alton, St. Louis, and that

region of country. But he had issued only one or two numbers of his

_Observer_, before the ruffians again fell upon his establishment and

destroyed it.

This second violation of his rights, in a State professedly free,

brought him and his patrons to feel that they were indeed “set for the

defence” of the liberty of the press. They appealed in deeper tones of

earnest remonstrance and solemn warning to their fellow-citizens, to

their countrymen, to all who appreciated the value of our political

institutions, to help them re-establish and maintain their desecrated

press. They called a convention of the people to consider the disgrace

that had been brought upon their town and State, and to awaken a

public sentiment that would overbear the minions of the slaveholding

oligarchy, which was assuming to rule our nation. Dr. Edward Beecher,

of Jacksonville, came to Alton and spoke with wisdom and power in

defence of the _Alton Observer_, and its devoted editor.

Mr. Lovejoy gave notice that he felt it to be a momentous duty

incumbent on him, there to vindicate the precious right which had been

so ruthlessly outraged in his person and property. He gave notice that

he had taken measures to procure another printing-press and materials

for the publication of his paper. He hoped the violent men, who had

twice broken up his office, would see their fearful mistake and molest

him no more. He trusted the good people of Alton and the officials of

their city would see to it that he should be protected, if the spirit

of outrage should again appear in their midst.

Many of the good people of the place gathered about him with assurances

of help, if needed. A Mr. Gilman, by all acknowledged to be one of the

very best men in the community, readily consented to receive the press

into his store for safe-keeping, and many other gentlemen agreed to

come there to defend it, if any attempt to take it away should be made.

As the day drew near on which the press was to arrive, alarming threats

were heard about the city, and evidences of preparation for another

deed of violence were too plain to be mistaken. Mr. Gilman called

upon the Mayor for protection,--to appoint a special police for the

occasion, or to have an armed force in readiness, if the emergency

should require their interposition. That official informed him that he

had no military at his service, and did not feel authorized to appoint

a special police. Then Mr. Gilman craved to know if the Mayor would

authorize him to collect an armed force to protect his property if it

should be assaulted. The Mayor gave him to understand that he would be

justified in so doing.

The boat arrived in the night of the 6th of November, and the press was

safely deposited in Messrs. Godfrey & Gilman’s store. The next evening

a mob assembled with the declared purpose of destroying the press or

the building that contained it, in which were goods valued at more than

$100,000. Mr. Gilman went out and calmly remonstrated with the mob. He

assured them that it was his determination, as it was his right, to

defend his own property and that of another, which had been committed

to him for safe-keeping, and that he was prepared so to do; that there

were a considerable number of loaded muskets in his store and resolute

men there to use them. He had no wish to harm any one, and besought

them to refrain from their threatened assault, which would certainly

be repulsed. They heeded him not, but reiterated their cries for the

onset. It was agreed between himself, Mr. Lovejoy, and their helpers

that they would forbear until there could be no longer any doubt of

the fell purpose of the assailants. The suspense was brief. Stones and

other heavy missiles were thrown against the building and through the

windows. These were quickly followed by bullets. At this several of

the besieged party fired upon the mob, killing one man and wounding

another. After a temporary retreat, the madmen returned bringing

materials with which to fire the store. A ladder was raised and a torch

applied to the roof. Mr. Lovejoy came out and aimed his musket at the

incendiary. So soon as he was recognized he was fired upon and fell,

his bosom pierced by five bullets.

Mr. Garrison and most of the oldest Abolitionists regretted that Mr.

Lovejoy and his friends had resorted to deadly weapons. If he was

to fall in our righteous cause we wished that he had chosen to fall

an unresisting martyr. From the beginning we had determined not to

harm our foes. And though we had been insulted, buffeted, starved,

imprisoned, our houses sacked, our property destroyed, our buildings

burnt, not the life of one of our number had hitherto been lost. But we

doubted not that our devoted brother had been governed by his highest

sense of right. He had acted in accordance with the accepted morality

of the Christian world, and in the spirit of our Revolutionary fathers.

A sensation of horror at the murder of that amiable and excellent young

man thrilled the hearts of all the people that were not steeped in the

insensibility to the rights of humanity which slaveholding produces.

The 7th of November, 1837, was fixed in the calendar as one of the days

never to be forgotten in our country, nor remembered but with shame.

The American Antislavery Society, the Massachusetts, and other kindred

societies took especial and very appropriate notice of the dreadful

outrage, and renewed their solemn pledges to labor all the more

assiduously, for the utter extermination of that system of iniquity in

the land, which could be upheld only at the expense of our freedom of

speech and the liberty of the press.

Rev. Dr. Channing and many more of the prominent citizens of Boston

were moved to call a public meeting in their “Old Cradle of Liberty,”

without distinction of sect or party, there to express the alarm and

horror which were felt at the outrage on civil liberty, and the murder

of a Christian minister, for attempting to maintain his constitutional

and inalienable rights. Accordingly, the Doctor and a hundred other

gentlemen made an application to the Mayor and Aldermen of the city for

permission to occupy Faneuil Hall for that purpose. Their application

was rejected as follows:--

“City of Boston. In Board of Aldermen, November 29, 1837: On the

petition of William E. Channing and others, for the use of Faneuil

Hall on the evening of Monday, the 4th of December,

“_Resolved_, That in the opinion of this Board, it is inexpedient

to grant the prayer of said petition, for the reason that

resolutions and votes passed by a public meeting in Faneuil Hall

are often considered, in other places, as the expression of public

opinion in this city; but it is believed by the Board that the

resolutions which would be likely to be sanctioned by the signers

of this petition on this occasion ought not to be regarded as the

public voice of this city.”

This extraordinary conduct of the city authorities kindled a fire

of indignation throughout the city and the Commonwealth, that sent

forth burning words of surprise and censure. Dr. Channing addressed

an eloquent and impressive “letter to the citizens of Boston,” that

produced the intended effect. It was widely circulated, and everywhere

read with deep emotion. A public meeting was called by gentlemen who

were not Abolitionists, to be held in the old Supreme Court Room,

“to take into consideration the reasons assigned by the Mayor and

Aldermen for withholding the use of Faneuil Hall, and to act in the

premises as may be deemed expedient.” A large concourse of citizens

assembled. George Bond, Esq., was chosen chairman, and B. F. Hallett,

Secretary. Dr. Channing’s letter was read, and then a series of

resolutions, “drawn up with consummate ability and strikingly adapted

to the occasion,” were offered by Mr. Hallett, and after an animated

discussion were unanimously adopted. A committee of two from each ward

was appointed to renew the application (precisely in the words of the

former one) for the use of Faneuil Hall, and to obtain signatures to

the same. This request was not to be denied. The Mayor and Aldermen

yielded to the pressure.

On the 8th of December the doors of Faneuil Hall were thrown open, and

as many people as could find a place pressed in. Hon. Jonathan Phillips

was called to the chair, and made some excellent introductory remarks.

Dr. Channing then made an eloquent and impressive address, after

which B. F. Hallett, Esq., read the resolutions which Dr. Channing

had drawn up. These were seconded by George S. Hillard, Esq., in a

very able speech. Then arose James T. Austin, the Attorney-General,

and made a speech in the highest degree inflammatory and mobocratic.

He declared that “Lovejoy died as the fool dieth.” He justified the

riotous procedure of the Altonians, and compared them to “the patriotic

Tea-Party of the Revolution.” What he said of the slaves was really

atrocious. Hear him!

“We have a menagerie in our city with lions, tigers, hyenas, an

elephant, a jackass or two, and monkeys in plenty. Suppose, now, some

new cosmopolite, some man of philanthropic feelings, not only towards

men but animals, who believes that all are entitled to freedom as an

inalienable right, should engage in the humane task of giving liberty

to these wild beasts of the forest, some of whom are nobler than

their keepers, or, having discovered some new mode to reach their

understandings, should try to induce them _to break their cages and

be free_? The people of Missouri had as much reason to be afraid of

their _slaves_ as we should have to be afraid of the wild beasts of

the menagerie. They had the same dread of Lovejoy that we should have

of this supposed instigator, if we really believed the bars would be

broken and the caravan let loose to prowl about our streets.”

Though this was the most disgusting passage in Mr. Austin’s speech,

nearly all of it was offensive to every true American heart, and some

parts were really impious. He likened the Alton and St. Louis rioters

to the men who inspired and led our Revolution. He infused so much of

his riotous spirit into a portion of his audience that at the close of

his speech they attempted to break up the meeting in an uproar. Happily

for the reputation of Boston, there were present a preponderance of

the moral _élite_ of the city. So soon as the disorder had subsided,

a young man, then unknown to most of his fellow-citizens, took the

platform, and soon arrested and then riveted the attention of the

vast assembly to a reply to the Attorney-General that was “sublime,

irresistible, annihilating.” I wish there were room in these columns

for the whole of it. I can give you but a brief passage.

“Mr. Chairman, when I heard the gentleman lay down principles which

placed the rioters, incendiaries, and murderers of Alton side by

side with Otis and Hancock, with Quincy and Adams, I thought those

pictured lips [pointing to the portraits in the hall] would have

broken into voice to rebuke the recreant American, the slanderer of

the dead. [Great applause and counter-applause.] Sir, the gentleman

said that he should sink into insignificance if he dared not to gainsay

the principles of the resolutions before this meeting. Sir, for the

sentiments he has uttered on soil consecrated by the prayers of

Puritans and the blood of patriots, the earth should have yawned and

swallowed him up!”

I need only tell my readers that this was the _début_ of our Wendell

Phillips, who has since become the leading orator of our nation, and

the dauntless champion of our enslaved, down-trodden countrymen. He

was then just established in the practice of law in Boston, with the

most brilliant prospect of success in his profession. No young man

would have risen so soon as he, or to so great a height as an advocate

at the bar and a speaker in the forum, if he had pursued his course as

a lawyer and a politician. But, blessed be the God of the oppressed,

the cry of the millions, to whom in our Republic every right of

humanity was denied, entered into his bosom. He espoused their cause

with no hope of fee or reward, but that best of all compensations, the

consciousness of having relieved suffering, and maintained great moral

and political principles, and throughout the thirty-two years that

have since passed away, he has consecrated his brilliant powers to the

service of the enslaved with an assiduity and effect of which our whole

nation has been the admiring witness.

Another young man, to whom we owe scarcely less than to Mr. Phillips,

was brought into our ranks and impelled to take upon himself the odium

of an Abolitionist by the awful catastrophe at Alton,--a young man

bearing a name illustrious in the history of our country, and still

highly honored in our State and nation. I allude to Edmund Quincy, a

son of Hon. Josiah Quincy, who, having filled almost every other office

in the gift of the people, was then President of Harvard College, and

grandson of Josiah Quincy, Jr., one of the leading spirits of the

American Revolution.

From the beginning of our antislavery efforts Mr. Edmund Quincy had

been deeply interested in our undertaking. But, like very many others,

he distrusted the wisdom of some of our measures, and especially the

terrible severity of Mr. Garrison’s condemnation of slaveholders.

The outrages perpetrated upon Mr. Lovejoy and the liberty of the press

at St. Louis and Alton dispelled all doubt of the unparalleled iniquity

of holding human beings in the condition of domesticated brutes, and

of the sinfulness of all who consent thereto. He has since been one of

the towers of our strength; has presided, often with signal ability, at

our meetings in the most troublous times, and occasionally spoken with

force and marked effect. But he has rendered us especial services by

his able pen. His contributions to _The Antislavery Standard_ and _The

Liberator_ have been numerous and invaluable. His style has been as

vigorous and penetrating as that of Junius, and his satire sometimes as

keen. Thus have the attempts of slaveholders and their minions to crush

the spirit of liberty served rather to bring to her standard the ablest

defenders.

Some Recollections of Our Antislavery Conflict · 第 38 / 79 题