The Liberator from Boston, Massachusetts • Page 1

If VOL. III. WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON AND ISAAC KNAPP, PUBLISHERS. 10. 11.

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS. OUR COUNTRY TIIE WORLD OUR COUNTRYMEN, ALL MANKIND. SATURDAY, MARCH 16, 18S3. 13 PUBLISHED WEEKLY, AT NO. 11, MERCHANTS' HALL.

VM. LLOYD GARRISON, EDITOR. TERMS. Jj Two Dollars per annum, payable in advanco 52,23 at the end of six months at the expiration of the year. CP AH letters and comnunicatious must be post paid.

The rule is imperative, in order to shield us from the frequent impositions of our enemies. Those, therefore, who wish their letters to be taken out of the Post Office by us, will be caineful to pay their postage. Agents who act for the Liberator are authorised to receive subscriptions for the Abolitionist. For every five subscribers obtained by them for either publication, (payment bcinsr secured,) a sixth copy will be allowed. Agents are desired not to remit less than 5 at one time, unless they payithe postage.

None but yearly subscribers will be received for the Abolitionist (tenns 1,00 id advance.) AGENTS. MAINE. Joseph C. Lovejoy, Nathan Winslow, Portland. 1CEW-HAMPSHIRE.

Rufus E. Cutler, Exeter. David Cambell, Acworth. David Cambell, Windham. Jonathan V.

Pearson, Meriden. William II. Hadley, Lancaster. MASSACHUSETTS. Harvey Kimball, Amesbury.

Charles Whipple, Abner Ltllc, Benjamin Colman, Charles L. Remand, Edward Johnson, Richard Johnson, Edward J. Pompey, James C. Anthony, Newbury port. Newbury.

Salem. Lynn. New-Bedford. Nantucket. Fall River.

VERMONT. John F. McCoITam, Castleton. RHObE-ISLiflD. Henrv E.

Benson, Providence. Alfred Niger, Eleazcr Trcvett, Newport. CONNECTICUT. John Wm. Creed, New-Haven.

Henry Foster, Ifartford. Frederick Olncy, Norwich. "William Anderson, New-London. "William Harris, KEW-TORK. Philip A.

Bell, New-York City. George Hogarth, Brooklyn. Charles Marriott, Hudson. Nathaniel Blount, Poughkeepsic. William P.

Griffin, Albany. James W. Jonson, Elmira. Josiah Green, Rochester. Eli Hazzard, Buffalo.

Erwin Sarket, Walertown. Isaac Griffin, Saratoga. John Thompson, Syracuse. George Bowley, Geneva, DELAWARE. Thomas M'Pherson, Wilmington.

NEW-JERSEY. Isaac Statia. Newark. Abncr H. Francis, Trenton.

PENNSYLVANIA. Joseph Cassey, Philadelphia. Joseph Sharpless, RolK-rt C. Gordon, jr. J.

B. Vashon, Pittsburg. George Chester, Harrisburg. Thomas Hambleon, Jennerville. John Peck.

Carlisle. Thomas Williams, Lewistown. James P. Whipper, Pottsville. Edward Roach, Williamsport.

Thomas Whitson, Valley Mill. William Brewer, Wilkesbarre. OHIO. George Carv, Cineinnati. James HamJJcton, Spruce Vale.

James Leach, Chillicothe. William Hill, Washington. Elizur Wright, jr. Hudson. DISTRICT OF COI I'MBIA.

Benjamin Lundy, Washington City. INDIANA. Jonathan Shaw, Nettle Crook. Nathaniel Field, Jcnersonvillc. ILLINOIS.

Robertus II. Stephenson, Greenville. BRITISH DOMINIONS. Andrew Garrison, St. John, N.

B. UPPER CANAD. Austin Steward, Wilberforce. Paola Brown, Colborncfburg. ENOLaND.

Joseph Phillips, Aldermanbury, London. THE LIBERATOR. JJj" I conceive it to be utterly impossible to continue the horrible system of negro slavery much longer. In my conscience I should as aoon hold highway robbery a sacred profession, as believe that the trading in our fellow-men can much longer be tolerated. JSooner or later the vengeance of Providence will o- vertake those who support such a system.

It is for -these reasons that I think not an hour ought to be lost hefore measures are taken for effecting the emancipation of the Dr Ldshington. -From the Hudson Observer and Telegraph. Mr. Isham: It is with pain that we are constrained to send you a few thoughts in to the remarks Elizur Wright, and the extracts furnished by him, which we find on the first page of your last paper. But duty to ourselves and to others whose feelings accord with our on tliis subject, urges us to offer the following; for the examination of your readers.

The object of the remarks and extracts, if they have any appropriate object at the present time, obviously was to justify, by an appeal to high authority, the course of preaching recently introduced into the College Chapel which knOwa to he adverse to the feelings of a large majority of the Trustees, and is call- ing fbrth expressions or dissatisf action from the parents of students in College, and from the i friends of the Institution in every part of the Reserve. We wish to be distinctly under- stood that we have no personal with the writer. He is our friend, with whom, i from the first effort to erect this Institution, we have been associated as Trustees. 'We i have taken sweet counsel and in heart are not now divided. All we have to do is with the remarks and extracts and with reference to these, we suggest two leading though tav' viz 1st.

Shivery as it existed in England, and ita dependencies, and as it exists in the United-States, is, in some important respects, an entirely different concern. In its moral character it is indeed the same but in its controllable circumstances it is as different as the government of Great Britain is from the government of the United States. In Great Britain and her dependencies, the government fundamentally one. There are no independent states to which certain privileges and possessions are guaranteed by a mutual compact. The right of slavery is noL and nevetwas, interwoven at all with theRil code.

It is an evil practised only by pormission. Like every other subject of legislation, therefore, it has ever been, of right, subject to the control of parliament, and might be abolished without interfering with any pledges or treaty. In the United States the right of slavery is recognized and the right of holding slaves is impliedly conceded to certain States in the Constitution and the United States are pledged not to interfere with state privileges. Congress therefore cannot now legislate on the subject. One state by the Constitution is- prohibited from interfering in the rights of another.

Those states, therefore, that have abjured slavery, let their conviction of the moral evil of it be ever so strong, can no more interfere with the guaranteed rights of the slave states and deliver their slaves, than Great Britain could thus interfere. And what might be in point to urge ia slaveholding states and on those who have the legal control of slavery, can with no better plea be urged in the West ern Reserve College, than it could in the University of Cambridge or Edinburgh. 2d. Leading thought is, the nature of the discussion, as it has been carried on in Great Britain, and as it is carried on here, is entirely, or at least essentially unlike. The controversy in Great Britain has been between the op- posers of slavery and the avowed advocates of it or those who held legislative and executive power in their hands, and refused or neglected to use it.

Here the controversy is between krie.nds the friends of the Africans the advocates for manumission, and it relates to mere modes and forms. The Colonization Society have no controversy with abolitionists about the moral right or the inhumanity of slavery. On these points the advocates for colonization will talk as long, and plead as earnestly and with as much candor as the advocates for abolition. We shudder at a view of the tremendous guilt of slavery in our land, and we tremble in fearful prospect of the frowns of heaven that may be sent to avenge the wrongs of these injured Africans: and had we a vo.ee to control the whole concern, they should not wear their chains, in hopeless gloom, another night. We would 4 break every and place them in a situation in which they might enjoy all the privileges and blessings of the most highly favored nation.

This is our profession, and this is the spirit claimed and manifested, by the active supporters of the Colonization Society through the land. But could we do-all that we desire, perhaps we should not do it in a way that would please the modern advocates of abolition. When we look at the difficulties attending this benevolent enterprise at every step, we see it both naturally and morally im possible, in a moment or a year, to set all the blacks in our land free, and raise them to an equality of intelligence, power and privilege with the whites. And we very much doubt whether it ever can be done in this country. We cannot see the remotest hope of it in one generation, even could every benevolent heart in our land feel it desirable.

We desire to see them free and happy, and had we the power, we would, with their own restore them to the land of their fathers, with all the blessinjrs of freedom and science and religion, and with them we would send the blessings of salvation, through a crucified Saviour, to their brethren and kindred from whom they have been cruelly torn. And since we cannot do this for alL we will confer the boon on as ma ny as are willing to accept it, to the extent of means at our command. 1 his the colonization Society has been doing with the manifest smiles of heaven on its labors. But here we are met by the advocates of abolition. Our professions are branded with hypocrisy our representations of facts are thrown back in our faces as falsehood and deception, and our Society is charged with every baseness that ingenuity can insinuate, as founded in hypocrisy, and the friend and supporter of slavery.

It is unequivocally declared undeserving the name of a benevolent institution and our colony of 2,000 happy souls, on which God has shed down his most precious smiles in the saving influences of his Uoly Spirit, sneered at pointed at with the finger of ntempt, and charged with being 'a curse Indeed these are the objects at which the deadly shafts of abolition are levelled. As in Garrison's paper, so here, the most diminutive terms are used to caricature both the friends of colonization and the Society itself! 4 Weakness, shallow thinking, and shrivelled are epithets familiar in the ears and galling to the feelings of those concerned in the discussions, and advocates for colonization. Such is the common-place language often repeated among us. We do not say that all this lias been said in the pulpit. But terms like these have been heard from that sacred place, and with allusions to caricatures thus drawn, too plain to be misunderstood, inferences have been drawn from the sublime truths of God's word, and poured upon the devoted head of such blackened and degraded objects.

This is what is complained of. such the preaching commended in the Christian Observer? If so, then the extracts are in point. But even the authority Cf the Christian Observer does not convince us that this is not a misapplication of the, gospel, and calculated to wound and grieve the hearts of its friends, alid not to 'perfect the saints, and edify the body of Christ-' If such was not the preaching commended, the extracts are not in place, but are calculated to mislead an honest community. It was not an enemy that reproached then I could have borne it but it was thou, a man mine Psalm GO: 13, 14, 15. That further evil may be prevented is the prayer of many.

Yours respectfully, DAVID HUDSON, CALEB PITKIN, HARVEY COE. Hudson, Feb. 4, 1833. From the Hudson Observer and Telegraph. In the Observ er and Telegraph for Feb.

7th, a communication is published, signed by David Hudson, Caleb Pitkin, and Harvey Coe, which may justly be expected to attract public attention," and to awaked-deep solicitude and general inquiry among the friends and patrons of the Western Reserve College. Upon the statements which that paper contains, I shall, I trust, be permitted to offer to 4 an honest community a few suggestions. The occupancy of the pulpit of the Western Reserve College is, by the laws of that institution, entrusted to the theological professors. As standing for the present alone in that department of instruction, the responsibility of preacliing in the College chapel, it is generally known, devolves upon me. In the communication, on which, in this paper, I propose to dwell, the gentlemen, just referred to, make some remarkable statements respecting 4 the course of preaching recently introduced into the College The first point to which I shall invite the attention of my readers, is the occasion, which drew these gentlemen before the public, in the attitude they have 6een fit toassume.

This was no other than 4 the remarks of Elizur Wright, and the extracts furnished by him on the first page of the Ob server and leiegraph lor Jan. ol 4 With' this 4 writer' they 4 wish' it 4 to be distinctly understood, 4 that they have no personal They embrace him, as their friend. While they declare that 4 ail they have to do is with the remarks and- they fall foul, whether rudely and wantonly or not may hereafter appear, ot the 4 course of preaching recently introduced into the College My readers may be curious to know, what had to do with 4 the remarks and extracts of Elizur Nothing more than any other reader of the Observer and Telegraph. For their existence, form, or publication, I had, not the slightest responsibility. The remarks, moreover, are of a general character, adapted as manifestly and truly to every other pulpit in Ohio, as to that which it is my privilege to occupy.

They invite the attention of every christian preacher, to the high importance of urging, even in the tace ol prejudice, upon the consciences and hearts of men, the claims of the oppressed nearro. With what proprie ty, then, is the College ptdpit held up to public reprehension Who can far! to see, that this attack upon me is wholly gratuitous and unprovoked It may be well for my readers to see, how eager these men are to stab at me even over the breast of a These gentlemen assure the public, that the course of preaching; which they find fault with, 4 is known to be adverse to the feelings of a large majority of the Irustees. Ihis is known to whom? To the preacher? "My read ers may, perhaps, be surprised to open their eyes on the following statement of facts. One trustee only, the president of the board, has heard all tie sermons, complained of. What feelings he may have expressed respecting them, in his official character, I have no documents to show.

As a and attentive hearer, and a most affectionate and faithful brother in the ministry of the gospel, he has in the most cordial, full, emphatic terms approved of the course of which has iriven these gentlemen so much offence. Nay he has declared, in unqualified language, that it was the very coxtrse, which official fideli ty demanded at my hands. This he has done, as the only trustee, who could pretend to be intimately acquainted with the circumstances I was piaced.in; and who, far beyond any other, was responsible for the prosperity of the College. Jilr. Coe I believe heard one sermon only the first of the series, which I have been blamed for preaching.

Some two or three days after it was delivered, a gentleman visited me, who assured me that he had, with gTeat reluctance and after much solicitation, consented, in behalf of Mr. Coe, to propose to me the question: Do yon mean to continue to preach as you preached on Uie last Sabbath Mr. Coe, he informed me, had declared to him, that unless he coidd have some assurance from me that I would change my course if preaching, he shoidd take his family the chapel. To the inquicy of Mr. Coe, 1 frankly rep lied, as 1 did the day following to himself in person; 4 1 can neither say yes, nor no.

Such a question I could not answer to myself. I regard it as impertinent' I have been repeatedly informed on the best authority, that Mr. Coe has admitted the truth of the train of thought, to which he listened; and only alleged, as a ground of fault-finding, that it was ill-timed. Mr. Pitkin heard, if I am not mistaken, but one of the sermons, to which exceptions have been taken.

From his own testimony contained in a letter, which he 6aw fit, soon after, to send me, it appears, that although two or three passages were in his opinion misapplied, stili my GENERAL THOUGHT BREATHED SO MUCH OF THE SPIRIT OF THE GOSPEL, that With tilA exception of Jew aberrations made to lug in my favorite theme, he was highly pleased with the body of my And with regard to the 4 application' with which he professed to be 4 as much displeased, he gives the following testimony, 4 To the abstract sentiments in deed, tn your application, do not object. TIEY ARE TRUE THEORT, AND II A SUPPO SED CASE WOULD APPLY WITH POWER. lie admits, that I even made a 4 solemn protesta tion which was, that in my warnings and appeals on that occasion, I had nothing to do with their parties and potiiics, but only with their obligations and prospects, as professed christians and moral agems anu tints, though he did net like lo call it 4 the circumstances were such, that many did not believe me sincere, cr if sincere, that I knew not what spirit I was of. Esq. Wriirht of Tallmadge has, I believe, heard one or two of the discourses in question but I have never heard that they were adverse to his feelings.

No other trustee, I believe, can pretend to know any tiling about my course ot preaching beyond what he has received from exparte statements. About the middle of January last, the pru dential committee of the boarifof trustees with a few other members were called together. In the letter, received by Elizur Wright, Esq. signed by a Trustee, who is rot a number of the committee, a hint is given, mat tne notice was not to be extended beyond the individuals invited. The meeting at Esq.

Hudson's house, was attended by the committee, together with Messrs. Coo and Kingsbury. Rev. Mr. Fenn, of Nelson, had been invited, but was hindered from attending, by the badness of the road.

At this meeting I have reason to think a paper was presented for approval and adoption, which was designed especially to censure the course of which had been admitted into the College chapel, and to urge a change. Of this meeting, President Storrs naa no omuai information. He was not invited to attend, un til he had occasion to send a note to one of the meeting on some point of business. It was then proposed that he should be invited. The nronosal was agreed to.

not without some dif ficulty. At lenirth, after long deliberation and animated discussion, a vote was passed near the close of the session, that the considers jon of the whole subiect should be suspended till the regular meeting of the Board in May. Upon this a member who took a leading part in the discussion exclaimed, 4 Brethren, you liave deserted From that hour to this, not a whisper disapproving of my course of preaching have the board of in any form by committee or as a body, breathed upon my ears. I request my readers to take notice, that at the meeting just spoken of, my accusers, whether reckless, bitter and violent, their companions cannot but remember, not only assumed the place of my judges, but assumed this place, without looking into my face, or heann? my deience. 1 aia noi eve ksow that I was the subiect of discitssion.

Thanks to the Saviour, His shield was my protection. What, then, do your correspondents mean? Do they suppose, that private members cf the board, in their every-day intercourse with the executive of the college, have a right to interfere with their doings or to control their movements? Do they imagine, that I can know them as legislators, when the board is not in session What have I to do with the un official expressions of their wfll, whether in the form of dictation or of threatening? What would a Sheriff or a magistrate have to do with 1 the interference of a member of the leffisla ture, who, in the every day intercourse of life, should take the attitude and assume the airs of authority Who should pass around from place to place, and make private visits toother, members of the same body and, then, for- sooth, should publish a censure of the official conduct of the magistrate and declare that it 4 as adverse to the feelings of a large jority of the legislature What if he should persuade two other members to sign his communication In what light would he and they deserve to be regarded, both by the magistrate whose rights they had rudely invaded, and by an 4 honest community And yet this is the very attitude, which these gentlemen have as-. sumed in the paper on which these remarks, are made. Yes, two of these gentlemen can say, if they choose, whether they are not the men, who, in different parts of the Reserve, have made statements, wholly exparte and unauthorized, which have called forth the expros sions of dissatisfaction from the parents of stu dents in of which they complain. Others may have assisted them in this work but will they, especially wDlone of them deny, that to a great extent, they have created the evil, which they profess to regard with apprehension and dread Am responsible fof the mischief, which otter hands may do? With regard 4 to the terms, wnich have been heard from the sacred place, the of which your correspondents speak, near the' close of their communication, let me say, that I have ncrcr introduced the subject of abolition or colonization, so far as I can remember, into the chapel pulpit.

Had I done so, I should not have deserved censure. I have no doubt, that it is the duty of christian ministers, to dwell in the most sacred places and on the holiest days on such topics. hope, I shall not, with the' Saviour's smiles, be wanting to my duty in this respect hereafter. I infer from some allusions, which your correspondents make, that they have confounded statements which they heard at the college disputations, with the preaching -of the Sabbath! Whether in these allusions, thus they nave given we public coarse caricature, adapted to have the full euect of malignant slander, I leave Tor others, who heard me speak, to judge. The two leadintr thoughts of Voaf cdrres-' pondents are extraordinary enough; In its moral character, they admit, 'that' slavery in England and the United States is indeed the And on what else, than the moral character of slavery, have I dwelt in the yulpit? What do these men mean, when ther say, that in 4 Great Britain and her dependencies, the government is fundamentally one Do they mean, that the Lnghsh colonics have no paruamcnts, courts of justice, and military forces? Will they deny, that the est Ihdian -colonists laugh at, and trample on the arrange-1 ments of the mother country to mitigate the horrors of slavery and in some cases make laws which nullify her enactments? Conjrress we are gravely told cannot now legislate on the subject.

Cannot Congress remove the slave market, which is maintained in the District of Columbia And do these gentlemen suppose, that a voluntary compact, based on crime, is of immutable everlasting obligation Cannot those, who agreed to support each other in committing tt renounce their iniquities? Cannot their covenant with Hell be annulled? Some 4 States it seems, have abjured sla-' indeed! And may not others Co tne same And under what mnuence can they be brought to do so Why, "most manifestly, under the influence of a corrected public sentiment. And how shall public sentiment Toe corrected? Especially bt the pclpitaitd' the press. Who asks the privilege of interfering with the guaranteed rights of the. Do these gentlemen know of no other way of exerting an influence on the movements of their fellow-men, than by inter- fering with their guaranteed rights? Is then, any interference with such rights, for, one as a preacher of the Gospel to expose the noxious tendency and damning guilt of slave-' holding And may not an influence be exerted in the Western Reserve College pulpit which shall reach the very heart of Georgia? I may be addressing young men, who will yet exert a predominant influence in the national councils or who, under God, may control the destinies of some of the very states, where the colored American is most cruelly oppressed. Do these gentlemen reject the doctrine, that in a country like ours, public sentiment is the supreme law Every man, then, who, by the pulpit or the press, exerts an influence upon public sentiment, touches the mainsprin? of -the nation.

And this can even now be done in the university of Cambridge or Edinburgh it certainly might be done in either, with great effect, if a circle of enterprising young Americans, who, in different stations of responsibility, were to be scattered. through this republic, were there receiving a public education. Will my readers just open their eyes, a moment, on one of the 4 state pritilesis, which these gentlemen inform us the United States are pledged not to interfere with'? It is the Perhaps a hint, in one ermon, might justly bar, been so construed- Ml i i il HI Hrj II.