.Y-' ^. ^: ^f ^ /^^^'v.. ^... j'^ y. AN ESSAY SLAVERY AND ABOLITIONISM, WITH REFERENCE TO THE DUTY OF AMERICAN FEMALES. BY CATHARINE E. t^EECHEE. HENRY PERKINS, 134 CHESTNUT STREET. PERKINS & MARVIN, BOSTON. 1837. Entered according to the Act of Congresa, in the year 1837, by Henry Perkins, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the Eastern District of Pettnsylyania. IN EXCHANGK Ooiueli Uaiv. r. ASHMEAD AND CO. PRINTERS. PREFACE. The following are the circumstances which occasioned the succeeding pages. A gentle- man and a friend, requested the writer to assign reasons why he should not join the Abolition Society. While preparing a reply to this request, Miss Grimke's Address was presented, and the information communi- cated, of her intention to visit the North, for the purpose of using her influence among northern ladies to induce them to unite with Abolition Societies. The writer then began a private letter to Miss Grimke as a personal friend. But by the wishes and advice of others, these two efforts were finally com- bined in the following Essay, to be presented to the public. The honoured and beloved name which that lady bears, so associated as it is at the South, North, and West, with all that is ele- gant in a scholar, refined in a gentleman, and elevated in a Christian, — the respectable sect with which she is connected, — the in- teresting effusions of her pen, — and her own intellectual and moral worth, must secure respect for her opinions and much personal influence. This seems to be a sufficient apology for presenting to the public some considerations in connexion with her name ; considerations which may exhibit in another aspect the cause she advocates, and which it may be appropriate to consider. As such, they are respectfully commended to the pub- lic, and especially to that portion of it for which they are particularly designed. ESSAY ON SLAVERY AND ABOLITIONISM. Addressed to Miss A. D. Grimke. My dear Friend, Your public address to Christian females at the South has reached me, and I have been urged to aid in circulating it at the North. I have also been informed, that you contemplate a tour, during the ensuing year, for the purpose of exerting your influence to form Abolition Societies among ladies of the non-slave-holding States. Our acquaintance and friendship give me a claim to your private ear; but there are reasons why it seems more desirable to ad- dress you, who now stand before the public a2 6 as an advocate of Abolition measures, in a more public manner. The object I have in View, is to present some reasons why it seems unwise and inex- pedient for ladies of the non-slave-holding States to unite themselves in Abolition Socie- ties ; and thus, at the same time, to exhibit the inexpediency of the course you propose to adopt. I would first remark, that your public ad- dress leads me to infer, that you are not suf- ficiently informed in regard to the feelings and opinions of Christian females at the North. Your remarks seem to assume, that the principles held by Abolitionists on the subject of slavery, are peculiar to them, and are not generally adopted by those at the North who oppose their measures. In this you are not correctly informed. In the sense in which Abolitionists explain the terms they employ, there is little, if any, difference be- tween them and most northern persons. Especially is this true of northern persons of religious principles. I know not where to look for northern Christians, who would deny that every slave-holder is bound to treat his slaves exactly as he w^OLild claim that his own children ought to be treated in similar circum- stances ; that the holding of our fellow men as property, or the withholding any of the rights of freedom, for mere purposes of gain, is a sin, and ought to be immediately aban- doned ; and that where the laws are such, that a slave-holder cannot /eg«//?/ emancipate his slaves, without throwing them into worse bondage, he is bound to use all his influence to alter those laws, and, in the meantime, to treat his slaves, as nearly as he can, as if they were free. I do not suppose there is one person in a thousand, at the North, who would dissent from these principles. They would only dif- fer in the use of terms, and call this the doc- trine of gradual emancipation, while Aboli- tionists would call it the doctrine of immediate emancipation. As this is the state of pubhc opinion at the North, there is no necessity for using any influence with northern ladies, in order that they may adopt your principles on the sub- ject of slavery ; for they hold them in com- mon with yourself, and it would seem unwise, and might prove irritating, to approach them as if they held opposite sentiments. In regard to the duty of making efforts to bring the people of the Southern States to adopt these principles, and act on them, it is entirely another matter. On this point you would find a large majority opposed to your views. Most persons in the non-slave-hold- ing States have considered the matter of Southern slavery, as one in which they were no more called to interfere, than in the aboli- tion of the press-gang system in England, or the tythe system of Ireland. Public opinion may have been wrong on this point, and yet have been right on all those great principles of rectitude and justice relating to slavery, which Abolitionists claim as their distinctive peculiarities. The distinctive peculiarity of the Abolition Society is this: it is a voluntary association in one section of the country, designed to awaken public sentiment against a moral evil existing in another section of the country, 9 and the principa] point of effort seems to be, to enlarge the numbers of this association as a means of influencing public sentiment. The principal object of your proposed tour, I suppose, is to present facts, arguments, and persuasions to influence northern ladies to enrol themselves as members of this associa- tion. I will therefore proceed to present some of the reasons which may be brought against such a measure as the one you w^ould urge. In the first place, the main principle of ac- tion in that society rests wholly on a false deduction from past experience. Experience has shown, that when certain moral evils exist in a community, efforts to awaken pub- lic sentiment against such practices, and combinations for the exercise of personal in- fluence and example, have in various cases tended to rectify these evils. Thus in respect to intemperance ; — the collecting of facts, the labours of public lecturers and the distribution of publications, have had much effect in diminishing the evil. So in reference to the slave-trade and slavery in England. The 10 English nation possessed the power of regu- lating their own trade, and of giving Hberty to every slave in their dominions ; and yet they were entirely unmindful of their duty on this subject. Clarkson, Wilberforce, and their coadjutors, commenced a system of operations to arouse and influence pubHc sentiment, and they succeeded in securing the suppression of the slave trade, and the gradual abolition of slavery in the English colonies. In both these cases, the effort was to enlighten and direct public sentiment in a community, of which the actors were a por- tion, in order to lead them to rectify an evil existing among themselves, which was en- tirely under their control. From the success of such efforts, the Abo- litionists of this country have drawn in- ferences, which appear to be not only illogi- cal, but false. Because individuals in their OHM community have aroused their fellow citizens to correct their own evils, therefore they infer that attempts to convince their fellow-citizens of the faults of another com- munity will lead that community to forsake 11 their evil practices. An example will more clearly illustrate the case. Suppose two rival cities, which have always been in competi- tion, and always jealous of each other's re- putation and prosperity. Certain individuals in one of these cities become convinced, that the sin of intemperance is destroying their prosperity and domestic happiness. They proceed to collect facts, they arrange statis- tics, they call pubhc meetings, they form voluntary associations, they use arguments, entreaties and personal example, and by these means they arrest the evil. Suppose another set of men, in this same community, become convinced that certain practices in trade and business in the rival city, are dishonest, and have an oppressive bearing on certain classes in that city, and are injurious to the interests of general com- merce. Suppose also, that these are prac- tices, which, by those who allow them, are considered as honourable and right. Those who are convinced of their immorality, wish to alter the opinions and the practices of the citizens of their rival city, and to do this. 12 they commence the collection of facts, that exhibit the tendencies of these practices and the evils they have engendered. But instead of going among the community in v^hich the evils exist, and endeavouring to convince and persuade them, they proceed to form volun- tary associations among their neighbours at home, and spend their time, money and ef- forts to convince their fellow citizens that the inhabitants of their rival city are guilty of a great sin. They also publish papers and tracts and send out agents, not to the guilty city, but to all the neighbouring tov^ns and villages, to convince them of the sins of the city in their vicinity. And they claim that they shall succeed in making that city break off its sins, by these measures, because other men succeeded in banishing intemperance by labouring among their own friends and fel- low citizens. Is not this example exactly parallel with the exertions of the Abolition- ists ? Are not the northern and southern sec- tions of our country distinct communities, with different feelings and interests? Are they not rival, and jealous in feeling ? Have the northern States the power to rectify evils 13 at the South, as they have to remove their own moral deformities; or have they any such power over the southern States as the British people had over their own trade and their dependent colonies in the West In- dies 1 Have not Abolitionists been sending out papers, tracts, and agents to convince the people of the North of the sins of the South? Have they not refrained from going to the South with their facts, arguments, and appeals, because they feared personal evils to themselves? And do not Abolitionists found their hopes of success in their project, on the success which crowned the efforts of British philanthropists in the case of slavery, and on the success that has attended efforts to banish intemperance ? And do not these two cases differ entirely from the Abolition move- ment in this main point, that one is an effort to convince men of thew own sins, and the other is an effort to convince men of the sins of other persons ? The second reason I would urge against joining the Abolition Society is, that its cha- racter and measures are not either peaceful B 14 or Christian in tendency, but they rather are those which tend to generate party spirit, denunciation, recrimination, and angry pas- sions. But before bringing evidence to sustain this position, I wish to make a distinction between the men who constitute an associa- tion, and the measures which are advocated and adopted. I beheve, that as a body. Abolitionists are men of pure morals, of great honesty of pur- pose, of real benevolence and piety, and of great activity in efforts to promote what they consider the best interests of their fellow men. I believe, that, in making efforts to abolish slavery, they have taken measures, which they supposed w^ere best calculated to bring this evil to an end, with the greatest speed, and with the least danger and suffer- ing to the South. I do not believe they ever designed to promote disunion, or insurrec- tion, or to stir up strife, or that they suppose that their measures can be justly character- ized by the peculiarities I have specified. I believe they have been urged forward by a 15 strong feeling of patriotism, as well as of re- ligious duty, and that they have naade great sacrifices of feeling, character, time, and money to promote what they believed to be the cause of humanity and the service of God. I regard individuals among them, as having taken a bold and courageous stand, in maintaining the liberty of free discussion, the liberty of speech and of the press ; though this however is somewhat abated by the needless provocations by which they caused those difficulties and hazards they so cou- rageously sustained. In speaking thus of Abolitionists as a body, it is not assumed that there are not bad men found in this party as well as in every other ; nor that among those who are good men, there are not those who may have allowed party spirit to take the place of Christian principle ; men who have exhibited a mournful destitution of Christian charity ; who have indulged in an overbear- ing, denouncing, and self-willed pertinacity! as to measures. Yet with these reservations, I believe that the above is no more than a fair and just exhibition of that class of men 16 who are embraced in the party of AboUtion- ists. And all this can be allowed, and yet the objection I am to urge against joining their ranks may stand in its full force. To make the position clearer, an illustra- tion may be allowed. Suppose a body of good men become convinced that the in- spired direction, " them that sin, rebuke be- fore all, that others may fear," imposes upon them the duty of openly rebuking every body whom they discover in the practice of any sin. Suppose these men are daily in the habit of going into the streets, and calling all by-standers around them, pointing out cer- tain men, some as liars, some as dishonest, some as licentious, and then bringing proofs of their guilt and rebuking them before all ; at the same time exhorting all around to point at them the finger of scorn. They persevere in this course till the whole community is thrown into an uproar; and assaults, and even bloodshed ensue. They then call on all good citizens to protect their persons from abuse, and to maintain the hberty of speech and of free opinion. 17 Now the men may be as pure in morals, as conscientious and upright in intention, as any Abolitionist, and yet every one would say, that their measures were unwise and unchristian. In like manner, although Abolitionists may be lauded for many virtues, still much evi- dence can be presented, that the character and measures of the Abolition Society are not either peaceful or christian in tendency, but that they are in their nature calculated to generate party spirit, denunciation, re- crimination, and angry passions. The first thing I would present to establish this, is the character of the leaders of this association. Every combined effort is ne- cessarily directed by leaders ; and the spirit of the leaders will inevitably be communi- cated to their coadjutors, and appear in the measures of the whole body. In attempting to characterize these leaders, I would first present another leader of a simi- lar enterprise, the beloved and venerated WiLBERFORCE. It is thus that his prominent traits are delineated by an intimate friend. b2 18 " His extreme benevolence contributed largely to his success. I have heard him say, that it was one of his constant rules, and on the question of slavery especially, never to provoke an adversary — to allow him credit fully for sincerity and purity of motive — to abstain from all irritating expres- sions — to avoid even such political attacks as would indispose his opponents for his great cause. In fact, the benignity, the gen- tleness, the kind-heartedness of the man, dis- armed the bitterest foes. Not only on this question did he restrain himself, but general- ly. Once he had been called during a whole debate ' the religious member,' in a kind of scorn. He remarked afterwards, that he was much inclined to have retorted, by calling his opponent the irreligious member, but that he refrained, as it would have been a return- ing of evil for evil. Next to his general con- sistency, and love of the Scriptures, the humility of his character always appeared remarkable. The modest, shrinking, simple Christian statesman and friend always ap- peared in him. And the nearer you ap- 19 proached him, the more his habit of mind obviously appeared to be modest and lowly. His charity in judging of others, is a farther trait of his Christian character. Of his bene- volence I need not speak, but his kind con- struction of doubtful actions, his charitable language toward those with whom he most "widely differed, his thorough forgetfulness of little affronts, were fruits of that general benevolence which continually appeared." This was the leader, both in and out of Parliament, of that body of men who com- bined to bring to an end slavery and the slave trade, in the dominions of Great Bri- tain. With him, as principal leaders, were associated Clarkson, Sharpe, Macauley, and others of a similar spirit. These men were all of them characterized by that mild, bene- volent, peaceful, gentlemanly and forbearing spirit, which has been described as so con- spicuous in Wilberforce. And when their measures are examined, it will be found that they were eminently mild, peaceful, and for- bearing. Though no effort that is to encoun- ter the selfish interests of men, can escape 20 without odium and opposition, from those who are thwarted, and from all whom they can influence, these men carefully took those measures that were calculated to bring about their end with the least opposition and evil possible. They avoided prejudices, strove to conciliate opposers, shunned every thing that would give needless offence and exas- peration, began slowly and cautiously, with points which could be the most easily car- ried, and advanced toward others only as public sentiment became more and more enlightened. They did not beard the lion in full face, by coming out as the first thing with the maxim, that all slavery ought and must be abandoned immediately. They began with " inquiries as to the impolicy of the slave trade,^^ and it was years before they came to the point of the abolition of slavery. And they carried their measures through, without producing warring parties among good men^ who held common principles with themselves. As a general fact, the pious men of Great Britain acted harmoniously in this great effort. 21 Let us now look at the leaders of the Abo- lition movement in America. The man who first took the lead was William L. Garri- son, who, though he professes a belief in the Christian religion, is an avowed opponent of most of its institutions. The character and spirit of this man have for years been exhibited in " the Liberator," of which he is the editor. That there is to be found in that paper, or in any thing else, any evidence of his possessing the peculiar traits of Wilber- force, not even his warmest admirers will maintain. How many of the opposite traits can be found, those can best judge who have read his paper. Gradually others joined themselves in the effort commenced by Gar- rison ; but for a long time they consisted chiefly of men who would fall into one of these three classes ; either good men who were so excited by a knowledge of the enor- mous evils of slavery, that any thing was considered better than entire inactivity, or else men accustomed to a contracted field of observation, and more qualified to judge of immediate results than of general tendencies, 22 or else men of ardent and impulsive tem- perament, whose feelings are likely to take the lead, rather than their judgment. There are no men who act more efficiently as the leaders of an enterprise than the edi- tors of the periodicals that advocate and de- fend it. The editors of the Emancipator, the Friend of Man, the New York Evangelist, and the other abolition periodicals, may therefore be considered as among the chief leaders of the enterprise, and their papers are the mirror from which their spirit and character are reflected. I wish the friends of these editors would cull from their papers all the indications they can find of the peculiarities that distinguished Wilberforce and his associates ; all the evi- dence of " a modest and lowly spirit," — all the exhibitions of " charity in judging of the motives of those who oppose their measures," — all the " indications of benignity, gentle- ness, and kind-heartedness," — all the " kind constructions of doubtful actions," — all the " charitable lanci^uaffe used toward those who difl^er in opinion or measures," — all the 23 *' thorough forgetfulness of little atfronts,'^-^ all the cases where " opponents are allowed full credit for purity and sincerity of motive," — -all cases where they have been careful " never to provoke an adversary," — all cases where they have " refrained from all irritat- ing expressions,"— all cases where they have avoided every thing that would " indispose their opponents for their great cause," and then compare the result with what may be found of an opposite character, and I think it would not be unsafe to infer that an associa- tion whose measures, on an exciting subject, were guided by such men, would be more likely to be aggressive than peaceful. The position I would establish will appear more clearly, by examining in detail some of the prominent measures which have been adopt- ed by this association. One of the first measures of Abohtionists was an attack on a benevolent society, origi- nated and sustained by some of the most pious and devoted men of the age. It was imagined by Abolitionists, that the influence and mea- sures of the Colonization Society tended to 24 retard the abolition of slavery, and to perpe- tuate injurious prejudices against the coloured race. The peaceful and christian method of meeting this difficulty would have been, to collect all the evidence of this supposed hurt- ful tendency, and privately, and in a respect- ful and conciliating way, to have presented it to the attention of the wise and benevolent men, who were most interested in sustaining this institution. If this measure did not avail to convince them, then it would have been safe and justifiable to present to the public a temperate statement of facts, and of the de- ductions based on them, drawn up in a re- spectful and candid manner, with every cha- ritable allowance which truth could warrant. Instead of this, when the attempt was first made to turn public opinion against the Colo- nization Society, I met one of the most influ- ential supporters of that institution, just after he had had an interview with a leading Abo- litionist. This gentleman was most remark- able for his urbanity, meekness, and benevo- lence, and his remark to me in reference to this interview, shows what was it.-^ nature. 25 "I love truth and sound argument," said he,- "but when a man comes at me with a sledge hammer, I cannot help dodging." This is a specimen of their private manner of dealing. In public, the enterprise was attacked as a plan for promoting the selfish interests and prejudices of the whites, at the expense of the coloured population; and in many cases, it was assumed that the conductors of this asso- ciation were aware of this, and accessory to it. And the style in which the thing was done was at once offensive, inflammatory, and exasperating. Denunciation, sneers, and pub- lic rebuke, were bestowed indiscriminately upon the conductors of the enterprise, and of course they fell upon many sincere, upright, and conscientious men, whose feehngs were harrowed by a sense of the injustice, the in- decorum, and the unchristian treatment, they received. And when a temporary impression was made on the public mind, and its oppo- nents supposed they had succeeded in crush- ing this society, the most public and triumph- ant exultation was not repressed. Compare this method of carrying a point, with that c 26 adopted by Wilberforce and his compeers^ and I think you will allow that there was a way that was peaceful and christian, and that this was not the way which was chosen. The next measure of Abolitionism was an attempt to remove the prejudices of the w^hites against the blacks, on account of natural pe- culiarities. Now, prejudice is an unreasona- hie and groundless dislike of persons or things. Of course, as it is unreasonable, it is the most difficult of all things to conquer, and the worst and most irritating method that could be at- tempted would be, to attack a man as guilty of sin, as unreasonable, as ungenerous, or as proud, for allowing a certain prejudice. This is the sure way to produce anger, self- justification, and an increase of the strength of prejudice, against that which has caused him this rebuke and irritation. The best way to make a person like a thing which is disagreeable, is to try in some w^ay to make it agreeable; and if a certain class of persons is the subject of unreasonable pre- judice, the peaceful and christian way of re- moving it would be to endeavour to render 27 the unfortunate persons who compose this class, so useful, so humble and unassuming, so kind in their feelings, and so full of love and good works, that prejudice would be sup- planted by complacency in their goodness, and pity and sympathy for their disabilities. If the friends of the blacks had quietly set themselves to work to increase their intelli- gence, their usefulness, their respectability, their meekness, gentleness, and benevolence, and then had appealed to the pity, generosity, and christian feelings of their fellow citizens, a very different result would have appeared. Instead of this, reproaches, rebukes, and sneers, were employed to convince the whites that their prejudices were sinful, and without any just cause. They were accused of pride, of selfish indifference, of unchristian neglect. This tended to irritate the whites, and to in- crease their prejudice against the blacks, who thus were made the causes of rebuke and exasperation. Then, on the other hand, the blacks extensively received the Liberator, and learned to imbibe the spirit of its con- ductor. 28 They were taught to feel that they were injured and abused, the objects of a guiUy and unreasonable prejudice — that they occupied a lower place in society than was right — that they ought to be treated as if they were whites; and in repeated instances, at- tempts were made by their friends to mingle them with whites, so as to break down the existing distinctions of society. Now, the question is not, w^hether these things, that were urged by Abolitionists, were true. The thing maintained is, that the method taken by them to remove this prejudice was neither peaceful nor christian in its tendency, but, on the contrary, was calculated to increase the evil, and to generate anger, pride, and recri- mination, on one side, and envy, discontent, and revengeful feelings, on the other. These are some of the general measures which have been exhibited in the Abolition movement. The same peculiarities may be as distinctly seen in specific cases, where the peaceful and quiet way of accomplishing the good was neglected, and the one most calcu- lated to excite wrath and strife was chosen. 29 Take, for example, the effort to establish a college for coloured persons. The quiet, peaceful, and christian way of doing such a thing, would have been, for those who were interested in the plan, to furnish the money necessary, and then to have selected a retired place, where there would be the least preju- dice and opposition to be met, and there, in an unostentatious way, commenced the educa- tion of the youth to be thus sustained. In- stead of this, at a time when the public mind was excited on the subject, it was noised abroad that a college for blacks was to be founded. Then a city was selected for its location, where was another college, so large as to demand constant effort and vigilance to preserve quiet subordination; where contests with " sailors and town boys" were barely kept at bay; a college embracing a large proportion of southern students, who were highly excited on the subject of slavery and emancipation; a college where half the shoe- blacks and waiters were coloured men. Be- side the very walls of this college, it was pro- posed to found a college for coloured young c 2 30 men. Could it be otherwise than that oppo- sition, and that for the best of reasons, would arise against such an attempt, both from the faculty of the college and the citizens of the place? Could it be reasonably expected that they would not oppose a measure so calcu- lated to increase their own difficulties and liabilities, and at the same time so certain to place the proposed institution in the most un- favourable of all circumstances? But when the measure was opposed, instead of yielding meekly and peaceably to such reasonable ob- jections, and soothing the feelings and appre- hensions that had been excited, by putting the best construction on the matter, and seeking another place, it was claimed as an evidence of opposition to the interests of the blacks, and as a mark of the force of sinful prejudice. The worst, rather than the best, motives were ascribed to some of the most respectable, and venerated, and pious men, who opposed the measure ; and a great deal was said and done that was calculated to throw the community into an angry ferment. Take another example. If a prudent and 31. benevolent female had selected almost any village in New England, and commenced a school for coloured females, in a quiet, appro- priate, and unostentatious way, the world would never have heard of the case, except to applaud her benevolence, and the kindness of the villagers, who aided her in the effort. But instead of this, there appeared public ad- vertisements, (which I saw at the time,) stat- ing that a seminary for the education of young ladies of colour was to be opened in Canterbury, in the state of Connecticut, where would be taught music on the piano forte, drawing, &c., together with a course of Eng- lish education. Now, there are not a dozen coloured families in New England, in such pecuniary circumstances, that if they were whites it would not be thought ridiculous to attempt to give their daughters such a course of education, and Canterbury was a place where but few of the wealthiest families ever thought of furnishing such accomplishments for their children. Several other particulars might be added that were exceedingly irri- tating, but this may serve as a specimen of the method in which the whole affair was conducted. It was an entire disregard of the prejudices and the proprieties of society, and calculated to stimulate pride, anger, ill-will, contention, and all the bitter feehngs that spring from such collisions. Then, instead of adopting measures to soothe and conciliate, rebukes, sneers and denunciations, were em- ployed, and Canterbury and Connecticut were held up to public scorn and rebuke for doing what most other communities would proba- bly have done, if similarly tempted and pro- voked. Take another case. It was deemed expe- dient by Abolitionists to establish an Abolition paper, first in Kentucky, a slave State. It was driven from that State, either by violence or by threats. It retreated to Ohio, one of the free States. In selecting a place for its location, it might have been established in a small place, where the people were of similar views, or were not exposed to dangerous po- pular excitements. But Cincinnati was se- lected; and when the most intelligent, the most reasonable, and the most patriotic of 33 the citizens remonstrated, — when tliey repre- sented that there were peculiar and unusual liabilities to popular excitement on this sub- ject, — that the organization and powder of the police made it extremely dangerous to excite a mob, and almost impossible to control it, — that all the good aimed at could be accom- plished by locating the press in another place, •where there were not such dangerous liabi- lities, — when they kindly and respectfully urged these considerations, they were disre- garded. I myself w^as present when a sincere friend urged upon the one who controlled that paper, the obligations of good men, not merely to avoid breaking wholesome laws them- selves, but the duty of regarding the liabilities of others to temptation; and that where Chris- tians could foresee that by placing certain temptations in the way of their fellows-men, all the probabilities were, that they would yield, and yet persisted in doing it, the tempt- ers became partakers in the guilt of those who yielded to the temptation. But these remon- strances were ineffectual. The paper must not only be printed and circulated, but it must 34 be stationed where were the greatest proba- bilities that measures of illegal violence would ensue. And when the evil was perpetrated, and a mob destroyed the press, then those who had urged on these measures of tempta- tion, turned upon those who had advised and remonstrated, as the guilty authors of the violence, because, in a season of excitement, the measures adopted to restrain and control the mob, were not such as were deemed suit-' able and right. Now, in all the above cases, I would by no means justify the wrong or the injudicious measures that may have been pursued, un- der this course of provocation. The great- ness of temptation does by no means release men from obligation; but Christians are bound to I'cmember that it is a certain consequence of throwing men into strong excitement, that they will act unwisely and wrong, and that the tempter as well as the tempted are held responsible, both by God and man. In all these cases, it cannot but appear that the good aimed at might have been accomplished in a quiet, peaceable, and 35 christian way, and that this was not the way which was chosen. The whole system of Abolition measures seems to leave entirely out of view, the obli- gation of Christians to save their fellow men from all needless temptations. If the thing to be done is only lawful and right, it does not appear to have been a matter of effort to do it in such a way as would not provoke and irritate; but often, if the chief aim had been to do the good in the most injurious and of- fensive way, no more certain and appropriate methods could have been devised. So much has this been the character of Abolition movements, that many have sup- posed it to be a deliberate and systematized plan of the leaders to do nothing but what w^as strictly a right guaranteed by law, and yet, in such a manner, as to provoke nren to anger, so that unjust and illegal acts might, ensue, knowing, that as a consequence, the opposers of Abolition would be thrown into the wrong, and sympathy be aroused for Abolitionists as injured and persecuted men. It is a fact, that Abolitionists have taken the course most 36 calculated to awaken illegal acts of violence, and that when they have ensued, they have seemed to rejoice in them, as calculated to ad- vance and strengthen their cause. The vio- lence of mobs, the denunciations and unrea- sonable requirements of the South, the denial of the right of petition, the restrictions attempt- ed to be laid upon freedom of speech, and free- dom of tlie press, are generally spoken of with exultation by Abolitionists, as what are among the chief means of promoting their cause. It is not so much by exciting feeUn^s of pity and humanity, and Christian love, towards the op- pressed, as it is by awakening indignation at the treatment of Abolitionists themselves, that their cause has prospered. How many men have declared or implied, that in joining the ranks of Abolition, they were influenced, not by their arguments, or by the wisdom of their course, but because the violence of opposers had identified that cause with the question of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and civil liberty. But when I say that many have supposed that it was the deliberate intention of the Abo- 37 litionists to foment illegal acts and violence, I would by no means justify a supposition, which is contrary to the dictates of justice and charity. The leaders of the Abolition Society disclaim all such wishes or intentions ; they only act apparently on the assumption that they are exercising just rights, which they are not bound to give up, because other men will act unreasonably and wickedly. Another measure of Abolitionists, calculat- ed to awaken evil feelings, has been the treat- ment of those who objected to their proceed- ings. A large majority of the philanthropic and pious, who hold common views with the Abo- litionists, as to the sin and evils of slavery, and the duty of using all appropriate means to bring it to an end, have opposed their mea- sures, because they have believed them not calculated to promote, but rather to retard the end proposed to be accomplished by them. The peaceful and Christian method of en- countering such opposition, would have been to allow the opponents full credit for purity and integrity of motive, to have avoided all D 38 harsh and censorious language, and to have employed facts, arguments and persuasionSy in a kind and respectful way with the hope of modifying their views and allaying their fears. Instead of this, the wise and good who opposed Abolition measures, have been treated as though they were the friends and defend- ers of slavery, or as those who, from a guilty, timid, time-serving policy, refused to take the course which duty demanded. They have been addressed either as if it were necessary to convince them that slavery is wrong and ought to be abandoned, or else, as if they needed to be exhorted to give up their timi- dity and selfish interest, and to perform a manifest duty, which they were knowingly neglecting. Now there is nothing more irritating, when a man is conscientious and acting according to his own views of right, than to be dealt with in this manner. The more men are treated as if they w^ere honest and sincere — the more they are treated with respect, fair- ness, and benevolence, the more likely they are to be moved by evidence and arguments. 39 On the contrary, harshness, iincharitableness, and rebuke, for opinions and conduct that are in agreement with a man's own views of duty and rectitude, tend to awaken evil feehngs, and indispose the mind properly to regard evidence. Abolitionists have not only taken this course, but in many cases, have seemed to act on the principle, that the abolition of Slavery, in the particular mode in which they were aiming to accomplish it, was of such paramount importance, that every thing must be overthrown that stood in the way. No matter what respect a man had gained for talents, virtue, and piety, if he stood in the way of Abolitionism, he must be attacked as to character and motives. No matter how important an institution might be, if its in- fluence wa^ against the measures of Abolition- ism, it must be attacked openly, or sapped privately, till its influence was destroyed. By such measures, the most direct means have been taken to awaken anger at injury, and re- sentment at injustice, and to provoke retalia- tion on those who inflict the wrong. All the partialities of personal friendship; all the feel- 40 ings of respect accorded to good and useful men; all the interests that cluster around pub- lic institutions, entrenched in the hearts of the multitudes who sustain them, were out- raged by such a course. Another measure of Abolitionists, which has greatly tended to promote wrath and strife, is their indiscreet and incorrect use of terms. To make this apparent, it must be premised, that words have no inherent meaning, but always signify that which they are common- ly understood to mean. The question never should be asked, whdX ought a word to mean? but simply, what is the meaning generally attached to this word by those who use it 1 Vocabularies and standard writers are the proper umpires to decide this question. Now if men take words and give them a new and peculiar use, and are consequently misunder- stood, they are guilty of a species of decep- tion, and are accountable for all the evils that may ensue as a consequence. For example; if physicians should come out and declare, that it was their opinion that they 41 ought to poison all their patients, and they had determined to do it, and then all the community should be thrown into terror and excitement, it would be no justification for them to say, that all they intended by that language was, that they should administer as medicines, arti- cles which are usually called poisons. Now Abolitionists are before the commu- nity, and declare that all slavery is sin, which ought to be immediately forsaken; and that it is their object and intention to promote the immediate emancipation of all the slaves in this nation. Now what is it that makes a man cease to be a slave and become free? It is not kind treatment from a master; it is not paying wages to the slave ; it is not the intention to bestow freedom at a future time; it is not treat- ing a slave as if he w^ere free; it is not feehng toward a slave as if he were free. No in- stance can be found of any dictionary, or any standard writer, nor any case in common discourse, where any of these significations are attached to the word as constituting its peculiar and appropriate meaning. It always d2 42 signifies that legal act, which, by the laws of the land, changes a slave to a freeman. What then is the 'proper meaning of the lan- guage used by AboUtionists, when they say that all slavery is a sin which ought to be im- mediately abandoned, and that it is their ob- ject to secure the immediate emancipation of all slaves ? The true and only proper meaning of such language is, that it is the duty of every slave- holder in this nation, to go immediately and make out the legal instruments, that, by the laws of the land, change all his slaves to free- men. If their maxim is true, no exception can be made for those who live in States where the act of emancipation, by a master, makes a slave the property of the State, to be sold for the benefit of the State ; and no exception can be made for those, who, by the will of testators, and by the law of the land, have no power to perform the legal act, which alone can emancipate their slaves. To meet this difiiculty. Abolitionists affirm, that, in such cases, men are physically unable to emancipate their slaves, and of course are 43 not bound to do it ; and to save their great maxim, maintain that, in such cases, the slaves are not slaves, and the slave-holders are not slave-holders, although all their legal relations remain unchanged. The meaning vi^hich the Abolitionist at- taches to his language is this, that every man is bound to treat his slaves, as nearly as he can,|like freemen ; and to use all his influence to bring the system of slavery to an end as soon as possible. And they allow that when men do this they are free from guilt, in the matter of slavery, and undeserving of cen- sure. But men at the North, and men at the South, understand the language used in its true and proper sense; and Abolitionists have been using these terms in a new and pecuhar sense, which is inevitably and universally misunder- stood, and this is an occasion of much of the strife and alarm which has prevailed both at the South and at the North. There are none but these defenders of slavery who maintain that it is a relation justifiable by the laws of the Gospel, who difl^er from Abolitionists in 44 vr'gard to the real thing which is meant. The great mistake of Abolitionists is in using terms which inculcate the immediate annihi- lation of the relation, when they only intend to urge the Christian duty of treating slaves according to the gospel rules of justice and benevolence, and using all lawful and appro- priate means for bringing a most pernicious system to a speedy end. If Abolitionists will only cease to teach that all slave-holding is a sin which ought to be immediately aholished ; if they will cease to urge their plan as one of immediate emancipa- tion, and teach simply and exactly that which they do mean, much strife and misunderstand- ing will cease. But so long as they perse- vere in using these terms in a new and pe- culiar sense, which will always be misunder- stood, they are guilty of a species of decep- tion and accountable for the evils that follow. One other instance of a similar misuse of terms may be mentioned. The word " man- stealer" has one peculiar signification, and it is no more synonymous with " slave-holder" than it is with " sheep-stealer." But Aboli- 45 tionists show that a slave-holder, in fact, does very many of the evils that are perpetrated by a man-stealer, and that the crime is quite as evil in its nature, and very similar in cha- racter, and, therefore, he calls a slave-holder a man-stealer. On this principle there is no abusive lan- guage that may not be employed to render any man odious — for every man commits sin of some kind, and every sin is like some other sin, in many respects, and in certain aggravated cases, may be bad, or even w^orse, than an- other sin with a much more odious name. It is easy to show that a man who neglects all religious duty is very much hke an atheist, and if he has had great advantages, and the atheist very few, he may be much more guilty than an atheist. And so, half the respecta- ble men in our religious communities, may be called atheists, with as much propriety as a slave-holder can be called a man-stealer. Abolitionists have proceeded on this princi- ple, in their various publications, until the terms of odium that have been showered upon slave-holders, would form a large page 4C} in the vocabulary of Billingsgate. This method of dealing with those whom we wish to con- vince and persuade, is as contrary to the dic- tates of common sense, as it is to the rules of good breeding and the laws of the gospel. The preceding particulars are selected, as the evidence to be presented, that the cha- racter and measures of the Abolition Society are neither peaceful nor Christian in their tendency ; but that in their nature they are calculated to generate party-spirit, denuncia- tion, recrimination, and angry passions. If such be the tendency of this institution, it fol- lows, that it is wrong for a Christian, or any lover of peace, to be connected with it. The assertion that Christianity itself has led to strife and contention, is not a safe me- thod of evading this argument. Christianity is a system oi persuasion, tending, by kind and gentle influences, to make men willing to leave oft' their sins — and it comes, not to convince those who are not sinners, but to sinners them- selves. Abolitionism, on the contrary, is a system of coercion by public opinion; and in its pre- 47 sent operation, its influence is not to convince the erring, but to convince those who are not guilty, of the sins of those who are. Another prominent pecuHarity of the Abo- htionists, (which is an objection to joining this association,) is their advocacy of a principle, which is wrong and very pernicious in its tendency. I refer to their views in regard to what is called " the doctrine of expediency." Their difiiculty on this subject seems to have arisen from want of a clear distinction be- tween the duty of those who are guilty of sin, and the duty of those who are aiming to turn men from their sins. The principle is assumed, that because certain men ought to abandon every sin immediately, therefore, certain other men are bound immediately to try and make them do it. Now the question of expediency does not relate to w^hat men are bound to do, who are in the practice of sin themselves — for the immediate relinquish- ment of sin is the duty of all; but it relates to the duty of those who are to make efforts to induce others to break off their wickedness. Here, the wisdom and rectitude of a given 48 course, depend entirely on the 'prohahilities of success. If a father has a son of a ^^ery pe- culiar temperament, and he knows by obser- vation, that the use of the rod will make him more irritable and more liable to a certain fault, and that kind arguments, and tender measures will more probably accomplish the desired object, it is a rule of expediency to try the most probable course. If a compan- ion sees a friend committing a sin, and has, from past experience, learned that remon- strances excite anger and obstinacy, while a look of silent sorrow and disapprobation tends far more to prevent the evil, expediency and duty demand silence rather than remon- strance. There are cases also, where differences in age, and station, and character, forbid all in- terference to modify the conduct and cha- racter of others. A nursery maid may see that a father mis- governs his children, and ill-treats his wife. But her station makes it inexpedient for her to turn reprover. It is a case where re- proof would do no good, but only evil. 49 So in communities, the propriety and rec- titude of measures can be decided, not by the rules of duty that should govern those who are to renounce sin, but by the proba- bilities of good or evil consequence. The Abolitionists seem to lose sight of this distinction. They form voluntary asso- ciations in free States, to convince their fel- low citizens of the sins of other men in other communities. They are blamed and opposed, because their measures are deemed inexpedient, and calculated to increase, rath- er than diminish the evils to be cured. In return, they show that slavery is a sin which ought to be abandoned immediately, and seem to suppose that it follows as a cor- rect inference, that they themselves ought to engage in a system of agitation against it, and that it is needless for them to inquire whether preaching the truth in the manner they propose, will increase or diminish the evil. They assume that whenever sin is com- mitted, not only ought the sinner imme- diately to cease, but all his fellow-sinners are bound to take measures to make him cease, 50 and to take measures, without any reference to the probabiUties of success. That this is a correct representation of the views of AboHtionists generally, is evident from their periodicals and conversation. All their remarks about preaching the truth and leaving consequences to God — all their depreciation of the doctrine of expediency, are rendered relevant only by this suppo- sition. The impression made by their writings is, that God has made rules of duty; that all men are in all cases to remonstrate against the violation of those rules; and that God will take the responsibility of bringing good out of this course; so that we ourselves are re- lieved from any necessity of inquiring as to probable results. If this be not the theory of duty adopted by this association, then they stand on com- mon ground with those who oppose their measures, viz: that the propriety and duty of a given course is to be decided by proba- bilities as to its results ; and these probabili- 51 lies are to be determined by the knoicn laivs of mind, and the records of past experience. For only one of two positions can be held. Either that it is the duty of all men to re- monstrate at all times art to coerce the South by the public sentiment of the North; because it brings them forward as partisans in a conflict that has been begun and carried forward by measures that are any thing rather than peaceful in their ten- dencies; because it draws them forth from their appropriate retirement, to expose them- 103 selves to the ungoverned violence of mobs, and to sneers and ridicule in public places ; because it leads them into the arena of poli- tical collision, not as peaceful mediators to hush the opposing elements, but as combat- ants to cheer up and carry forward the mea- sures of strife. If it is asked, " May not woman appropriate- ly come forward as a suppliant for a portion of her sex who are bound in cruel bondage ?' It is replied, that, the rectitude and propri- ety of any such measure, depend entirely on its probable results. If petitions from females will operate to exasperate ; if they will be . deemed obtrusive, indecorous, and unwise, by those to whom they are addressed; if they will increase, rather than diminish the evil which it is wished to remove ; if they will be the opening wedge, that will tend eventually to bring females as petitioners and partisans into every political measure that may tend to injure and oppress their sex, in various parts of the nation, and under the various public measures that may hereafter 104 be enforced, then it is neither appropriate nor wise, nor right, for a woman to petition for the relief of oppressed females. The case of Queen Esther is one often ap- pealed to as a precedent. When a woman is placed in similar circumstances, where death to herself and all her nation is one al- ternative, and there is nothing worse to fear, but something to hope as the other alterna- tive, then she may safely follow such an ex- ample. But when a woman is asked to join an Abolition Society, or to put her name to a petition to congress, for the purpose of con- tributing her measure of influence to keep up agitation in congress, to promote the ex- citement of the North against the iniquities of the South, to coerce the South by fear, shame, anger, and a sense of odium to do what she has determined not to do, the case of Queen Esther is not at all to be regarded as a suitable example for imitation. In this country, petitions to congress, in reference to the official duties of legislators, seem, in all cases, to fall entirely without the sphere of female duty. Men are the 105 proper persons to make appeals to the rulers whom they appoint, and if their female friends, by arguments and persuasions, can induce them to petition, all the good that can be done by such measures will be sour- ed. But if females cannot influence their nearest friends, to urge forward a public measure in this way, they surely are out of their place, in attempting to do it them- selves. There are some other considerations, which should make the American females peculiarly sensitive in reference to any mea- sure, which should even seem to draw them from their appropriate relations in society. It is allowed by all reflecting minds, that the safety and happiness of this nation de- pends upon having the children educated, and not only intellectually, but morally and religiously. There are now nearly two mil- lions of children and adults in this country who cannot read, and who have no schools of any kind. To give only a small supply of teachers to these destitute children, who are generally where the population is sparse, will lOG demand thirty thousand teachers; and six thousand more will be needed every year, barely to meet the increase of juvenile popu- lation. But if we allow that we need not reach this point, in order to save ourselves from that destruction which awaits a people, when governed by an ignorant and unprin- cipled democracy; if we can weather the storms of democratic liberty with only one- third of our ignorant children properly edu- cated, still we need ten thousand teachers at this moment, and an addition of two thou- sand every year. Where is this army of teachers to be found ? Is it at all probable that the other sex will afford even a mode- rate portion of this supply ? The field for enterprise and excitement in the political arena, in the arts, the sciences, the Hberal professions, in agriculture, manufactures, and commerce, is opening with such temptations, as never yet bore upon the mind of any na- tion. Will men turn aside from these high and exciting objects to become the patient labourers in the school-room, and for only the small pittance that rewards such toil ? 107 No, they will not do it. Men will be educa- tors in the college, in the high school, in some of the most honourable and lucrative common schools, but the children, the little cidlclren of this nation must, to a wide ex. tent, be taught by females, or remain un- taught. The drudgery of education, as it is now too generally regarded, in this country, will be given to the female hand. And as the value of education rises in the public mind, and the importance of a teacher's of- fice is more highly estimated, women will more and more be furnished with those in- tellectual advantages which they need to fit them for such duties. The result will be, that America will be distinguished above all other nations, for well- educated females, and for the influence they will exert on the general interests of society. But if females, as they approach the other \ sex, in intellectual elevation, begin to claim, or to exercise in any manner, the pecuHar I prerogatives of that sex, education will prove/ a doubtful and dangerous blessing. But this( will never be the result. For the more in- 108 telligent a woman becomes, the more she can appreciate the wisdom of that ordinance that appointed her subordinate station, and the more her taste will conform to the graceful and dignified retirement and submission it involves. An ignorant, a narrow-minded, or a stupid woman, cannot feel nor understand the ra- tionality, the propriety, or the beauty of this relation ; and she it is, that will be most likely to carry her measures by tormenting, when she cannot please, or by petulent com- plaints or obtrusive interference, in matters which are out of her sphere, and which she cannot comprehend. And experience testifies to this result. By the concession of all travellers, American fe- males are distinguished above all others for their general intelligence, and yet they are complimented for their retiring modesty, vir- tue, and domestic faithfulness, while the other sex is as much distinguished for their respectful kindness and attentive gallantry. There is no other country where females have so much public respect and kindness accorded to them 109 as in America, by the concession of all tra- vellers. And it will ever be so, while intel- lectual culture in the female mind, is combin- ed with the spirit of that religion which so strongly enforces the appropriate duties of a woman's sphere. But it may be asked, is there nothing to be done to bring this national sin of slavery to an end? Must the internal slave-trade, a trade now ranked as piracy among all civil- ized nations, still prosper in our bounds? Must the very seat of our government stand as one of the chief slave-markets of the land ; and must not Christian females open their lips, nor lift a finger, to bring such a shame and sin to an end ? To this it may be rephed, that Christian females may, and can say and do much to bring these evils to an end ; and the present is a time and an occasion when it seems most desirable that they should know, and appre- ciate, and exercise the power which they do possess for so desirable an end. And in pointing out the methods of ex- erting female influence for this object, I am K 110 inspired with great confidence, from the con- viction that what will be suggested, is that which none will oppose, but all will allow to be not only practicable, but safe, suitable, and Christian. To appreciate these suggestions, however, it is needful previously to consider some par- ticulars that exhibit the spirit of the age and the tendencies of our peculiar form of gov- ernment. The prominent principle, now in develop- ment, as indicating the spirit of the age, is the perfect right of all men to entire free- dom of opinion. By this I do not mean that men are coming to think that " it is no matter what a man believes, if he is only honest and sincere," or that they are grow- ing any more lenient towards their fellow- men, for the evil consequences they bring on themselves or on others for believing wrong. But they are coming to adopt the maxim, that no man shall be forced by pains and penalties to adopt the opinions of other minds, but that every man shall be free to form his HI own opinions, and to propagate them by all lawful nneans. At the same time another right is claimed, which is of necessity involved in the pre- ceding, — the right to oppose, by all lawful means, the opinions and the practices of others, when they are deemed pernicious either to individuals or to the community, Facts, arguments and 'persuasions are, by all, conceded to be lawful means to employ in propagating our own views, and in opposing the opinions and practices of others. These fundamental principles of liberty have in all past ages been restrained by co- ercive influences, either of civil or of eccle- siastical power. But in this nation, all such coercive influences, both of church and state, have ceased. Every man may think what he pleases about government, or religion, or any thing else ; he may propagate his opinions, he may controvert opposite opinions, and no magistrate or ecclesiastic can in any legal way restrain or punish. But the form of our government is such, that every measure that bears upon the public 112 or private interest of every citizen, is decided by public sentiment. All lavv^s and regula- tions in civil, or religious, or social concerns, are decided by the majority of votes. And the present is a time when every doctrine, every principle, and every practice which influ- ences the happiness of man, either in this, or in a future life, is under discussion. The whole nation is thrown into parties about almost every possible question, and every naan is stimulated in his efforts to promote his own plans by the conviction that success depends entirely upon bringing his fellow citizens to think as he does. Hence every man is fierce in maintaining his own right of free discussion, his own right to propagate his opinions, and his own right to oppose, by all lawful means, the opinions that conflict with his own. But the difficulty is, that a right which all men claim for themselves, with the most sen- sitive and pertinacious inflexibility, they have not yet learned to accord to their fellow men, in cases where their own interests are in- volved. Every man is saying, " let me hnve 113 full liberty to propagate my opinions, and to oppose all that I deem wrong and injurious, but let no man take this liberty with my opinions and practices. Every man may be- lieve what he pleases, and propagate what he pleases, provided he takes care not to attack any thing which belongs to me." And how do men exert themselves to restrain this corresponding right of their fellow men? Not by going to the magistrate to inform, or to the spiritual despot to obtain ecclesiastical penalties, but he resorts to methods, which, if successful, are in effect the most severe pains and penalties that can restrain freedom of opinion. What is dearer to a man than his charac- ter, involving as it does, the esteem, respect and affection of friends, neighbours and so- ciety, with all the confidence, honour, trust and emolument that flow from general es- teem ? How sensitive is every man to any thing that depreciates his intellectual charac- ter! What torture, to be ridiculed or pitied for such deficiencies! How cruel the suffer- ing, when his moral delinquencies are held up k2 114 to public scorn and reprehension ! Confisca- tion, stripes, chains, and even death itself, are often less dreaded. It is this method of punishment to which men resort, to deter their fellow-men from exercising those rights of liberty which they so tenaciously claim for themselves. Examine now the methods adopted by almost all who are engaged in the various conflicts of opinion in this nation, and you will find that there are certain measures which combatants almost invariably employ. They either attack the intellectual charac- ter of opponents, or they labour to make them appear narrow-minded, illiberal and bigoted, or they impeach their honesty and veracity, or they stigmatize their motives as mean, selfish, ambitious, or in some other respect unworthy and degrading. Instead of truth, and evidence, and argument, personal depre- ciation, sneers, insinuations, or open abuse, are the weapons employed. This method of resisting freedom of opinions, by pains and penalties, arises in part from the natural sel- fishness of man. and in part from want of clear 115 distinctions as to the rights and duties in- volved in freedom of opinion and freedom of speech. The great fundamental principle that makes this matter clear, is this, that a broad and in- variable distinction should ever be preserved between the opinions and practices that are discussed, and the advocates of these opinions and practices. It is a sacred and imperious duty, that rests on every human being, to exert all his in* fluence in opposing every thing that he be- lieves is dangerous and w^rong, and in sus- taining all that he believes is safe and right. And in doing this, no compromise is to be made, in order to shield country, party, friends, or even self, from any just censure. Every man is bound by duty to God and to his country, to lay his finger on every false prin- ciple, or injurious practice, and boldly say, " this is v^^rong — this is dangerous — -this I will oppose with all my influence, whoever it may be that advocates or practises it." And every man is bound to use his efforts to turn public sentiment against all that he believes 116 to be wrong and injurious, either in regard to this life, or to the future world. And every man deserves to be respected and applauded, just in proportion as he fearlessly and impar- tially, and in a 'proper spirit^ time and manner, fulfils this duty. The doctrine, just now alluded to, that it is " no matter what a man believes, if he is only honest and sincere," is as pernicious, as it is contrary to religion and to common sense. It is as absurd, and as impracticable, as it would be to urge on the mariner the maxim, " no matter which way you believe to be north, if you only steer aright." A man's character, feelings, and conduct, all depend upon his opin- ions. If a man can reason himself into the belief that it is right to take the property of others and to deceive by false statements, he will pro- bably prove a thief and a liar. It is of the great- est concern, therefore, to every man, that his fellow-men should believe right, and one of his most sacred duties is to use all his in- fluence to promote correct opinions. But the performance of this duty, does by no means involve the necessity of attacking 117 the character or motives of the advocates of false opinions, or of holding them up, indivi- dually, to public odium. Erroneous opinions are sometimes the con- sequence of unavoidable ignorance, or of mental imbecihty, or of a weak and erring judgment, or of false testimony from others, which cannot be rectified. In such cases, the advocates of false opinions are to be pitied rather than blamed; and while the opinions and their tendencies may be publicly exposed, the men may be objects of affection and kindness. In other cases, erroneous opinions spring from criminal indifference, from prejudice, from indolence, from pride, from evil passions, or from selfish interest. In all such cases, men deserve blame for their pernicious opin- ions, and the evils which flow from them. But, it maybe asked, how are men to decide, when their fellow-men are guilty for holding wrong opinions ; when they deserve blame, and when they are to be regarded only with pity and commiseration by those who be- lieve them to be in the wrong? Here, surely, 118 is a place where some correct principle is greatly needed. Is every man to sit in judgment upon his fellow-man, and decide what are his intel- lectual capacities, and what the measure of his judgment? Is every man to take the office of the Searcher of Hearts, to try the feelings and motives of his fellow-man? Is that most difficult of all analysis, the estimating of the feelings, purposes, and motives, which every man, who examines his own secret thoughts, finds to be so complex, so recondite, so in- tricate ; is this to be the basis, not only of in- dividual opinion, but of pubHc reward and censure? Is every man to constitute himself a judge of the amount of time and interest given to the proper investigation of truth by his fellow-man ? Surely, this cannot be a correct principle. Though there may be single cases in which we can know that our fellow-men are weak in intellect, or erring in judgment, or per- verse in feeling, or misled by passion, or biased by selfish interest, as a general fact we 119 are not competent to decide these matters, in regard to those who differ from us in opinion. For this reason it is manifestly wrong and irrelevant, when discussing questions of duty or expediency, to bring before the public the character or the motives of the individual ad- vocates of opinions. But, it may be urged, how can the evil tendencies of opinions or of practices be in- vestigated, without involving a consideration of the character and conduct of those who advocate them ? To this it may be replied, that the tendencies of opinions and practices can never be ascertained by discussing indivi- dual character. It is c/a55e5of persons, or large communities, embracing persons of all va- rieties of character and circumstances, that are the only proper subjects of investigation for this object. For example, a community of Catholics, and a community of Protestants, may be compared, for the purpose of learning the moral tendencies of their different opin- ions. Scotland and New England, where the principles opposite to Catholicism have most prevailed, may properly be compared with 120 Spain and Italy, where the Catholic system has been most fairly tried. But to select cer- tain individuals who are defenders of these two different systems, as examples to illus- trate their tendencies, would be as improper as it would be to select a kernel of grain to prove the good or bad character of a whole crop. To illustrate by a more particular exarnple. The doctrines of the Atheist school are now under discussion, and Robert Owen and Fanny Wright have been their prominent ad- vocates. In agreement with the above principles, it is a right, and the duty of every man who has any influence and opportunity, to show the absurdity of their doctrines, the weakness of their arguments, and the fatal tendencies of their opinions. It is right to show that the practical adoption of their principles indicates a want of common sense, just as sowing the ocean with grain and expecting a crop would indicate the same deficiency. If the advo- cates of these doctrines carry out their prin- ciples into practice, in any such way as to 121 offend the taste, or infringe on the rights of others, it is proper to express disgust and dis- approbation. If the female advocate chooses to come upon a stage, and expose her person, dress, and elocution to public criticism, it is right to express disgust at whatever is of- fensive and indecorous, as it is to criti- cise the book of an author, or the dancing of an actress, or any thing else that is pre- sented to public observation. And it is right to make all these things appear as odious and reprehensible to others as they do to our- selves. But what is the private character of Robert Owen or Fanny Wright? Whether they are ignorant or weak in intellect; whether they have properly examined the sources of truth; how much they have been biased by pride, passion, or vice, in adopting their opinions; whether they are honest and sincere in their belief; whether they are selfish or benevolent in their aims, are not matters which in any way pertain to the discussion. They are questions about which none are quahfied to judge, except those in close and intimatg com- 122 munion with them. We may inquire with propriety as to the character of a community of Atheists, or of a community where such sentiments extensively prevail, as compared with a community of opposite sentiments. But the private character, feelings, and mo- tives of the individual advocates of these doc- trines, are not proper subjects of investiga- tion in any public discussion. If, then, it be true, that attacks on the cha- racter and motives of the advocates of opin- ions are entirely irrelevant and not at all ne- cessary for the discovery of truth ; if injury inflicted on character is the most severe pe- nalty that can be employed to restrain free- dom of opinions and freedom of speech, what are we to say of the state of things in this nation? Where is there a party which does not in effect say to every man, " if you dare to op- pose the principles or practices we sustain, you shall be punished with personal odium?" which does not say to every member of the party, " uphold your party, right or wrong ; oppose all that is adverse to your party, right or wrong, or else suffer the penalty of having 123 your motives, character, and conduct, im- peached?" Look first at the poHtical arena. Where is the advocate of any measure that does not suffer sneers, ridicule, contempt, and all that tends to depreciate character in public esti- mation? Where is the partisan that is not at- tacked, as either weak in intellect, or dis- honest in principle, or selfish in motives ? And where is the man who is linked with any po- litical party, that dares to stand up fearlessly and defend what is good in opposers, and re- prove what is wrong in his own party ? Look into the religious world. There, even those who take their party name from their professed liberality, are saying, " who- ever shall adopt principles that exclude us from the Christian church, and our clergy from the pulpit, shall be held up either as in- tellectually degraded, or as narrow-minded and bigoted, or as ambitious, partisan and persecuting in spirit. No man shall believe a creed that excludes us from the pale of Christianity, under penalty of all the odium we can inflict." 124 So in the Calholic controversy. Catholics and their friends practically declare war against all free discussion on this point. The decree has gone forth, that " no man shall ap- pear for the purpose of proving that Catho- licism is contrary to Scripture, or immoral and anti-republican in tendency, under penalty of being denounced as a dupe, or a hypo- crite, or a persecutor, or a narrow-minded and prejudiced bigot. On the contrary, those who attack what is called Hberal Christianity, or who aim to op- pose the progress of Cathohcism, how often do they exhibit a severe and uncharitable spirit towards the individuals whose opinions they controvert. Instead of loving the men, and rendering to them all the offices of Chris- tian kindness, and according to them all due credit for whatever is desirable in character and conduct, how often do opposers seem to feel, that it will not answer to allow that there is any thing good, either in the system or in those who have adopted it. " Every thing about my party is right, and every thing in the opposing party is wrong," seems to be 125 the universal maxim of the times. And it is the remark of some of the most intelligent foreign travellers among us, and of our own citizens w^ho go abroad, that there is no coun- try to be found, where freedom of opinion, and freedom of speech is more really influ- enced and controlled by the fear of pains and penalties, than in this land of boasted freedom. In other nations, the control is exercised by government, in respect to a very few matters ; in this country it is party-spirit that rules with an iron rod, and shakes its scorpion whips over every interest and every employment of man. From this mighty source spring constant detraction, gossiping, tale-bearing, falsehood, anger, pride, malice, revenge, and every evil word and work. Every man sets himself up as the judge of the intellectual character, the honesty, the sincerity, the feelings, opportunities, motives, and intentions, of his fellow-man. And so they fall upon each other, not with swords and spears, but with the tongue, "that unruly l2 12G tnember, that setteth on fire the course of na- ture, and is set on fire of hell." Can any person who seeks to maintain the peaceful, loving, and gentle spirit of Chris- tianity, go out into the world at this day, without being bewildered at the endless con- jflicts, and grieved and dismayed at the bitter and unhallowed passions they engender ? Can an honest, upright and Christian man, go into these conflicts, and with unflinching firmness stand up for all that is good, and oppose all that is evil, in whatever party it may be found, without a measure of moral courage such as few can command? And if he carries him- self through with an unyielding integrity, and maintains his consistency, is he not exposed to storms of bitter revilings, and to peltings from both parties between which he may stand? What is the end of these things to bet Must we give up free discussion, and again chain up the human mind under the despotism of past ages? No, this will never be. God designs that every intelligent mind shall be governed, not by coercion, but by reason, and 127 conscience, and truth, Man must reason, and experiment, and compare past and present results, and hear and know all that can be said on both sides of every question which influences either private or public happiness, either for this life or for the life to come. But while this process is going on, must we be distracted and tortured by the baleful pas- sions and wicked works that unrestrained party-spirit and ungoverned factions will bring upon us, under such a government as ours? Must we rush on to disunion, and civil wars, and servile wars, till all their train of horrors pass over us hke devouring fire? There is an influence that can avert these dangers — a spirit that can allay the storm- that can say to the troubled winds and wa- ters, "peace, be still." It is that spirit which is gentle and easy to be entreated, which thinketh no evil, which rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth, which is not easily provoked, which hopeth all things, which beareth all things. Let this spirit be infused into the mass of the nation, and then truth maybe sought, defend- 128 ed, and propagated, and error detected, and its evils exposed ; and yet we may escape the evils that now^ rage through this nation, and threaten us with such fiery plagues. And is there not a peculiar propriety in such an emergency, in looking for the espe- cial agency and assistance of females, who are shut out from the many temptations that assail the other sex, — who are the appointed ministers of all the gentler charities of life, — who are mingled throughout the whole mass of the community, — who dwell in those re- tirements where only peace and love ought ever to enter, — whose comfort, influence, and dearest blessings, all depend on preserving peace and good will among men'? In the present aspect of affairs among us, when everything seems to be tending to disunion and distraction, it surely has become the duty of every female instantly to relin- quish the attitude of a partisan, in every mat- ter of clashing interests, and to assume the office of a mediator, and an advocate of peace. And to do this, it is not necessary that a woman should in any manner relinquish 129 her opinion as to the evils or the benefits, the right or the wrong, of any principle or prac- tice. But, while quietly holding her own opinions, and calmly avowing them, when conscience and integrity make the duty im- perative, every female can employ her influ- ence, not for the purpose of exciting or regu- lating public sentiment, but rather for the purpose of promoting a spirit of candour, for- bearance, charity, and peace. And there are certain prominent maxims w^hich every woman can adopt as peculiarly belonging to her, as the advocate of charity and peace, and which it should be her especial office to illustrate, enforce, and sustain, by every method in her power. The first is, that every person ought to be sustained, not only in the right of propagating his own opinions and practices, but in oppos- ing all those principles and practices which he deems erroneous. For there is no opinion which a man can propagate, that does not oppose some adverse interest; and if a man must cease to advocate his own views of truth and rectitude, because he opposes the 130 interest or prejudices of some other man or party, all freedom of opinion, of speech, and of action, is gone. All that can be demanded is, that a man shall not resort to falsehood, false reasoning, or to attacks on character, in maintaining his own rights. If he states things which are false, it is right to show the false- hood, — if he reasons falsely, it is right to point out his sophistry, — if he impeaches the character or motives of opponents, it is right to express disapprobation and disgust; but if he uses only facts, arguments, and persua- sions, he is to be honoured and sustained for all the efforts he makes to uphold what he deems to be right, and to put down what he believes to be wrong. Another maxim, which is partially involved in the first, is, that every man ought to allow his own principles and practices to be freely discussed, with patience and magnanimity, and not to complain of persecution, or to at- tack the character or motives of those who claim that he is in the wrong. If he is belied, if his character is impeached, if his motives are assailed, if his intellectual capabilities are 131 made the objects of sneers or commiseration, he has a right to complain, and to seek sym- pathy as an injured man; but no man is a consistent friend and defender of liberty of speech, who cannot bear to have his own principles and practices subjected to the same ordeal as he demands should be im- posed on others. Another maxim of peace and charity is, that every man's own testimony is to be taken in regard to his motives, feelings, and intentions. Though we may fear that a fellow- man is mistaken in his views of his own feel- ings, or that he does not speak the truth, it is as contrary to the rules of good breeding as it is to the laws of Christianity, to assume or even insinuate that this is the case. If a man's word cannot be taken in regard to his own motives, feelings, and intentions, he can find no redress for the wrong that may be done to him. It is unjust and unreasonable in the extreme to take any other course than the one here urged. Another most important maxim of candour and charity is, that when we are to assign mo- 132 lives for the conduct of our fellow-men, espe- cially of those who oppose our interests, we are obligated to put the best, rather than the worst construction, on all they say and do. Instead of assigning the worst as the probable motive, it is always a duty to hope that it is the best, until evidence is so unequivocal that there is no place for such a hope. Another maxim of peace and charity re- spects the subject of retaliation. Whatever may be said respecting the literal construc- tion of some of the rules of the gospel, no one can deny that they do, whether figurative or not, forbid retaliation and revenge; that they do assume that men are not to be judges and executioners of their own wrongs; but that injuries are to be borne with meekness, and that retributive justice must be left to God, and to the laws. If a man strikes, we are not to return the blow, but appeal to the laws^ If a man uses abusive or invidious language,, we are not to return railing for railing. If a man impeaches our motives and attacks our character, we are not to return the evil. If a man sneers and ridicules, we are not to re^ 133 taliate with ridicule and sneers. If a man reports our weaknesses and failings, we are not to revenge ourselves by reporting his. No man has a right to report evil of others, except when the justification of the innocent, or a regard for public or individual safety, demands it. This is the strict law of the gospel, inscribed in all its pages, and meeting in the face all those unchristian and indecent violations that now are so common, in almost every conflict of intellect or of interest. Another most important maxim of peace and charity imposes the obligation to guard our fellow-men from all unnecessary tempta- tion. We are taught daily to pray, "lead us not into temptation;" and thus are admonish- ed not only to avoid all unnecessary tempta- tion ourselves, but to save our fellow-men from the danger. Can we ask our Heavenly Parent to protect us from temptation, while we recklessly spread baits and snares for our fellow-men? No, we are bound in every measure to have a tender regard for the weaknesses and Habilities of all around, and ever to be ready to yield even our just rights. 134 when we can lawfully do it, rather than to tempt others to sin. The generous and high- minded Apostle declares, "if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth ;" and it is the spirit of this maxim that every Christian ought to culti- vate. There are no occasions when this maxim is more needed, than when we wish to modify the opinions, or alter the practices of our fellow-men. If, in such cases, we find that the probabilities are, that any interfer- ence of ours will increase the power of tempation, and lead to greater evils than those we wish to remedy, we are bound to forbear. If we find that one mode of at- tempting a measure will increase the power of temptation, and another will not involve this danger, we are bound to take the safest course. In all cases we are obligated to be as careful to protect our fellow-men from temptation, as we are to watch and pray against it in regard to ourselves. Another maxim of peace and charity re- quires a most scrupulous regard to the repu- tation, character, and feelings of our fellow- 135 men, and especially of those who are opposed in any way to our wishes and interests. Every man and every woman feels that it is wrong for others to propagate their faults and weak- ness through the community. Every one feels wounded and injured to find that others are making his defects and infirmities the subject of sneers and ridicule. And what, then, is the rule of duty? "As ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." With this rule before his eyes and in his mind, can a man retail his neighbour's faults, or sneer at his deficiencies, or ridicule his in- firmities, with a clear conscience? There are cases when the safety of individuals, or public justice, demands that a man's defects of character, or crimes, be made public; but no man is justified in communicating to others any evil respecting any of his fellow-men, when he cannot appeal to God as his witness that he does it from benevolent interest in the welfare of his fellow-men — from a desire to save individuals or the public from some evil — and not from a malevolent or gossiping propensity. Oh, that this law of love and 136 charity could find an illustration and an ad- vocate in every female of this nation ! Oh, that every current slander, and every inju- rious report, naight stand abashed, whenever it meets the notice of a woman ! These are the maxims of peace and chari- ty, which it is in the power of the females of our country to advocate, both by example and by entreaties. These are the principles which alone can protect and preserve the right of free discussion, the freedom of speech, and liberty of the press. And with our form of government, and our liabilities to faction and party-spirit, the country will be safe and happy only in proportion to the prevalence of these maxims among the mass of the com- nn unity. There probably will never arrive a period in the history of this nation, when the influence of these principles will be more needed, than the present. The question of slavery invoh^es more pecuniary interests, touches more private relations, involves more prejudices, is entwined with more sectional, party, and pohtical interests, than any other which can ever again arise. It is a matter 137 which, if discussed and controlled without the influence of these principles of charity and peace, will shake this nation hke an earth- quake, and pour over us the volcanic waves of every terrific passion. The trembling earth, the low murmuring thunders, already admonish us of our danger; and if females can exert any saving influence in this emer- gency, it is time for them to awake. And there are topics that they may urge upon the attention of their friends, at least as matters worthy of serious consideration and inquiry. Is a w-oman surrounded by those who fa- vour the Abolition measures ? Can she not with propriety urge such inquiries as these? Is not slavery to be brought to an end by free discussion, and is it not a war upon the right of free discussion to impeach the mo- tives and depreciate the character of the op- posers of Abolition measures? When the op- posers of Abolition movements claim that they honestly and sincerely believe that these measures tend to perpetuate slavery, or to bring it to an end by servile wars, and civil M 2 138 disunion, and tiie most terrific miseries— when they object to the use of their pulpits, to the embodying of literary students, to the agitation of the community, by Abolition agents— when they object to the circulation of such papers and tracts as Abolitionists pre- pare, because they believe them most perni- cious in their influence and tendencies, is it not as much persecution to use invidious in- sinuations, depreciating accusation and im- peachment of motive, in order to intimidate, as it is for the opposers of Abolitionism to use physical force ? Is not the only method by which the South can be brought to relinquish slavery, a conviction that not only her duty, hut her highest interest, requires her to do it? And is not calm, rational Christian discussion the only proper method of securing this end? Can a community that are thrown into such a state of high exasperation as now exists at the South, ever engage in such discussions, till the storm of excitement and passion is allayed ? Ought not every friend of liberty and of free discussion, to take every possible means to soothe exasperated feelings, and to 139 avoid all those offensive peculiarities that in their nature tend to inflame and offend ? Is a woman among those who oppose Abolition movements? She can urge such inquiries as these: Ought not Abolitionists to be treated as if they were actuated by the motives of benevolence which they profess ? Ought not every patriot and every Christian to throw all his influence against the im- peachment of motives, the personal detrac- tion, and the violent measures that are turned upon this body of men, who, however they may err in judgment or in spirit, are among the most exemplary and benevolent in the land? If Abolitionists are censurable for taking measures that exasperate rather than convince and persuade, are not their oppo- nents, who take exactly the same measures to exasperate Abolitionists and their friends, as much to blame ? If Abolitionism prospers by the abuse of its advocates, are not the authors of this abuse accountable for the in- crease of the very evils they deprecate? It is the opinion of intelligent and well in- formed men, that a very large proportion of 140 the best members of the AboHtion party were placed there, not by the arguments of Abo- litionists, but by the abuse of their opposers. And I know some of the noblest minds that stand there, chiefly from the influence of those generous impulses that defend the in- jured and sustain the persecuted, while many others have joined these ranks from the im- pression that Abolitionism and the right of free discussion have become identical in- terests. Although I cannot perceive why the right of free discussion, the right of petition, and other ricrhts that have become involved in this matter, cannot be sustained without joining an association that has sustained such injurious action and such erroneous principles, yet other minds, and those which are worthy of esteem, have been led to an opposite con- clusion. The South, in the moments of angry ex- citement, have made unreasonable demands upon the non-slave-holding States, and have employed overbearing and provoking lan- guage. This has provoked re-action again at the North, and men, who heretofore were 141 unexcited, are beginning to feel indignant, and to say, " Let the Union be sundered." Thus anger begets anger, and unreasonable measures provoke equally unreasonable re- turns. But when men, in moments of excitement rush on to such results, little do they think of the momentous consequences that may fol- low. Suppose the South in her anger unite? with Texas, and forms a Southern slave- holding republic, under all the exasperating influences that such an avulsion will excite? What will be the prospects of the slave then, compared with what they are while we dwell together, united by all the ties of bro- therhood, and having free access to those whom we wish to convince and persuade ? But who can estimate the mischiefs that we must encounter while this dismember- ment, this tearing asunder of the joints and members of the body politic, is going on ? What will be the commotion and dismay, when all our sources of wealth, prosperity, and comfort, are turned to occasions for an- gry and selfish strife ? 142 What agitation will ensue in individual States, when it is to be decided by majorities which State shall go to the North and which to the South, and when the discontented mi- nority must either give up or fight ! Who shall divide our public lands between con- tending factions ? What shall be done with our navy and all the various items of the na- tion's property ? What shall be done when the post-office stops its steady movement to divide its efforts among contending parties'? What shall be done when public credit stag- gers, when commerce furls her slackened sail, when property all over the nation changes its owners and relations? What shall be done with our canals and railways, now the bands of love to bind us, then the causes of contention and jealousy? What umpire will appear to settle all these ques- tions of interest and strife, between commu- nities thrown asunder by passion, pride, and mutual injury? It is said that the American people, though heedless and sometimes reckless at the ap- proach of danger, are endowed with a strong 143 and latent principle of common sense, which, when they fairly approach the precipice, always brings them to a stand, and makes them as wise to devise a remedy as they were rash in hastening to the danger. Are we not approaching the very verge of the precipice ? Can we not already hear the roar of the waters below? Is not now the time, if ever, when our stern principles and sound common sense must wake to the rescue 1 Cannot the South be a little more patient under the injurious action that she feels she has suffered, and cease demanding those con- cessions from the North, that never will be made ? For the North, though slower to manifest feeling, is as sensitive to her right of freedom of speech, as the South can be to her rights of property. Cannot the North bear with some unrea- sonable action from the South, when it is re- membered that, as the provocation came from the North, it is wise and Christian that the aggressive party should not so strictly 144 hold their tempted brethren to the rules of right and reason ? Cannot the South bear in mind that at the North the colour of the skin does not take away the feeUng of brotherhood, and though it is a badge of degradation in station and intellect, yet it is oftener regarded with pity and sympathy than with contempt? Can- not the South remember their generous feel- ings for the Greeks and Poles, and imagine that some such feelings may be awakened for the African race, among a people who do not believe either in the policy or the right of slavery? Cannot the North remember how jealous every man feels of his domestic relations and rights, and how sorely their Southern breth- ren are tried in these respects ? How would the husbands and fathers at the North endure it, if Southern associations should be formed to bring forth to the world the sins of North- ern men, as husbands and fathers? What if the South should send to the North to collect all the sins and neglects of Northern husbands and fathers, to retail them at the South in 145 tracts and periodicals ? What if the English nation should join in the outcry, and English fenoales should send forth an agent, not in- deed to visit the offending North, but to cir- culate at the South, denouncing all who did not join in this crusade, as the defenders of bad husbands and bad fathers ? How would Northern men conduct under such provoca- tions? There is indeed a difference in the two cases, but it is not in the nature and amount of irritating influence, for the South- erner feels the interference of strangers to re- gulate his domestic duty to his servants, as much as the Northern man would feel the same interference in regard to his wife and children. Do not Northern men owe a debt of forbearance and sympathy toward their Southern brethren, who have been so sorely tried? It is by urgmg these considerations, and by exhibiting and advocating the principles of charity and peace, that females may exert a wise and appropriate influence, and one which will most certainly tend to bring to an end, not only slavery, but unnumbered other evils 146 and wrongs. No one can object to such an influence, but all parties will bid God speed to every w^oman who modestl}^ wisely and benevolently attempts it. I do not suppose that any Abolitionists are to be deterred by any thing 1 can offer, from prosecuting the course of measures they have adopted. They doubtless will continue to agi- tate the subject, and to form voluntary asso- ciations all over the land, in order to excite public sentiment at the North against the mo- ral evils existing at the South. Yet 1 can- not but hope that some considerations may have influence to modify in a degree the spirit and measures of some who are included in that party. Abolitionists are men who come before the public in the character of reprovers. That the gospel requires Christians sometimes to assume this office, cannot be denied; but it does as unequivocally point out those qualifi- cations which alone can entitle a man to do it. And no man acts wisely or consistently, unless he can satisfy himself that he possesses 147 the qualifications for this duty, before he assumes it. The first of these quahfications is more than common exemption from the faults that are reproved. The inspired interrogatory, "thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself?" enforces this principle; and the maxim of common sense, that "reprovers must have clean hands," is no less unequivocal. Abolitionists are re- provers for the violation of duties in the domestic relations. Of course they are men who are especially bound to be exemplary in the discharge of all their domestic duties. If a man cannot govern his temper and his tongue; if he inflicts that moral castiga- tion on those who cross his will, which is more severe than physical stripes; if he is overbearing or exacting with those under his control ; if he cannot secure respect for a kind and faithful discharge of all his social and relative duties, it is as unwise and im- proper for him to join an Abolition Society, as it would be for a drunkard to preach temperance, or a slave-holder Abolitionism. 148 Another indispensable requisite for the office of reprover is a character distinguished for humility and meekness. There is nothing more difficult than to approach men for the purpose of convincing them of their own de- ficiencies and faults; and whoever attempts it in a self-complacent and dictatorial spirit, always does more evil than good. However exemplary a man may be in the sight of men, there is abundant cause for the exer- cise of humility. For a man is to judge of himself, not by a comparison with other men, but as he stands before God, when com- pared with a perfect law, and in reference to all his peculiar opportunities and restraints. Who is there that in this comparison, cannot find cause for the deepest humihation? Who can go from the presence of Infinite Purity after such an investigation, to "take his brother by the throat?" Who rather, should not go to a brother, who may have sinned, with the deepest sympathy and love, as one who, amid greater temptations and with fewer advantages, may be the least offender of the 149 two? A man who goes with this spirit, has the best hope of doing good to those who may offend. And yet even this spirit will not always save a man from angry retort, vexa- tious insinuation, jealous suspicion, and the misconstruction of his motives. A reprover, therefore, if he would avoid a quarrel and do the good he aims to secure, must be possess- ed of that meekness which can receive evil for good, with patient benevolence. And a man is not fitted for the duties of a reprover, until he can bring his feelings under this control. The last, and not the least important re- quisite for a reprover, is discretion. This is no where so much needed as in cases where the domestic relations are concerned, for here is the place above all others, where men are most sensitive and unreasonable. There are none who have more opportunities for learning this, than those who act as teachers, especially if they feel the responsibility of a Christian and a friend, in regard to the moral interests of pupils, A teacher who shares 150 with parents the responsibiUties of educating their children, whose efforts may all be ren- dered useless by parental influences at home; who feels an affectionate interest in both pa- rent and child, is surely the one who might seem to have a right to seek, and a chance of success in seeking, some modifications of domestic influences. And yet teachers will probably testify, that it is a most discouraging task, and often as Hkely to result in jealous alienation and the loss of influence over both parent and child, as in any good. It is one of the greatest compliments that can be paid to the good sense and the good feeling of a pa- rent to dare to attempt any such measure. This may show how much discretion, and tact, and delicacy, are needed by those who aim to rectify evils in the domestic relations of mankind. The peculiar qualifications, then, which make it suitable for a man to be an Aboli- tionist are, an exemplary discharge of all the