Fifty Notable Years

CHAPTER VIII.

NEW ENGLAND ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY. – UNIVERSALIST PROTEST

"What concord hath Christ with Belial." – 2 Cor. vi. 15.

THE New England Anti-Slavery Society was one of the most vigorous and persistent bodies that ever appeared on these western shores as a reformatory institution. Its chief leader was the indomitable Garrison, who had vowed that on the vexed question of American slavery "he would be heard," and whose "Liberator" was making its journeys from a Boston press throughout the land; hailed and patronized by a goodly company in the North, denounced as incendiary at the South, where a large sum was offered for the head of its editor. He had sympathetic companions of a persistency equal to his own: Wendell Phillips, Edmund Quincy, Samuel E. Sewell, N. P. Rogers, Stephen C. Foster, John Pierpont, Theodore Parker, Parker Pillsbury, Frederick Douglass, and C. L. Remond, among the men of New England, and the Tappans of New York, and representatives at the annual gatherings from Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Washington. Lucretia Mott and Abby Kelley (afterwards Mrs. Foster) were among the women expounders of this gospel of freedom, and "Anniversary Week" in Boston was made especially notable by their gatherings at Marlboro Chapel and Faneuil Hall. No matter what other meetings on that week were dull, there was always an exuberance of liveliness at the Anti-Slavery Convention. "Eloquence is dog-cheap at Marlboro Chapel," said Ralph Waldo Emerson; and it was. No better could be heard on the continent. The hardest and boldest resolutions were usually up for consideration, denouncing slaveholders and all their abettors, political, ecclesiastical, of whatever standing or profession. Church and state alike were subjects of their maledictions. Their defiance of all opposition had a clarion ring in it. Nothing pleased them more than to have their positions questioned or assailed. The adventurous wight who was willing to appear as a condemner of their doctrines was the very one for whom they were looking, and for whose presence and opposition they were profoundly thankful. Their meetings were electrifying. Such debates and orations, such questionings and rejoinders! Such hymns and spiritual songs, too, sung often by the Hutchinsons to the old tunes of "Amherst," "Lenox," and "New Jerusalem!" We hear them now; they brought the shouts and tears.

We remember a scene in Marlboro Chapel one afternoon during Anniversary Week. There came up for debate the question: "Does the Constitution of the United States justify slavery?" Rev. John Pierpont took the negative, and very logically maintained it for more than an hour. He appeared in the greatness of his strength, and at the close of his argument proposed to those of his auditors who wished, to question his statements. And never was seen a hungrier company of interrogators than then and there came upon him. But he was unmoved as a sea-rock in the midst of the breakers. His side of the question was not popular with most of the speakers and their sympathizers there, and he was subjected to a most searching cross-questioning. But he came out triumphantly (as it seemed) through it all. When three or four would speak at once, he would say: "One at a time, friends; the miller's rule holds, – first come, first served. I desire to hear you all." The afternoon sunshine suddenly blazing in from one of the windows upon his face, he aptly remarked: "Some subjects are involved in impenetrable darkness; but here we seem to have a super-abundance of light!" When the last inquirer had been answered, the speaker asked: "Are you all through?" And no other one questioning, he said: "And now, after the fashion of the good old divines, I come to the 'Improvement';" under which head he carefully and briefly reviewed the substance of the debate. It was a masterly plea.

But the end was not yet. There was an evening meeting. Again the hall was filled, to listen to a reply to Mr. Pierpont by Wendell Phillips. The orator was in his best mood, and his silvery speech kept the audience spell-bound. It was a complete refutation of the arguments adduced in the afternoon. A clergyman sitting near to Mr. Pierpont said to him: "How can his arguments be answered?" to which the latter replied: "I should like to see the man who could tell me!" So Greek met Greek in those stirring and stormy days.

It was an up-hill movement, this anti-slavery agitation. It called out spirits of more colors than those mentioned in "Macbeth." The opposition was intense. Garrison's life was in peril in the streets of Boston in 1835, and a little company of his sympathizers, including the poet Whittier and George Thompson, the English philanthropist, were closely followed in the streets of Concord, N. H., one evening, that they might be seized by certain mobocratic ones, and subjected to an immersion in some liquid coloring of transient, if not indelible, black; but the hounded ones escaped, preserving white men's complexions. They were not to be put down by mobs nor frightened by any human opposition. They had the spirit of Luther as he went to the Diet at Worms. Though the pro-slavery "devils were thick as the tiles on the houses," they proposed to fight them in the name of God and humanity.

Politicians could do nothing with them, and the churches generally discarded them. There was no love lost, however, between them and the churches. The churches did not give them credit for the good they were seeking to do, and they had no words of approval for the humanity of the churches. Even the National Constitution was denounced as "a covenant with death and an agreement with hell," and the churches were accused as upholders of this covenant. So they reasoned, not always, however, in that charity which the New Testament commends. There were those in the churches as strongly opposed to slavery as themselves, – but they were slow to recognize action against it outside of their own organizations, – who could say, as did Dr. Gannett of the Unitarian Church: —

"In principle I am with you. But there are those with whom you are connected, persons who seem to me so to distrust the goodness of all others who differ from them, and to look down upon all such with so great a consciousness of moral superiority, that I feel myself when in their presence to be in a situation not unlike that of a criminal before his accuser and judge."[28 - Memoir of Dr. Gannett, by his son, p. 294.]

At one time they held an Anti-Sabbath Convention for a few days, in Boston, during which they said many hard things against the sanctity of this seventh-day worship-time, evidently because they could thus castigate the churches for refusing to discuss freely on this day the crying sin of American slavery. It seemed a pity to hear such harsh denunciations by the speakers who were advocating a righteous cause, against an institution that had done so much towards the world's true civilization. But this was one of their methods of carrying on the reform.

A leading spirit in this movement in the "Granite State" was Nathaniel P. Rogers, for a few years the editor of the "Herald of Freedom," issued at Concord, N. H. He was a lawyer of Plymouth, Grafton County, and a member of the Orthodox Church in that town, and was a descendant of him who was burned at Smithfield, and had the martyr spirit of his noted ancestor. He was a scholarly, witty, and affable man, and wielded as facile a pen as any editor in New England. In many of his descriptive sketches he gave to the scenery of New Hampshire a fascination equal to that with which Sir Walter Scott invests the lochs and hills of Scotland. His plea with Mr. Webster, the great Senator from Massachusetts, to let "his lion voice in one Numidian roar" be heard from his place in Congress on the abomination of American slavery and the claims of American freedom, once read, could never be forgotten. When his "Herald of Freedom" was first issued, some of the stage-drivers from Concord refused to carry it out to the subscribers; but this hostility, through the personal influence of the editor, soon ceased. Its columns were opened to all sorts of radical sayings against the churches because of their presumed hostility to human freedom; but as the columns of the paper were free, there were sometimes sound and strong answers to them. Mr. Rogers, worn out with mental toiling and anxiety, was called from the earthly life in the midst of his years.

And so this work of the anti-slavery reformers went steadily forward with increasing momentum, till a more general awakening took place all over the land. The churches were becoming more and more alive to it, and the politicians could in no wise evade it. The seed of "Free-Soilism" sown, "Know-nothingism" sprang up, and one of the two leading political parties became the party of Freedom – of "free soil, free speech, free men." The passage and attempted enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act, and the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, had served to bring about this result. Hence the election of Mr. Lincoln to the Presidency, secession, war, the downfall of slavery. These first agitators lived to see the end they had striven for attained. They had been heard, and a stronger than they had heard, and had answered them, and an imploring and struggling nation, "in the day of his power!" Now could one of the first of our poets sing: —

"Ring and swing
Bells of joy! On morning's wing
Send the song of praise abroad!
With a sound of broken chains
Tell the nations that he reigns
Who alone is Lord and God!"

Of course the Universalist churches could not evade this controversy between freedom and slavery. Their very faith invited and encouraged it. The Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man are doctrines which forever stand in opposition to the presumption that man can own property in his fellow man. Of all the Christian sects, Universalists were the last who could countenance in the light of their beneficent faith the abomination of American slavery. If other theologies gave cause for the aspersion that "God was the greatest slaveholder in the universe," because it was his intention to keep in spiritual bondage and sufferings great numbers of his offspring world without end, Universalism affirmed that this whole human creation now groaning and travailing in pain shall be delivered from its bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.[29 - Heb. viii. 21, 22.] Could this church, bearing its own significant name, be silent, then, when the test time came? Nay, it was a golden opportunity for her to speak and act. She uttered her voice, firmly, freely, faithfully. True, there were conservatives at first in this church as in others, who dreaded the consequences of the agitation of this subject, who deemed it a political question rather than a religious one, and feared not only discord and division in the churches because of it, but a disruption of the national union. This timidity wore off in due time, and this manifesto went forth from the Universalists of Massachusetts and other States in 1845. It is a "protest against American slavery," and is signed by three hundred and four Universalist clergymen. The reasons stated as the basis of the protest are these: —

"1. Because slavery denies the eternal distinction between a man and property, ranking a human being with a material thing. 2. Because it does not award to the laborer the fruits of his toil in any higher sense than to the cattle. 3. Because it trammels the intellectual powers and prevents their expansion. 4. Because it checks the development of the moral nature of the slave; denies him rights and therefore responsibility. 5. Because it involves a practical denial of the religious nature of the slave. 6. Because it presents an insurmountable barrier to the propagation of the great truth of the Universal Brotherhood and thereby most effectually prevents the progress of true Christianity. 7. Because the essential nature of slavery cannot be altered by any kindness, how great so ever, practised toward the slave. 8. Because the long continuance of a system of wrong cannot palliate it, but on the other hand augments the demand for its abolition. 9. Because we would in all charity remember that peculiarities of situation may affect the judgment and moral sense; still, we must not forget that no peculiarity of situation can excuse a perpetual denial of universal principles and obligations."

CHAPTER IX.

REFORMATORY PROGRESS

"The crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain." – Isaiah, xl. 4.

THE half-century just passed has been notable for the progress of thought in reference to the significant reforms now claiming public attention. Foremost among these is that of

Temperance

In no other period of the past has its work been so marked and cheering. In Great Britain and America its manifestations were almost simultaneous. Intemperance was seen to be a monstrous national vice, and societies were formed for the suppression of it. Abstinence from distilled liquors was at first the pledge taken; but subsequent discussion of the subject induced the next and safer step forward, of total abstinence from all intoxicants. From 1834 to 1838 nearly the whole of the original societies through England and Scotland extended their principles on the new and broader declaration, and worked with renewed enthusiasm.[30 - Chambers' Miscellany.] The same course was taken in our own country, and similar effects followed. The new pledge was consistent, because it struck at the root of the evil.

The Temperance reform enlisted the sympathies of Universalists in the beginning. It was a vindication of the Gospel of enlightened and pure manhood, maintaining its supremacy over the sinful inclinations and indulgences "that war against the soul." Indeed, one of the first avowed advocates of the practice of total abstinence, as early as 1778, was the well-known and honored Dr. Benjamin Rush, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, and a firm believer in Christian Universalism. He not only advocated this practice himself, but was especially interested in commending it to the attention of two religious bodies in Pennsylvania, the Episcopalians and Presbyterians, at their annual meetings. When in later days the attention of the Christian churches was called to the consideration of this reform, no more zealous friends of it were found than those among Universalists. The Universalist ministry was well represented, and its services welcomed by others. An instance is remembered of a deserved tribute, given in his peculiar quaintness of speech, by the elder Dr. (Lyman) Beecher, to Rev. Edwin Thompson, at an annual meeting of the Massachusetts Temperance Society. Mr. Thompson was State agent for the Society, and had been very active in its work during the year; so that a speaker alluded to him as having been in that time "the main spoke in the wheel." "Indeed," said Dr. Beecher, "it seems to me that he has been the hub, and all the spokes, and a considerable part of the rim!"

The reform in our country was quickened by the "Washingtonian" movement, which involved the reformation of the inebriate, and his work to redeem others from the destroyer. Although there were backsliders in this, as in all reformatory movements, yet the number of the saved justified a thousand times the interest taken in the great work itself. It was an indication of what might be done everywhere and in all time by Divine aid, and human will at work relying upon it. It seemed also to emphasize the truth that men, however far overcome by wrong habit, are not to be given over as irreclaimable. It was in accord with the grand idea that there are no lost ones so far astray as to be beyond the mercy which sent Him into the world, who said, "I came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. They that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick."

Legislation took higher and stronger ground in reference to the evil of intemperance. The subject went into politics more than ever. The doctrine of prohibition gained advocates. A law favoring it was passed in Massachusetts, and afterwards in Maine. Prosecutions and law-suits followed, and appeals went up to the highest courts to test the constitutionality of the law. This was affirmed by them, just as the framers of the law knew that it would be. Despite all sophisms and evasions, the common sense of every man will settle down into the conviction that the people of a nation, if they would be really strong and free, must employ every safeguard against this giant evil, that has so constantly outraged and cursed our world.

The rising of the women of the West, in 1873, to suppress the demoralizing work of the liquor-saloons, was an outspoken, providential protest against these scourges of our civilization. Jeered by the thoughtless, and insulted and cursed by the dealers in the death-poison, it was an indication that made the traffickers in strong drink thoughtful, the friends of woman to take new note of her righteous demands and of her reformatory power, and every true soldier in the temperance army to put on new courage in view of the many instrumentalities which God is able to raise up in aid of His redeeming work with His children. One result of the Woman's Crusade has been the formation of the Woman's Christian Temperance Unions in all parts of our land.

The signs of progress in this reform are more significant than ever. The popularity of the Prohibitory Law in Maine; the Prohibitory clause just put into the Kansas and Iowa Constitutions, and proposed in other States; the numerous Reform Leagues; the proposal to institute in our Congress a thorough investigation in reference to the bearing of this question of liquor-making and vending on the industrial, social, and political welfare of our nation; the continued discussion of the effects of the use of intoxicants by leading statesmen, scientists, and medical professors of our age, and the bringing out of new facts, all showing the vital importance of the Temperance reform; and, also, the evident tendency of these movements, as apprehended by the devotees of the liquor interests themselves, moving them, as at a recent convention of brewers in Washington, to avow their determination to defeat, if possible, by all practicable means, the legal, moral, and especially the religious endeavors put forth against the evil by which they are enriched at the expense of the prosperity, happiness, and peace of so many millions of our land, – these facts are unmistakable indications of still greater achievements in the days and years to come.

Like most reforms, this one must work a long way on to its completion. The evil against which it contends is deep-seated and far-reaching. Appetite, avarice, and the drinking usages of society are its strongholds. But all these are not impervious to the inroads of the right upon them. The public conscience is awake to the demands of this reform as it never was before. When that is more truthfully and generally educated, moral suasion will have freer course, and restrictive laws will find a stronger support everywhere.

Peace

The history of our race is one of warfare. "Wars and fightings" have been realized among men from the beginning, and the world has not outgrown the sanguinary strife. Even during the time of which we are speaking in these pages, when so much has been done for the mental and moral enlightenment of mankind, these murderous human contentions have been going on in the Old World and the New. Our own nation has passed through one of the darkest passages of its history. The war of the Rebellion came of a war that existed previous to the withdrawal of the Southern States of our Union, the war of slavery, – for slavery itself is war always, an outrage on the rights of human beings, perpetrated by members of a common brotherhood. And thus one war opened the way to another. They who were warring upon others could no longer bear to have their wrong-doings questioned, but claimed the right to multiply and perpetuate them. So came secession, so came the fratricidal contest. The majority of the nation did not seek war, did not desire it. But the Unionists of the nation deemed themselves justified in resisting the efforts of the secessionists to dismember the nation, and so through a defensive warfare sought to preserve the Union. It was a terrible ordeal, and although the abomination of slavery was swept away, it was at the cost of tens of thousands of lives, of a vast amount of treasure, of suffering as yet unrevealed, and of a lamentable demoralization. The Almighty brought out of it a new order of things with our nation, by abolishing human bondage and placing freedom in the ascendancy. The new order, however, is not yet fully effected. It will take time, wisdom, patience, mutual forbearance, sympathy, and fraternal help to secure this result.

But one reform aids another. A higher view of the claims of human freedom will tend to effect a clearer perception of the great claims of the human brotherhood. If man is too good to be enslaved by his fellow-man, he is too good to be destroyed by him. If human freedom is sacred, so is human life. And we are sure that this grand conception has been very clearly realized, and as clearly affirmed, during the middle of the present century.

In the midst of the world's conflicts during this time, the advocates of peace principles, on both sides of the Atlantic, have not been inactive. They have had a hearing, if a limited one, in Christendom. Peace associations have been more operative than before, and the pulpit and press have made new appeals to the public for the promotion of peace principles. Excellent publications in essay, sermon, or oration have been issued from the press. We hear of one Sunday, in 1845, when one hundred and twenty peace sermons were preached in the city of London. Our philanthropic countryman, Elihu Burritt, has done much for this cause. One of the ablest and most admirable of appeals in behalf of "peace on earth and good will to men" was given in 1845, in Boston, by Charles Sumner, – who may be justly reckoned as one of the brightest lights among philanthropists and statesmen of the present century, – on "The True Grandeur of Nations." Moved by the threatening aspect of affairs between the United States and Mexico, the orator denounced the war system as the ordeal by battle still unwisely continued by international law as the arbiter of justice between nations, and insisted that this system ought to give way to peaceful arbitration for the settlement of international questions, as the private ordeal of battle had given way to such substitutes in the administration of justice between individuals. "The oration attracted unusual attention, led to much controversy, and was widely circulated both in America and Europe. It was pronounced by Richard Cobden to be 'the most noble contribution made by any modern writer to the cause of peace.'"[31 - New Amer. Enc.]

The delusion that wars must always be expected more or less with mankind is a vagary of barbarism, and not a true Christian thought. Rather is the poet right, when he says: —

"War is a game, which, were their subjects wise,
Kings would not play at."

Wars may be lessened, may be outgrown in human society. There are better ways of settling human disputes than by an appeal to arms. Facts in the history of our own nation prove it. Here are a few of them: —

In 1794, the question of the Northeastern boundary between the United States and the dependencies of Great Britain was settled by arbitration.

In 1822, the question of restitution or compensation for slaves found on board of British vessels during the war of 1812. The matter was referred to the Emperor of Russia, and his award accepted by both nations.

In 1858, a difficulty between the United States and the government of Chili and Peru, was referred to the arbitration of the King of the Belgians, and settled by his award.

In 1869, the claims of the United States and Great Britain to landed property in and about Puget Sound were adjusted by peaceable reference.

In 1871, the well-known Alabama claim, which caused so much ill feeling between the United States and England, and threatened to involve the two countries in a terrible war. President Grant, referring to the settlement of this claim, said in his message of Dec. 3, 1871: —

"This year has witnessed two great nations, having one language and lineage, settling by peaceful arbitration disputes of long standing, which were liable at any time to bring nations to a bloody conflict. The example thus set, if successful in its final issue, will be followed by other civilized nations, and finally be the means of restoring to pursuits of industry millions of men now maintained to settle the disputes of nations by the sword."

Is this good possible? Assuredly, if good is able to prevail over evil, right over wrong, love over hatred. And what does the Christian Gospel signify but this: "Peace on earth and good will toward men"? This "good will" shall come, if Christians will do their duty by insisting on the practicability of it. The undercurrent of a better feeling is gaining force as the great truth of the Brotherhood of Man is more deeply and extensively realized. If the present toiling-time is dark, there is light beyond it, the unerring prophecy of the time when "nations shall learn war no more."

As said Victor Hugo, at the Congress of Peace in Paris, in 1849: —

"A day will come when the only battle-field shall be the market open to commerce and the mind opening to new ideas; when a cannon shall be exhibited in public museums just as an instrument of torture is now, and people shall be astonished how such a thing could have been. A day shall come when those two immense groups, the United States of America and the United States of Europe, shall be seen placed in presence of each other, extending the hand of fellowship across the ocean, exchanging their produce, their commerce, their industry, their arts, their genius, clearing the earth, peopling the deserts, meliorating creation under the eyes of the Creator, and uniting, for the good of all, these two irresistible and infinite powers, – the fraternity of men and the power of God."

In agreement with the foregoing statements in reference to the reform movements of our time, we may note more briefly certain other indications of the increase of that spirit which would lessen the afflictions and wrongs and promote the well-being of society.

The Treatment of Criminals

has been a subject of much thought and discussion during the generation just passed. It has been, and still is, an open question among the more thoughtful, whether the subject of the proper treatment of criminals has been regarded aright. We may justly plead for benevolent sympathy without being the apologist of crime. Conscience must be remembered as well as the cry of pitying tenderness, and punishment must have a meaning, or the distinctions of right and wrong are lost. "It will be a sad day," as one has truly said, "when those who violate our laws are more pitied than blamed." Christians are bound by their religion to labor for the prevention of crime, and for the strict application of all righteous laws to the criminal; to impress as they can the awfulness of sin on their own and on other's consciences, and to recall the fallen back to virtue, shamed by his sin, and resolute and strong in the working of a regenerated will, thus vindicating and imitating "the goodness and severity of God." The treatment of convicts in our prisons at the present time is generally more in accordance with these considerations than in the past, when severity was deemed more needful as applied to criminals who were subjects of total depravity, than a proportionate mercy, which regarded them not only as lost ones, but as capable of a possible restoration to their rightful Owner and Almighty Friend. The reform schools in our different States are working in this Christian direction. The subject of has elicited much attention during the time of which we are speaking. It has been discussed in newspapers, pamphlets, legislatures, pulpits, and lyceum halls. Some of our States have abolished the gallows, others are agitating this subject in their legislatures. The present governor (Long) of Massachusetts, in his annual messages of the last two years, has recommended the abolition of the death penalty. A large number of ministers of the Universalist Church have constantly affirmed their opposition to it. Rev. Charles Spear published a sensible work on the subject, and Rev. Hosea Ballou, D. D., thirty years since, gave the whole question a very thorough investigation, in reply to Rev. Dr. Cheever of New York, and others.[32 - Universalist Quarterly, Vol. VI. No. 4, October, 1849.] Michigan was the first State in the Union to abolish the death penalty, and a late Report makes the statement that, with a population of 1,500,000, no man has been executed in the State during the last thirty-five years, and that a less number of murders have been perpetrated during the last ten years, in ratio to the population, than during the same decade in any other State where public or even private executions have prevailed.[33 - "Gospel Banner," Augusta, Me., June 10, 1882.] Capital punishment has also been abolished in Maine.

Capital Punishment