NAWSA                                       Subject File                                 Garrison, William Lloyd

WRITINGS OF W. L. GARRISON.
Selections from the writings and speeches
of William Lloyd Garrison- 316 pages, duodec-
imo. Price- In cloth, $1.00: extra gilt, $1.25.               186+
    For sale at the Anti- Slavery Office, 21 Cornhill. 

December 31 1930  Zion's Herald 1673
A New Abolitionism 
"Is there not cause for severity" today is speaking the truth
concerning the vast insanity of preparedness?
Robert Whitaker
Boston, in the first week of 
January, 1831, a hundred years ago, was
curiously aroused by a nondescript sheet
that appeared from an attic office, and 
was edited by a young man, twenty-five
years of age, poor and inconspicious,
who used language quite shocking to the 
then intellectual hub of America. This
young man, William Lloyd Garrison, had
already made himself locally offensive to
many by certain less public utterances that
he had made from a local platform. He
had asked for a hearing in the churches,
but although his mother was a good 
church woman, and he himself was quite
religiously inclined, the hearing had been 
refused. An infidel club was persuaded
to open its hall to him, and there he had
spoken with an outrightness that the 
more conservative thought in poor taste.
And now he came out with a paper,
which he dared to call by the challenging
name of The Liberator. The first issue
met the complaints of his critics as to 
his outspokenness frankly enough. He
wrote: 
I am aware, that many object to the
severity of my language; but is there not
cause for severity? I will be as harsh as
truth, and as uncompromising as justice. 
On this subject, I do not wish to think, or
speak, or write, with moderation. No!
no! Tell a man whose house is on fire, to
give a moderate alarm; tell him to 
moderately rescue his wife from the hands of the 
ravisher; tell the mother to gradually 
extricate her babe from the fire into which it
has fallen; - but urge me not to use
moderation in a cause like the present. I am 
in earnest - I will not equivocate - I will 
not excuse - I will not retreat a single inch
- and I will be heard. 
Well, he was heard. So also was
Wendell Phillips, in that same city, on
the occasion of his dramatic début at
old Faneuil Hall. So also was Theodore
Parker. 
It is history now, and there is no need
to repeat it here, The 
Garrison-Liberator anniversary will be very little
noted, probably not at all by the press and
public in general outside of Boston. 
There will be some discussion in certain
quarters, where a more radical radicalism
than Garrison ever knew prevails today,
as to whether Garrison and the 
abolitionists had really anything very much to do
with the passing of chattel slavery in the 
United States. Much can be said to 
prove that the official North was willing
to grant slavery in the South more
secure protection against outside
interference, in 1861, just before the war
began, that it had been willing to provide 
in 1831 when Garrison broke forth. 
Also much can be said to show that the 
McCormick reaper, which was first put
together in 1831, by a young chap three
years younger than Garrison, had more
to do with the economic process that put
chattel slavery out of business than had
all the abolitionists together.
But without entering into these 
matters now, it may be said with confidence
that Garrison and his kind did a 
conspicuous service in preparing a 
psychological reenforcement for the
economic factors when these had 
developed to a crisis.
What concerns us more at this
point is whether there is not need
for something like the spirit and speech
of William Lloyd Garrison today in 
relation to the most immediately imperative
abolitionism of our day, the abolition of
war? Abolition was no new thing when
Garrison came on to the scene. The 
outstanding Revolutionary Fathers of the 
South were against slavery, and wanted 
to be rid of it. But the institution was
there. What was more embarrassing
was that the black men were there. A
status of freedom for them involved
difficulties more disturbing than the 
status in which they stood as slaves.
The cotton gin came, and made their
present status more valuable, and the 
attempt to change that status more
precarious and dangerous. Then came the 
Missouri Compromise of 1820. Each section
of the Union was to be allowed to work
out for itself the conditions of "domestic
labor," a nice euphemism to avoid
official recognition of slavery, as we avoid
official recognition of imperialism and 
class struggle now. The land was at
peace. Prosperity was under way. Of
course something would have to be done
about the black men sometime. 
Meanwhile it was n so bad if a Quaker like
Benjamin Lundy went up and down
preaching the "genius of universal 
emancipation," and another Quaker, John
Greenleaf Whittier, wrote songs in 
protest against slave-holding. These were
moderate measures. Everybody was
against slavery, in principle, and willing
to have something done, so long as 
nothing was actually done of any consequence.
The puttering failed, of course. Our
country "muddled through"- into civil 
war. We seem likely to "muddle
through" into another World War within
a period much shorter than that between
the adoption of the Missouri Compromise
and the firing on Fort Sumter, unless
something very decisive is done at once.
At least something decisive ought to be
said. Is it not time for a
war-abolitionism as outspoken as the abolitionism of
Garrison was? "Is there not cause for
severity?" to use his exact words. And
the comparisons that he used, the house
on fire, the wife in the hands of the 
ravisher, the child fallen into the fire, do
they not apply with manifold force to the
greater evil and the more appalling
catastrophe that we face?
Are we to repeat the experience of a 
century ago, lacking only the
prophetic appeal of a Garrison? Will the
churches of our time do as did the
churches of a century ago, give timid and
reluctant hearing to the appeal of an 
utterly moderate abolitionist now and then,
and leave to the infidel club hospitality
for the outspoken word? The "infidel
club" is already here, on lines of an
enlarged dimension now which may well
give our churches pause as they consider
what has happened to churchdom in 
Russia. And this "infidel club" has already
 challenged Christendom to complete
disarmament, with no such seconding of
the motion on the part of American
Christianity as might avail to test out
how sincere Russia is in her proposals,
and how ready we are to back up these
proposals, to originate better ones.
Immediate and unconditional 
disarmament, with the United States waiting on
nobody to lead the way, is a cry of which 
there is imperative need, and 
timeliness beyond dispute, surpassing both the
need and the timeliness that marked
Garrison's call. To wait upon the politicians
and the military experts and the 
American Legion to get rid of war for us is
more hopeless than was the waiting upon
the slave-holders of a century ago, with
their shadow figures in the political field, 
to get rid of slavery. The economic 
forces are working with us more than they 
worked with Garrison and his fellows.
The world order is coming. The only 
issue is whether we are going to putter
and play with the issue till we have to 
wade to decision through seas of blood
that may overwhelm civilization.
Is it not time to be done with our
evasions, our equivocations, our idolatries of
statecraft and legalism, and to cry aloud
for an arousement of the people that will
speak out the truth without compromise
concerning this vast insanity of 
preparedness, which is as much worse than
war itself as deliberation in planning the 
massacre of humanity on a wholesale
scale is worse than the hysteria of a 
war-crisis? The new abolitionism calls for
a renewal of the prophetic spirit.

1674     Zion's Herald     December 31 1930
"The Liberator" Makes Its Bow
[From The Liberator, Vol. I, No. I, January 1, 1831]
The Salutation
To date my being from the opening year, 
I come, a stranger in this busy sphere,
Where some I meet perchance many pause and 
ask,
What is my name, my purpose, or my task?

My name is "Liberation"! I propose
To hurl my shafts at freedom's deadliest foes!
My task is hard - for I am charged to save
Man from his brother! - to redeem the slave!

Ye who may hear, and yet condemn my cause, 
Say, shall the best of Nature's holy laws
Be trodden down? and shall her open veins
Flow but for cement to her offspring's chains?

Art thou a parent? shall thy children be
Rent from thy breast, like branches from the 
tree,
And doom'd to servitude, in helplessness,
On other shores, and thou ask no redress?

Thou, in whose bosom glows the sacred flame
Of filial love, say, if the tyrant came,
To force thy parent shrieking from thy sight,
Would thy heart bleed - because thy face is
white?

Art thou a brother? shall thy sister twine
Her feeble arm in agony on thine,
And thou not lift the heel, nor aim the blow
At him who bears her off to lifelong wo?

Art thou a sister? will no desp'rate ery
Awake thy sleeping brother, while thine eye
Beholds the fetters locking on the limb
Stretched out in rest, which, hence, must end,
for him?

Art thou a lover? no! naught e'er was found
In lover's breast, save cords of love, that bound
Man to his kind! then, thy profession save!
Forswear affection, or release thy slave!

Thou who art kneeling at thy Maker's shrine,
Ask if Heaven takes such offerings as thine!
If in thy bonds the son of Afric sighs,
For higher than thy prayer this groan his rise!

God is a God of mercy, and would see
The prison-doors unbarr'd- the bondmen free!
He is a God of truth, with purer eyes
Than to behold the oppressor's sacrifice!

Avarice, thy cry and thine insatiate thirst
Make man consent to see his brother cursed!
Tears, sweat, and blood thou drink'st, but in 
their turn,
They shall cry, "More!" while vengeance bids
thee burn.

The Lord that said it!- who shall Him
gain-say?
He says, "The wicked, they shall go away"-
Who are the wicked? - Contradict who can,
They are the oppressors of their fellow man!

Aid me, New England! 'tis my hope in you
Which gives me strength my purpose to pursue!
Do you not hear your sister States resound
With Afric's cries to have her sons unbound?

To the Public
In the month of August, I issued
proposals for publishing The Liberator in
Washington city ; but the enterprise, 
though hailed in different sections of the
country, was palsied by public
indifference. Since that time, the removal of
the Genius Of Universal Emancipation to 
the Seat of Government has rendered less
imperious the establishment of a similar
periodical in that quarter.

During my recent tour for the purpose
of exciting the minds of the people by a
series of discourses on the subject of 
slavery, every place that I visited gave
fresh evidence of the fact, that a greater
revolution in public sentiment was to be
effected in the free states - and 
particularly in New England- than at the south.
I found contempt more bitter, opposition
more active, detraction more relentless,
prejudice more stubborn, and apathy
more frozen, than among slave
owners themselves. Of course, they were
individual exceptions in the contrary. 
This state of things afflicted but 
did not dishearten me. I determined,
at every hazard, to lift up the 
standard of emancipation in the eyes of
the nation, within sight of Bunker Hill
and in the birthplace of liberty. That
standard is now unfurled ; and long may
it float, unhurt by the spoliations of the time
or the missiles of a desperate foe - yea,
till every chain be broken, and every
bondman set free! Let southern 
oppressors tremble - let their secret abetters
tremble - let their northern apologists
tremble - let all the enemies of, the 
persecuted blacks tremble. 

I deem the publication of my original
Prospectus unnecessary, as it has obtained
a wide circulation. The principles 
therein inculcated will be steadily pursued in 
this paper, excepting that I shall not 
array myself as the political partizan of
any man. In defending the great cause
of human rights, I wish to derive the 
assistance of all religions and of all
parties. 

Assenting to the "self-evident
truth" maintained in the American
Declaration of Independence, "that all
men are created equal, and endowed by 
their Creator with certain inalienable
rights - among which are life, liberty, and 
the pursuit of happiness." I shall 
strenuously contend for the immediate 
enfranchisement of our slave population. In 
Park Street Church, on the Fourth of 
July, 1829, in an address on slavery, I
unreflectingly assented to the popular but
pernicious doctrine of gradual abolition.
I seize this opportunity to make a full
and unequivocal recantation, and thus
publicly to ask my pardon of my God, of my
country, and of my brethren the poor
slaves, for having uttered a sentiment so
full of timidity, injustice, and absurdity.
A similar recantation, from my pen, was
published in the Genius of Universal
Emancipation at Baltimore, in September, 
1829. My conscience is now satisfied. 

I am aware, that many object to the 
severity of my language ; but is there not 
cause for severity? I will be as harsh as 
truth, and as uncompromising as justice.
On this subject, I do not wish to think, 
or speak, or wite, with moderation. No!

December 31 1930   Zion's Herald   1675
 no! Tell a man whose house is on fire,
to give a moderate alarm ; tell him to 
moderately rescue his wife from the 
hands of the ravisher; tell the mother to 
gradually extricate her babe from the fire
into which it has fallen ; - but urge me not
to use moderation in a cause like the 
present. I am in earnest - I will not 
equivocate - I will not excuse - I will not retreat
a single inch - AND I WILL BE HEARD.
The apathy of the people is enough to
make every statue leap from its pedestal,
and to hasten the resurrection of the dead.

It is pretended, that I am retarding the 
cause of emancipation by the coarseness
of my invective, and the precipitancy of
my measures. The charge is not true.
On this question my influence - humble as 
it is - is felt at his moment to a 
considerable extent, and shall be felt in coming
years - not perniciously, but beneficially
- not as curse, but as a blessing ; and 
posterity will bear testimony that I was
right. I desire to thank God, that He
enables me to disregard "the fear of man
which bringeth a snare," and to speak
His truth in its simplicity and power.

And here I close with his fresh
dedication : 

"Oppression! I have seen thee, face to face, 
And met thy cruel eye and cloudy brow ; 
But thy soul-withering glance I fear not now - 
For dread to prouder feelings doth give place
Of deep abhorrence! Scorning the disgrace
Of slavish knees that at thy footstool bow,
I also kneel - but with far other bow
Do hail thee and thy herd of hirelings base;-
I swear, while life-blood warms my throbbing
veins,
Still to oppose and thwart, with heart and hand,
Thy brutalizing sway - till Afric's chains
Are burst, and Freedom rules the rescued
land, - 
Trampling Oppression and his iron rod :
Such is the vow I take - SO HELP ME GOD!"
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON
Boston, January 1, 1831.

Christmas and the 
Communists
Robert A. Bakeman
While the holiday crowd milled its
way in and out of the places of 
trade and the gaily lighted Christmas
trees were being put in their accustomed
places in the suburban centers and the 
Christmas carols wafted their way 
skyward from the balconies, Boston was
placing on tail some fifty of her 
inhabitants known as Communists.

It would be unjust to suggest that these
cases were allowed to accumulate and 
were being tried at this time just because
it was the Christmas season, but the fact
remains that the mind is brought up
sharp as one considers the synchronous
relationship of the trial of the 
Communists and the celebration of the spirit of
the Man who said, "I was a stranger, and 
ye took me in."

There were several very definite
mental pictures that registered 
during that trial. In the first place, on was
fairly overwhelmed with the 
cross-purposes of the whole thing. On the one
hand, the State was prosecuting 
violations of city ordinances that had to do
with the angle at which a truck was
parked, the displaying of placards, the
distributing of bills, the congesting of
traffic, the opening of the mouth where
a crowd was assembled without a permit.
On the other hand, fifty men and women
(or rather boys and girls, for not one
of them looked to be over thirty), were
fighting for principles in which they
believed and for which they were willing
to suffer not only the odium of their
fellows but actual physical punishment. And 
in between prosecutor and defendant was
a judge of exceptional fairness who was
obliged to say, when an attempt was made
by these crusaders to give to the jury
their burning message of emancipation
for the working class, that the question
before the jury had nothing to do with the 
matter of the constitutional guaranty of 
freedom of speech of arguments for a 
change of economic control, but simply
as to whether a certain truck was parked
in a manner contrary to law! One did
wish that there might be a tribunal where 
those fundamental questions affecting the
very foundations of government would 
not be obscured by the shadow of a 
misplaced truck!

And again, there were stories of
cruelty, mere girls testifying that they were
beaten and knocked down, and men
telling how they were trampled upon by the 
police. Evidently the jury believed the
stories that the Communists told, for 
twelve out of thirteen were found not
guilty. But what happened? Were there
any letters in the daily papers protesting
against this cruelty? Did the State 
apologize to them or offer to make redress for
their suffering? No, they were simply 
allowed to go after receiving pitiless 
publicity and, in the case of those who had a 
job, the loss of four or five days' pay!

And what did the newspapers gather
from that trial to carry in glaring
headlines to their million readers? Anything
about the cruelties of the police?
Anything about the sincerity and sacrifice
and zeal of the defendant Communists?
No, they simply spread from end to end
of old New England that fifty young men 
and women Communists had testified that
they did not believe in God! Never mind
if hundreds of our native-born college
boys and girls could be found who would
make the same denial! Never mind if 
these defendants did know that it would
prejudice, their cases to make this
confession, and yet had the courage to do it!
And one was just obliged to wonder
whether people are going to be content
with the horror that comes over them
from the report that these people do not
believe in God, or whether they are 
going to break the veneer and ask why it
should be that fifty young people should
have so sturdy a conviction that there is 
no Deity. How many folks will ask 
whether the fact of our unlovely lives as
individuals and as communities may not
have a very real bearing upon this whole
question?

And one more thing photographed
itself deeply on the sensitive plate of
the mind - the people who were there at
the trial of the Communists- and equally
the people who were not there! The 
ministers were not there. Neither were the 
social workers, nor the students of 
government - no one, in fact, who 
represented the point of view of the sympathetic,
disinterested interpretation of social
happenings. Instead of these the youthful
Communist looked into the faces of the 
federal assistant district attorney in 
charge of deportation cases, and an
inspector from the immigration department
with a stenographer ready to find some
evidence that could be made the basis of
deportation proceedings! Is it any 
wonder that he stands perplexed and cynical
about the traditional American freedom 
when his only crimes have been fights for
freedom of expression and fairer
industrial conditions?

The hysteria on every hand in regard 
to Communists, aggravated by the 
investigations of a congressional committee,
has resulted in a demand from many
quarters for the deportation of the 
Communist. That this is bearing fruit it
shown by the fact that today a 
recommendation has gone from the immigration
department at Boston to the secretary of
labor for the deportation of a young
Portuguese alien on the ground that he is
a Communist. A careful reading of the 
evidence presented has convinced many
fair-minded people that if Augusto Pinto
is deported it will be not because he is 
a Communist but because of activity in
the New Bedford cotton strike of 1928.

Has the Christmas spirit exhausted 
itself with the pilgrimage to Beacon Hill
on Christmas Eve for carol singing and 
the exchange of gifts, or is it going to 
probe ore deeply and ask what answer
the central figure in all this celebration
would give to the suggestion of deporting
men for their loyalty to their ideas?

Is not the acid test of the religion of 
Jesus the treatment of the shunned and
the outcast? Shall we then answer His 
"I was a stranger, and ye took me in" by 
saying of the Communist, "He was a 
stranger, and we threw him out"?

1676      Zion's Herald       December 31 1930
"Spain Is Awake"
INTERVIEW WITH THE FOREIGN MINISTER, THE DUKE OF ALBA AND BERWISK, IN MADRID
Christian F. Reisner
THE Duke of Alba greeted me very
cordially when I called at the Foreign 
Office by appointment. He spoke
English fluently, exhibited a wide knowledge
of history--for he is an author of
note--and beamed with enthusiasm about
his visit to America. He talked freely on many
subjects and with great animation. I
will try to relate some of the things he
said.

"The King felt compelled to inaugurate
a dictatorship, but as soon as convinced
that a constitutional form could be reestablished
he acted. Many outsiders predicted
immediate and violent outbreaks. 
We have had none. Crime here, unlike
in many other nations, is at its lowest ebb.
All political prisoners were freed as soon
as this government came into power.
We have absolutely no native 'Reds,'" 
he asserted; "foreign ones are promptly
deported. Our extremists are socialists.
We are widely unionized, but this is
an advantage. Organized 'masters' and
'workers' meet, and if they fail to compromise,
then a government arbitrator is
called in and his decision is final."

CONTINUING the conversation, I
suggested that two out of three of
the automobiles encountered were American
and most of them were the costlier
type. He said: "Yes, our people like the
best of everything, and America exerts
an immense influence here since many of
our people seem to prefer American machines."
I then remarked that Madrid 
was the most American city we had seen
in Europe. He answered promptly: "Madrid
is a real modern city. It has an
unnatural location on a high plateau with
little water, no fuel, and arid lands surrounding
it. Now that we have electric
water-power from the adjacent hills our
troubles are disappearing and the city is
prospering. Being developed by modern
methods and being new, it turns to America, 
the newest nation, for leadership.
You find the highest skyscraper in Europe
here. It is the new 'tower' Telephone
Building. This company has 
installed the disk phones so that when necessary
Americans can phone friends direct 
without being able to speak Spanish. 
We have your 'soft' drinks, ice sticks,
American dishes, etc."

A local newspaper friend with whom I
talked enumerated three American productions 
that were working a revolution
in Spain: (1) the safety razor, which led
the men to shave where before they neglected
it because they feared the old-style
razor; (2) the jazz music, which inaugurated
miscellaneous dancing and so
broke down century-old segregation of
the sexes; (3) the moving pictures,
which taught new customs and wrecked
castes and demonstrated a modern type
of liberty.

"THE Spanish War with America
did us a vast good," continued the
Duke. "We had not been administering
our colonies very successfully. We were
backward in many other ways. No enmity
remained when the war was over.
We secured a new relationship with the
United States as a result, for afterwards
your nation had closer touch with Spanish-speaking
people in Porto Rico, Cuba, 
and the Philippines. This too led to closer
cooperation in South America. Your
people traded there more generally and
spoke our tongue more fluently. We 
have always felt a unique kinship to
America, and the future may increase it.
Our university, located in the outskirts
of the city at tremendous cost, and built
in imitation of your suburban located
universities, is attracting more students
from the United States than from any
other nation."

Since the new tariff law has aroused
all the countries of Europe, I asked the
Duke about it. "Yes," he said, "that
legislation has stirred our people greatly.
We do more business with the United
States than with any one else. But," he
injected immediately, "I notice that the
fair-minded Americans have given the
President power to adjust the rates.
Why, for example, should they place an
exclusive rate on some things that we
alone can raise and send to the United
States? We are now prosperous. We
do not have an unemployment problem,
but unless this tariff is adjusted, our
prosperity will be cut and American
goods must of necessity be no longer so
generally consumed."

I had passed through the country districts
where the people are still gathered
in groups as in feudal days with few
modern conveniences or changes. Remembering 
this, I asked the Duke why modern
methods of living and farming were
not inaugurated. He paused and thoughtfully
replied: "In the north you will find
the houses scattered on the farms and
more machinery being used, but in the
south the people never will change.
Around Seville is the oldest farm land in
Europe. Some of it has been thus used
for 6000 years. The people are utterly
wedded to it; they love it as their very
lives. Their wants are small. They want
a little food and clothing, something to
drink, a few funny stories, and beautiful
women whom they revere without coarseness.
Once a year they get drunk for
three days and this is their holiday. They
are orderly and never dependent. Tradition
rules them. The remnants of the
old walled cities hold them in tight affection-knit
groups. No influence has
yet been found to change them."

A BIT hesitant, I nevertheless blurted
out: "Duke, you know that
among many in America the bull-fight
appears a bit barbarous, even though the
same Americans attend when they come
over here." He answered without hesitation:
"I am personally against these 
fights, but it is still impossible to discontinue
them utterly. We have greatly
lessened their cruelty. For example, under
the new law the horses must be carefully
padded, so that few of them are
killed, and the bulls are not tortured so
fiercely. Furthermore, we are gradually
introducing other sports.  Thirty thousand
now attend football games - a sport
that was unknown a few years ago.
Many similar attractions are threatening
the existence of the bull-fight.  Meanwhile,
land values are increasing so rapidly
that it is not economical to use space
and time necessary to provide the bulls."
Then the Duke explained:  "After all, is
it so bad? Our historians tell us that
wild bulls were the first enemies the
early settlers encountered and that this
fight symbolizes the contest one always
has with nature or with his lowest self.
The bull has a rather happy five years
with his family of cows and then, since
he is doomed to die for meat ultimately,
he is allowed to die fighting."

I remarked that Spain was accredited
with being so loyal to the Roman Catholic
Church that Protestants had few
privileges there.  Without going into the
past, he declared: "There are thirty
Protestant schools in Madrid alone.
When I was minister of public education
a Protestant school was closed by
the local authorities in a distant community,
but I ordered it opened immediately.
I am informed that seven different
Protestant organizations are at
work in Madrid.  A university teacher
here recently argued for the separation
of church and state.  The Roman Catholic
Church is dominant here, but all other
forms of religion are welcome."

I congratulated him on the good automobile
roads we had found from San
Sebastian to Madrid.  He replied: "Yes,
we have some very good roads.  The
former government undertook to build

December 31, 1930  ZION'S HERALD 1677
too much at once.  They began 7000 kilometers 
(about 4250 miles) and after trying
all other methods they chose the
American tarvia surfacing as the best, but
they found they did not have the machinery
to do more than 4000 kilometers."

SOLDIERS are seen on every hand
I asked the Duke about conscription
and he replied:  "There is less and less
need for soldiers.  We have no enemies, no
revenge to be enforced.  We are for peace.
Many think the day will soon come when
our army will be recruited by volunteers
and conscription will be unnecessary."

As a last question I said:  "What do 
you think of prohibition?" He replied:
"We do not like the Volstead act, for it
shuts out our wines.  We are not interested
in selling anything stronger."

Spain is awake.  Her people are determined
to go forward, especially in the
cities.  Her leaders and people are very
friendly to the United States and very
ready to follow our lead.  After an exceedingly
cordial interview I arose to leave
and the Duke concluded: "Spain greatly
admires the United States.  Former President
Roosevelt spent five days with us
and revived an earlier begun affection
for the United States.  His son, Kermit,
was married here in Madrid to the daughter
of a former ambassador.  Some of
the Americans did not like your former
representative, Mr. Moore, but we loved
him; he was a diamond in the rough.  We
are eager to be reciprocal and friendly
both here and in South America."
"Be ready for the chance when it comes,"
is still alive, one of the evidences of the
faith that things are going to straighten
out.  It does not allay his concern at the
growing prejudice in New England
schools to twit him with oversensativeness.
It is not convincing to be told by
the head of an institution that it will not
tolerate prejudice, when in the next breath
students are given free use of institution
premises and facilities for student
functions from which none but colored
students are excluded.  All over the country
a great Boston educational institution
is honored for its past policy of the
open door for all students meeting the
requirements of character and scholarship,
and we colored people are justly
alarmed when the addition that you must
not be a Negro in order to enjoy the institution's
facilities is made to the entrance requirements.

WE Negros keenly realize that the
open shop and the open school are
our great needs.  Fortunately, we do not
have to get anybody's permission, nor do
we have to go arm in arm with anybody
to any other body's church, to exercise
our Christian faith and worship.  But
we do need to be free from the exercise
upon us of dead rituals and a Christless
religion.  We devoutly pray that our
countrymen will try Christianity on us.
Just give it a chance at our mutual problems
unhampered by the fears born of
snobbery.  One of our needs is the certainty
that our children will hold stedfastly 
to the faith of their elders that the
great majority of our countrymen are
sound at heart and need only to be again
aroused as Garrison stirred them one
hundred years ago to give us a square
deal and a fair chance without special
favor.

What Negros Want Today
" A SQUARE DEAL AND A FAIR CHANCE WITHOUT SPECIAL FAVOR"
Butler R. Wilson
[Photograph of Butler R. Wilson]

LIKE other people, Negroes want an
opportunity to make the best of
themselves, to be appraised and preferred
for individual character and fitness and
not rejected in mass because of race or
color.  They would be greatly heartened
and encouraged if they could be relieved
of the wide-spread feeling of hopelessness,
fast becoming a permanent state of
mind, a sort of inferiority complex, in
groups of colored boys and girls who are
treated like a pariah class in the land
of their birth.

Such a difficulty as the country faces
today because of unemployment in all but
the most menial places in cities and
towns Negroes face constantly.  It is
harder and harder for them to get congenial
occupation.  A very real terror is
added to the attempt to get a job.  The
colored boy starts out with a premonition
that he will be turned down because of
his color and in addition be insulted and
humiliated by being told, "We don't hire
colored help."  This statement is usually
accompanied by the assertion of the employer,
"I have no prejudice myself," no
doubt intended to soften the cruelty of
the blow just dealt but in nine cases out
of ten resulting in a keener humiliation
and a deepened bitterness.

The difficulty of finding employment
at home, teeming with opportunities
for outsiders, adds very seriously to
the school problem.  Many parents say,
"Why educate them if you can find nothing
for them to do?"  On this account
it is harder and harder to hold young
people in school after the grades are
passed.  The usual employment situation
has brought wide-spread want and
suffering.  What is an extraordinary situation
is the case of the white men unable
to obtain jobs is the everyday, ordinary
case with great numbers of colored people
except in the menial, less lucrative occupations.
Required to live decent, wholesome
lives and rear their children to be
self-supporting, dependable citizens, colored
people are daily faced with the difficulty 
of making bricks without straw.

With all the discouragements and handicaps,
the average colored man desires
to educate his children.  The old urge,

Garrison Centennial
To celebrate the 100th Anniversary of the 
Founding of The Liberator by William Lloyd
Garrison, at Park Street Church, Boston,
Thursday evening, Jan. 1, '1931, 8 P.M.

PROGRAM
Organ Prelude, Ina Braithwaite, Organist
Invocation, Bishop William F. Anderson
"Battle Hymn of the Republic,"
Led by William H. Hamilton

Opening Address, Butler R. Wilson
Spirituals, (a) "Nobody Knows de Trouble
I see."
(b) "Gimme dat Ole Time Religion."

Chorus, led by Dorothy Richardson
Address, "Garrison and the 
Garrison Spirit Today," Sherwood Eddy
National Negro Anthem,
Chorus and Audience
Benediction, Rev. F. Havis Davis

COMMITTEE OF ARRANGEMENTS: Rolfe
Cobleigh, chairman; Butler R. Wilson, Rev.
Lewis O. Hartman, Rev. S. L. Laviscount,
William Lloyd Garrison, Jr., Joseph P. Loud,
Rev. Alfred V. Bliss, Mrs. Eva Bernard,
David K. Niles, Arthur H. Morse, Rev.
George L. Paine, Rev. Oliver B. Quick,
William M. Trotter.

1678            Zion's Herald                     December 31 1930

The Game and the Candle
Chapter XII
Joseph Hocking
(All rights reserved)

"Ladies and gentlemen, pray silence for Mr. Arnold Robartes."  It was the toastmaster for the evening, and Arnold knew that he was expected to respond to the toast that had been proposed.
  

Heathen or Christian?
A SERMON FOR THE NEW YEAR
Ernest Lyman Mills
"Seek ye first his kingdom, and his right-cousness; and all these things shall be added unto you." -- MATT. 6:33
To be a heathen is not to be subject to a certain locality, it is to have a certain quality of mind. According to Jesus, heathen folks are not marked by their color or unfavorable situation but by their sordid eagerness for food, drink and clothes. Many of us so-called Christians could easily qualify as "heathen" in the sense that we make these things our major interest. Perhaps that foreign writer was correct in his estimate of Protestant America when he charged us with considering prosperity as one of the marks of a  high state of religion. At an rate, there is no better food, drink or clothing that is to be found in America. 

I have always considered the text of this sermon as special words spoken to the immediate followers of Jesus. He was interested in founding a kingdom and He here shows the attitude of mind that the founders and builders of that kingdom must have, if they are to succeed. They are to have minds that see the transcendent superiority of spirituality over mere material prosperity. He wants us to get away from the heathen frame of mind by which too many of us are actuated.
The average Methodist Conference is a center of heathenism. The main stress is not on spiritual triumphs but on statistics. We have got caught by the heathen mind that is all about us. The first important question that stirs every heart is "How much money have you raised?" Great is the applause when some new church building is announced - " All paid for." Glory! How we clap and how we congratulate the "successful minister"! Commitees look in his direction. Then comes the second question, not quite so important as the first, but it also "gets a hand" : "How many members have you added to the rolls?" This fact is important! Just what sort of life was added is not quite so important. Numbers! That is it. Number Isreal. Forget that story about Gideon! To report a shrinking membership would be contrary to the heathen spirit of our times. Burn a few joss sticks to this fat heathen god - even at at Methodist conference. That is to say, pus material prosperity first, and then change Scripture to read : "Seek ye first for material things, and his kingdom and his righeousness shall be added unto you" Let us have Scripture revised to suit our heathen notions. Above all, let us be "practical."
Prosperity is, according to Jesus a "by-product." It is a real product and worth while, but nevertheless is it a "by-product" of a more important product, "his kingdom, and his righteousness." The things that we stress- material prosperity, organization, audiences, statistics - are, in the mind of Jesus, so sure that He considers them secondary.
Our "heathen" attitude of mind has given us a distorted idea of church life. How often I hear some one say, "So-and-So is a great church worker"! I am always concerned to know just what is meant. usually, "work" refers to the conducting of church enterprises. Listen long enough and the item of "work" will be largely material. The fact is that great groups of church people have been handed a "secondary" rather than a "primary" interest. I feel that numbers of fine folks have been led into a "heathen" frame of mind toward the church - they have been given the tasks that have reference to material rather than spiritual success. You can get crowds of women to work on all sorts of church projects who have absolutely no interest in the spiritual side of church life. We are to blame for this. We have given the wrong emphasis and we have reaped the reward. Today we find it exceedingly difficult to induce people to engage in these so-called items of "church work." I presume it was never so hard to get folks to serve on "committees" as it is now. There seems to be a revolt stirred up by the feeling that the church is on the wrong track. We are beginning to realize that a change is needed if we are to command the allegiance and support of large numbers of young people. The old line of church work does not have sufficient challenge to capture minds of the youth of our times. "Church work" does not seem to be a primary importance, it is not big enough to demand a whole man or woman. 
What are the primary concerns of the followers of Jesus? "Seek ye first his kingdom, and his righteousness."
Is it not true that putting money interests first cuts the nerve of much that is worth while in life? No artist does his best work when he is putting a mere money value on his labor. Many great artists have had to do their work in the garrets of civilization. Great reformers have seldom had riches at their command or even though of them. I cannot think of a single prophet who could by any stretch of the imagination be called "successful" At least none of them made material prosperity their main drive. It is almost an act of sacrilege to think of Isaiah or Jeremiah counting adherents. They were not addicts of statistics. Prophecy seems, in some way, to be independent on prosperity. The artist must be mastered by his projected masterpiece; the reformer must see the kingdom coming; the prophet must rely on the ultimate triumph of righteousness.
The church needs to be called back to its primary object -- "his kingdom and his righteousness." Jesus came to bring a certain quality of life: from that life all material prosperity flows. We should seek to place the emphasis where He put it-on the spiritual work of the church as primary. It is, in my judgement, because we have misplaced our emphasis that we find ourselves in our present predicament of diminishing resources. We shall not gain ground until we cease to put our emphasis on "prosperity," and think of "spirituality." Let me illustrate what Jesus meant by what I have called " a certain quality of life."
Some years after Jesus had left earth the greatest of His apostles summed up His teaching by the sentence, " The kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit." This defines that "quality of life" to which Jesus referred. 
"Righteousness." Surely this term means a "quality of life." Life made right. Here is the suggestion of life freed from the things that keep it from being its best. 



1668    Zion’s Herald    December 31 1930

[re]ligious publications in Boston, were brave enough to
take Garrison’s part and denounce the “aristocratic
mob.”

GARRISON was no time-server, no man-pleaser, no
compromiser. In these days of mealy-mouthed
leadership he stands forth as a true prophet of God in
the midst of a wicked and perverse generation. He
was a little too rugged for the smug lovers of comfort
and ease. Garrison often used strong language like
that employed by Isaiah and Jeremiah. ‘‘For myself,”
he once said, “I hold no fellowship with slave owners.
I will not make a truce with them even for a single
hour. I blush for them as countrymen—I know they
are not Christians; and the higher they raise their profession 
of patriotism or piety, the stronger is my detestation 
of their hypocrisy. They are dishonest and
cruel—and God and the angels, and devils and the universe 
know that they are without excuse.”

Why cannot we in this age be as straightforward, as
direct, as uncompromising, as the great abolitionist?
But no, we distort the maxim that ‘‘there are always
two sides to every question” into an excuse for following 
the line of least resistance. We crave a ‘‘balanced
judgment,” or prate about a “common-sense view,” only 
that we may avoid trouble. We sell the truth ! Confronted 
by an embarrassing situation calling for courage 
and loyalty to the right, we find some respectable
loophole through which we can crawl to a costly safety. 


Courage, courage is the need in this day of sick
ly flabbiness.

THE task of William Lloyd Garrison is by no means
completed. The Negro race is emancipated. But
emancipated to what? To full freedom, justice, and
equal opportunity? We know that this is not the case.
The Negro himself is still the victim of misunderstanding 
and a deadening discrimination. We who claim
to be Christians should follow in the footsteps of the
fiery abolitionist and proclaim the gospel of the brotherhood 
of all mankind not by mere words only but also 
by actual deeds.

In a large sense the fight for freedom still invites
prophets. Even in this twentieth century we are enslaved 
to the war method. Its wickedness must be
made clear. There are still white slaves in the industrial 
order. Here is a call for a new abolition movement. 
There is still a plundering of weak peoples
by strong nations—the terrible sin of exploitation
which in different guise from the old “African slavery”
continues to enchain millions of poor ignorant human 
beings and makes them a means instead of an
end.

We need to go back to our Bibles, to read the Word
of the Lord and to brood upon it until we catch the
larger meaning of Christian prophecy. What is freedom? 
Why freedom? Let us find the answers to
these two searching questions.

AN OUTLOOK ON THE
NEWS OF THE WORLD

Principles Rather Than Parties
"It seems to me a man ought to be in good standing in his
party even it he disagrees with a President who is also
a member of that party,” declared Senator Norris of Nebraska
on Christmas Day. “Enthusiasm for parties often clouds our
judgment and sometimes is really injurious to the country,”
Senator Norris said. “A public official, from road supervisor
to President, ought not to permit partizanship to cntrol his
official actions in the slightest degree. An official ought to he
moved exclusively by what he thinks is for good of the country. 
If he obeys his oath of office, he has no legal right to do
otherwise.” Senator Norris, who has been for the past two
weeks the center of the whirlwind that has threatened to disrupt 
the Republican Party into warring camps of orthodox and
insurgents, revealed this fundamental of his political philosophy
in connection with a statement of his belief that the electoral
college has outlived its usefulness. That part of the Constitution
which provides for the electoral college should be repealed, he
said, that an independent candidate might offer himself in the
event that neither of the major political parties' nominees
was satisfactory to the people. “In Presidential elections the
people are often in the position of having to choose between
two candidates, in the selection of which they had no voice
whatever. Unfortunately, it often amounts to choosing the
lesser of two evils. The President is the most powerful part
of our government. He influences legislation in a thousand

different ways. Yet under our system the people never really
select the President. The man must first be nominated by one
of the dominant political parties.”

Harvard Scrubwomen Reimbursed
WHEN, two days before Christmas, Corliss Lamont, secretary-treasurer 
of the Harvard Scrubwomen Fund,
came from New York to Cambridge and distributed a total
fund of $3880 subscribed by 268 Harvard men for these women, 
the final justification of the first protester against the injustice 
of the university, Rev. W. H. Duvall, pastor of Trinity 
Methodist Episcopal Church, Cambridge, and of the Herald's 
condemnation of the institution’s attitude toward these
employees was completed. The money came from alumni,
graduates, and members of the faculty and of the board of
overseers. In a letter addressed to the scrubwomen, Mr. Lamont, 
who is the son of Thomas W. Lamont, member of the
financial house of Morgan and one of the leading alumni of
Harvard, says:

I take great pleasure in enclosing a savings account book in
your name representing approximately the back pay due you
for work at the Widener Library over a number of years.
This is your share of a total fund of $3880 subscribed by 268
Harvard men from various groups : the undergraduate body,
the graduate schools, the faculty, the board of overseers,
and the college alumni.

When it was discovered last January that Harvard University

SIR WILLIAM OSLER
ONE HUNDREDTH ANNIVERSARY OF HIS BIRTH

With good will toward his fellow men -------------
He had the deepest interest in everything human.
--GARRISON




THE TRUE MEANING OF LENT
Lent is not a negation.
It is the affirmation 
Of life's positive values.
Not doing without but doing with.
Taking greater interest 
In things crowded out
In the hurry and worry of every day.
A time when the church may prove
Its value as a center of culture
For the enrichment of the spirit.

ALLIANCE SERVICE COMMITTEE
Tuesday, March 11, is the date of the next Alliance
Service Committee all day meeting.  We will be completing
our quilts and packing our final shipment (for
this year) of clothing, blankets and quilts to American
Relief for Korea.  Warm clothing is still greatly 
needed.  Any articles which are mended and ready
for shipment may be left in the boxes on the stage
marked "For Korea."  If you are unable to bring your
clothing to the church, please call Mrs. Arnold, ME 4-0235,
or Mrs. Bissett, ME 4-5224, and it will be collected.

KNOWLEDGE PLUS VIRTUE
The central aim of education -- and of life . . . is to
wed knowledge with wisdom to enable men both to do
and to do what is good.
As I grow older, my conviction deepens that 
knowledge without virtue is sterile and dangerous and
that many of the world's ills stem from the divorcement
of these two goals.  Nazi Germany was a terrible
example of this divorcement.  The knowledge and
power of the German people were put to evil use by
men without ethical standards . . .
But I have faith that we can effect a combination 
of science and spirit which will contribute toward the
effectiveness of each and that by doing so we can
achieve a bifocal vision which enables us to see life
steady and see it whole.
---James R. Killian Jr., president of Massachusetts
Institute of Technology and member of the Wellesley
Hills Unitarian Church

BOOK REVIEW
The Sin of the Prophet, by Truman Nelson.
Boston:  Little, Brown and Co., $4.00 or on loan from
the Melrose Public Library.
This is an amazing book.  Written as a novel -- to
be read, says the author, "as fiction" -- it is in reality
a history of Boston in the last years of the anti-slavery
fight.  More particularly it is the story of the rendition
of Anthony Burns, the famous slave who escaped his
bondage, and was seized under the authority of the
Fugitive Slave Law, to be returned to his master.
More particularly still, it is an excited and exciting 
account of the Abolition Movement.  Wendell Phillips,
William Lloyd Garrison, Samuel Gridley Howe and 
his wife, Julia Ward Howe, Thomas Wentworth Higginson, 
and topping all the rest, the great Theodore Parker!
What is remarkable about this book is its day by 
day narrative of life in Boston in that hectic and
tragic time when the battle was being fought for the
freedom of the escaped slave.  The community comes
to life in these pages. Here are the streets of Boston,
the wharves and houses, the Court House, the Common,
Faneuil Hall, Tremont Temple and the old Music 
Hall on a Sunday morning when Parker was preaching
to his immense congregation.  You feel yourself a part
of the surging crowds and the raging mobs.  The vividness
of the tale is overwhelming.  This was the heroic
age of Boston and of Massachusetts, and in the end of
the nation itself. For it was but a step from Anthony
Burns to John Brown, and another step to Lincoln
and the War.
If the community comes to life under the magic of
Mr. Nelson's pen, the individual figures do not -- i.e.,
some of them do not.  Thus, Wendell Phillips is a
pallid character, and Dr. Howe a confusing one.  
Higginson never quite comes through.  But Parker is here
with all his grandeur and gallantry.  There are 
unforgettable scenes, enacted by the greatest of the
public leaders of his time.  For this one portraiture, we
can forgive all the rest.
Mr. Nelson has written an historical novel of the
first order.  We cannot be too grateful for what he has
done.
--John Haynes Holmes

Shy violets not shy enough to seek cover
pop up in a Jantzen Bashful Bikini.
Who wouldn't smile upon nature at its best?
Even more glamorous when wet 15.95. t.m.

just wear a smile and a Jantzen

Jentzen Inc., Portland 8, Oregon

The Shrine of the Founding Scriptures
Every year more than half a million Americans step up to a pillared shrine in
the National Archives in Washington to read the noble and familiar words of
the nation's founding scriptures-"When in the course of human events," "We

the people." The originals of the Declaration of Independence (in vertical case)
and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights (below it) are protected by yellow
filters from daylight. Cases to left and right contain other historic documents.

'LIFE' PRESENTS A CRUCIAL NEW SERIES
THE
NATIONAL
PURPOSE

   The words above, The National Purpose,
have begun to sound increasingly
throughout the country, stirring up uneasy
questions, forcing Americans to re-examine
themselves and their aspirations, engaging men
of high position in what can be the most crucial
debate of our generation.
   But the discussions sometimes produce only
earnest confusion or empty declamation.  To explore
what the phrase has meant to America and
what it means--or should mean--today, LIFE
here begins a five-part series on The National
Purpose:  what we as citizens and as a nation
wish and hope to achieve.
   It is a question important in an election year
when the great issues must be brought out by the
men who wish to lead the nation, but it transcends
partisan politics.  LIFE has asked eight
eminent Americans to explore the question.  This
week the background of the debate is set down
on the following pages.  In four succeeding issues
The National Purpose will be discussed by ADLAI
STEVENSON, twice a presidential candidate;
ARCHIBALD MACLEISH, Pulitzer Prize poet and
playwright;  BILLY GRAHAM, the evangelist;  DAVID
SARNOFF, chairman, RCA:  JOHN GARDNER,
president, Carnegie Corp. of New York;  ALBERT
WOHLSTETTER, national defense specialist for
The Rand Corp.;  CLINTON ROSSITER, author and
professor of government, Cornell University;
WALTER LIPPMANN, political commentator.
   The debate, of course, cannot be left to the
country's leaders.  LIFE invites all Americans to
join in.  For upon the nation's purpose depend
the lives of all--not in some comfortably remote
future but right now and in the years just ahead.

one of another, covenant, & combine our selves togeather into a
civill body politick; for our labor ordering, & preservation & furtherance
of ends aforesaid; and by vertue hearof to enacte,
constitute, and frame such just & equall lawes, ordinances,
Acts, constitutions, & offices, from time to time, as shall be thought
most meete & convenient for general good of the colonie:  

Early Charter of Democracy

Mayflower Compact signed by Pilgrims on ship off Cape Code in 1620 created
a "civill body politick" to pass "just and equall lawes."  The original doucment
is lost.  The version above is from early history of the Plymouth Colony.

A NOBLE FRAMEWORK

The words and deeds that expressed our past purpose are starting

“The critical weakness of our society is that for the time being our people
do not have great purposes which they are united in wanting to achieve.
The public mood of the country is defensive, to hold on and to conserve,
not to push forward and to create. We talk about ourselves these days
as if we were a completed society, one which has achieved its purposes,
and has no further great business to transact. . .

SO wrote Columnist Walter Lippmann a few months ago. It is a disturbing 
charge for three reasons. First. Lippmann is not alone in
making it. The same complaint is heard, with varying emphasis, from
many other critics and leaders of opinion, and also, according to a
recent survey of LIFE’s correspondents, from many an average anonymous 
American as well. Some of them speak like Lippmann of our lost
or mislaid national purpose or purposes; others use an older phrase,
“the American dream.” Thus William Faulkner: “What happened to
the American dream? We dozed, and it abandoned us. And in that
vacuum now there sound no longer the strong loud voices . . . speaking 
in mutual unification of one hope and will." As though he also

felt something missing, the President himself has appointed a Commission 
on National Goals “to develop a broad outline of national objectives 
and programs for the next decade and longer.” So much palpable
concern, in quarters high and low, suggests that the vacuum of purpose
may be a real one.

Second, the charge is disturbing because if it is true it is new. The U.S.
has hitherto been a country associated with great purpose. If that purpose 
is now absent, we are not what we were. Is there not a connection
between the rise of nations and great purposes, between the loss of purpose 
and their decline? A U.S. without a purpose, or no greater purpose
than “Don’t rock the boat.” may well be a U.S. in decline.

Third, the world needs a purposeful America. Even if the U.S. could
ever be a “completed society,” to use Lippmann’s phrase, the world is
not. Mankind has much further “great business to transact"—if not
with the active leadership of the U.S., then without it, and probably
with the leadership of Communism.

It may be argued that Lippmann’s charge, even if true, is irrelevant.
Docs the U.S. really need a self-conscious purpose in the world? Is not

Legal Bulwark
of Rights

The Constitution. drafted
in 1787, embodies in its
preamble (right) a will
for national unity. Constitution 
was a blueprint
for a government to protect 
natural rights described 
in the Declaration. 
It replaced old Articles 
of Confederation.

Classic Creed
of Rights
Declaration of Independence, 
intended only as legal 
and moral justification 
for revolt against
Britain, became classic
statement of the natural
rights of men. Document
was drawn up by committee 
of five. This is reproduction 
of original.

FOR A GREAT DEBATE
point for discourse on aims today    by JOHN K. JESSUP LIFE’s Chief Editorial Writer

a democracy its own raison d'etre, and survival the whole of its duty?
Many feel that only individuals, not nations, are capable of high purposes; 
and that the proper role of the American nation is simply to
provide the political framework in which each American citizen defines
and conducts his own private “pursuit of happiness," nobly or ignobly,
to suit himself. Yet this theory of a passive role for the nation has not
satisfied the growing uneasiness. “Why are many Americans fearful
that we have lost our sense of national purpose?” asks Adlai Stevenson.
“Why is there a slackness about public problems and a wholesale retreat
to the joys of private life?"

Our onetime confidence

IF America is in fact an elderly, status quo nation, it has had one of
the briefest runs for its money in the history of great nations, and its
early senescence will have belied more prophecies and grander promises
than any nation ever made. During most of its brief history America has
been bursting with confidence in its own unlimited destiny. A French

visitor in the 1840s asked one of these confident spokesmen. Senator
Lewis Cass of Michigan. “If such is the youth of the republic, what will
be its old age?" Replied the senator. “Sir. it will have no old age."
Cass’s bold prophecy is already proved doubtful by the fact that so few
Americans feel like repeating it today.

Thus there appears to be a real vacuum in the national will, or at
least the widespread fear that such a vacuum exists. To explore this
disturbing condition Life here begins a scries of articles which we hope
may stimulate a fruitful national debate. Does the U.S. lack a national
purpose? Does it need a national purpose in the world? If so, what
should that purpose be?

The present article is a resume of what earlier generations have felt
about the American national purpose, together with a few remarks on
the new historical conditions that may have affected these beliefs. How
far are the older beliefs relevant to the problems that face our country
now. in this strange era of Communism, megaton weaponry, fractured
empires, mushrooming sovereignties and continuing moral, social and
technical revolution? The answers hinted at in this introductory article
CONTINUED

NATIONAL PURPOSE
CONTINUED

arc not offered as definitive. Fuller answers will be presented in the subsequent 
articles by leaders of opinion.

The motivating beliefs of a nation are to be sought in its deeds and
illuminated by the words of its leaders, its spokesmen and its key documents. 
Deeds and words do not always match, but in America they have
matched often enough to show a pattern to those who look for one.

Thus when Roger Williams expounded
the principles of religious liberty and
democracy, his authority did not run
beyond colonial Rhode Island; but the
practical experience of mutual accommodation 
among the sects in other colonies
eventually established religious liberty
as part of the American political creed.
Thus, too, township self-government and
the common law, which helped to make
the Constitution workable, were the
slow deposit of English and colonial
experience rather than the decree of towering 
prophets or statesmen. But on occasion 
sudden flashes of great documentary 
lightning have also illuminated
our beliefs. The greatest of these was,
of course, the Declaration of Independence 
on July 4, 1776.

The Declaration turned what had just
a few months before been an Anglo-
American family quarrel into a defiance
of all tyranny everywhere. Colonial loyalty 
to the English crown, the dominant
American sentiment of 1775, was trans-
formed into national loyalty to the cause
of political freedom for the human race.

Thomas Jefferson achieved his masterpiece not by taking an opinion
poll, nor yet by sucking the words from his thumb. In writing the Declaration 
he borrowed some current political ideas from England, from
Virginia, from Massachusetts, from Tom Paine and from other sources.
He carefully listed the colonists’ particular grievances against George
III. But above all he related the cause of American independence to certain 
timeless beliefs about the nature of man. society and government.

Men are created with equal and inalienable rights—all men every-
where. The chief purpose of any government is to secure these rights, and
its just power comes only from the consent of the governed. Although
this news took decades to spread and has yet to penetrate everywhere,
all other theories of government were doomed by this Declaration and
the American independence that followed it. Tom Paine did not exaggerate: 
“Despotism felt a shock, and man began to contemplate redress.”
The Declaration went round the Western world, adding an important
stimulus to the revolution in France, the independence of Latin America,
the national movements in Germany, Italy, Greece and eastern Europe,
and eventually the political reformation of England itself.

Small wonder, then, that in America the Declaration became the focus

of that sense of special destiny and vocation which most vocal Americans 
had long associated with their country. Just as the Puritans had
felt akin to the Israelites, chosen by God for a “holy experiment” in
rule by conscience on new soil, so George Washington's generation felt
themselves to be the vanguard of a new political dispensation. They
were a watershed in human history, agents of what John Adams had
called “a grand scheme and design in
Providence for the illumination and
emancipation of the slavish part of mankind 
all over the earth.”

Added Adams: “The institutions now
made in America will not wholly wear
out for thousands of years. It is therefore 
of the last importance that they
should be right." In this self-conscious
spirit was our Constitution written. It
was to be the test of the basic question
whether men, as Alexander Hamilton
put it, can achieve good government by
"reflection and choice," or whether they
must always be governed by “accident
and force."

The Constitution was not a universal
document in the same sense as the Declaration. 
It was a working document for
Americans, not for Laplanders or Chinese. 
It has nevertheless proved an adequate 
political franchise for Americans
while they subdued a continent, added
37 new states, fought seven wars and
changed from an agricultural federal 
republic into an industrialized democratic
nation. We have seen fit to amend the
Constitution 22 times but not to change a word of the preamble, which
is a summary statement of what the founders thought to be the true purposes 
of government—any government. Here are those purposes: "To
form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity,
provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and
secure the blessings of liberty.”

Focus of patriotic reverence

THESE purposes, and the principle of strong but limited government 
under law which imbues it, have made the Constitution a
focus of American patriotic reverence second only to the Declaration.
It is a much stronger focus of loyalty, for example, than the American
land, for all this land's purple majesty and beloved rocks and rills. An
English visitor in 1837 remarked on the transient place-sense of this
migratory people: “Give the American his institutions, and he cares little 
where you place him." Said Hawthorne, “We have so much country
that we have really no country at all.” The land has been an inestimable
stimulus to effort and to wealth, but the system that enabled every man


[Black and white photos of Marshall, Paine, Madison, John Adams, and Hamilton]
Five chief spokesmen for a united America helped put infant republic on
its feet. John Marshall, fourth Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, was
first to establish court's authority as arbiter of what was constitutional.
Tom Paine, propagandist of Revolution, wrote historic pamphlet Common
Sense in 1775, which argued for independence. James Madison, called
Father of the Constitution in his own lifetime, was chief author of Bill of
Rights. John Adams, chief political workhorse of the Revolution, followed 
Washington into presidency. Alexander Hamilton, champion of
strong central government, was first Secretary of the Treasury, rescued
country from near bankruptcy and put it on a sound financial footing.

COLOR ON PAGES 27-32 AND 37-41
TEXT CONTINUED ON PAGE 33
26

[photo]
Foundation Stone of the Nation

The common goal of America at the time of the Revolution was clear: independence. Its hopes centered in one man, George Washington, whose bust (above) was photographed beside a Revolutionary cannon at Valley Forge, was called Father of His Country as early as 1779, while the fighting was still going on. His integrity and austere dignity made him a foundation stone for a new-born nation in search of an identity. Eloquence was not Washington's forte, nor was political philosophizing. But after the 1787 constitutional convention over which he presided, Washington forcefully summed up his and the nation's mission: "to preserve the Union, to establish good order and government, and to render the nation happy at home and respected abroad."

continued

NATIONAL PURPOSE CONTINUED

Prophet of Popular Sovereignty
Thomas Jefferson, whose bust is framed by the Jerrerson-designed colonnade
at the University of Virginia, wrote the Declaration of Independence and pro-
vided the nation with a democratic creed. Trusting the fitness of common men
to govern themselves, he founded a new political party (first called Repub-
license and later Democrats), which carried him into the Presidency in 1800.

National Pride with 'Old Ironsides'
With the War of 1812 America graduated into self-conscious nationhood. Un-
til then it had been little more than a shaky confederation of mutually jeal-
ous states. But the victories at New Orleans and Lake Erie and the exploits of 
the frigate Old Ironsides (right)-now preserved as a national monument in
Boston-stirred national pride and created a growing sense of national unity.

[?POSE] CONTINUED

[P]opular Sovereignty
framed by the Jerrerson-designed colonnade
[?]te the Declaration of Independence and pro-
[?]c creed. Trusting the fitness of common men
[?]d a new political party (first called Repub-
[?]ch carried him into the Presidency in 1800.

National Pride with 'Old Ironsides'
With the War of 1812 America graduated into self-conscious nationhood. Un-
til then it had been little more than a shaky confederation of mutually jeal-
ous states. But the victories at New Orleans and Lake Erie and the exploits of 
the frigate Old Ironsides (right)-now preserved as a national monument in
Boston-stirred national pride and created a growing sense of national unity.

CONTINUED

NATIONAL PURPOSE CONTINUED

Opening the Way to the West

Along the upper Missouri in May 1805, Meriwether Lewis and William Clark
stood before a panorama (above) that had never been seen by white man: the
gnarled wilderness of western Montana and distant Rockies. Jefferson,
who had bought the Louisiana Territory from France in 1803, had sent the

expedition to explore the Purchase and beyond, to find a practical trade route
to the West Coast. The Lewis and Clark expedition was the prelude to the drama
of westward expansion which absorbed the nation's ambitions and energies for
a century and shaped American character with the roughness of the frontier.

Politician of the Fronti[e?]

Andrew Jackson, a tough, popular general, was
the first President who was neither a Founding
Father nor an "aristocrat." Prototype of the vote-
getting politician, "Old Hickory" in 1829 brought

into the White
man" frontier
ran Powers is
Nashville, Beh

[?]OSE CONTINUED

Opening the Way to the West

1805, Meriwether Lewis and William Clark
that had never been seen by white man: the
[M]ontana and distant Rockies. Jefferson,
Territory from France in 1803, had sent the

expedition to explore the Purchase and beyond, to find a practical trade route
to the West Coast. The Lewis and Clark expedition was the prelude to the drama
of westward expansion which absorbed the nation's ambitions and energies for
a century and shaped American character with the roughness of the frontier.

Politician of the Fronti[e?]

Andrew Jackson, a tough, popular general, was
the first President who was neither a Founding
Father nor an "aristocrat." Prototype of the vote-
getting politician, "Old Hickory" in 1829 brought

into the White House the "I'm as good as any
man" frontier spirit. This bust of Jackson by Hi-
ran Powers is at The Hermitage, his home near
Nashville. Behind are hickories which he planted.

CONTINUED

The Noblest Embodiment of Noble Ideals

Abraham Lincoln was almost everybody's second choice for the Republican nomination in the spring of 1860, when Leonard Wells Volk modeled the head from which the cast above was taken. He won the nomination on the third ballot and went into presidency on a bare 40% of the popular vote. Yet within weeks, as the country plunged into the tragic test of the Civil War, he became the prophet and the agent of the nation's desperate need: to save the Union and free the slave. His hold on the American imagination kept growing after his death. The deep humanity which pervaded his private and public life has raised him far above the struggles of his day into a timeless role, as the noblest embodiment of the American ideals of brotherhood and human dignity.

Early Move against Slavery

In Boston in 1831 William Lloyd Garrison started
a one-man campaign against slavery in The Liberator, 
whose first issue masthead is shown above.
Although Boston mobs smashed his press and
tried to lynch him. Garrison sparked abolitionist 
sentiment that expanded until the Civil War.

NATIONAL PURPOSE continued

to take up his pursuit of wealth and happiness has been the most valued
part of the whole. The American system has always been held to be far
wider than American geography. As Walt Whitman said, “O America,
because you build for mankind I build for you.”

By Whitman's time the U.S.. like its great poet, was taking pride in
the title of “democracy.” a word the Founding Fathers had not much
liked. Our 19th Century legislation—from free schools and no-jail-for-
debt to the Homestead Act. not to mention the emancipation of slaves
—maintained an egalitarian bent. Its purpose and effect were to widen
the suffrage and enlarge the opportunities of the average man. John
Locke had made the amount of its emigration a test of whether a country 
is truly governed by consent or not. Waves of immigration, visibly
assimilated, were evidence that America was the most consent-governed
country in the world. As one not untypical immigrant wrote home: “Here
a highway to honor, wealth and renown is open to all.” Our national
mission was to exemplify the success of free self-government, to let our
democratic light so shine before men that they could see its good works
and become democrats too. Many did, including most of Europe.

The first internationally recognized American historian. George Bancroft. 
saw American democracy as the highest revelation of God’s purpose 
in history and the consummation of all previous civilizations. “In
the fulness of time," he wrote, “a republic arose in the wilderness of
America. Thousands of years had passed away before this child ol the
ages could be born . . . from her the human race drew hope." This viewpoint, 
which today sounds primitive or jingoistic, was as self-evident to
many 19th Century Americans as the rights of man were to those of the
18th. Both were vindicated by continuing success. Indeed, the American
experiment was succeeding in so many directions that the sense ol national 
purpose, though no less intense, became somewhat diffuse. Patriotism 
became identified with practically every virtue except patience.
Thus Emerson: “I wish to see America a benefactor such as no country
ever was . . . the office of America is to liberate, to abolish kingcraft,
priestcraft, castle, monopoly, to pull down the gallows, to burn up the
bloody statute-book, to take in the immigrant, to open the doors of
the sea and the fields of the earth." In the swelling tide of immigration
and expansion he also foresaw the advent of “a new race, a new religion,
a new state, a new literature."

By the end of the 19th Century there were at least four great causes
which America could be said to exemplify and which many Americans
were eager to urge on the human race. These were:
I) Democracy. Bancroft called it “practical Christianity” and said:
“The duty of America is to secure the culture and the happiness of the
masses by their reliance on themselves.” The people's voice was the
voice of God. and of progress and of civilization as well.

2) Individual liberty. The wisdom of the hounding Fathers in making the
free individual the cornerstone of our institutions was proved by his
accomplishments. The individual was especially credited with our economic 
feats and therefore not begrudged his unequal rewards through
the free enterprise system. He was the agent of that conquest of poverty
which America had anticipated since colonial times.

3) “Pluralism.” This became the scholar's word for our harmonious
diversity of races, creeds and conditions. Scientist-Author E. E. Slosson
was to define America as “the finest of all the fine arts, the art of getting
along peaceably with all sorts and conditions of men." Our pluralistic
laboratory proved the beneficence of the federal system, crowning our
good with brotherhood from sea to shining sea. Since federalism had

shown that it could govern and harmonize a continent, why not a world?

4) Morality. The universe is moral and “civilization depends on morality," 
said Emerson. Our system was assumed to be in closer touch
than others with what Seward called “a higher law than the Constitution." 
The old Stephen Decatur formula, “our country, right or wrong."
was offensive to intellectual patriots like Senator Carl Schurz, who amended 
it thus: "Our country . . . when right, to be kept right: when wrong,
to be put right." Kept or set right by reliable methods, the vocal conscience 
of responsible citizens manifested itself through free institutions.

These four diverse national purposes could get somewhat out of alignment. 
Such was the case when Theodore Roosevelt came on the scene.
Creative individualism had made it seem that America’s dominant purpose
—as it seems to many today—was merely to get rich. T. R.. a great
teacher as well as politician, used the White House as a pulpit to stir the
national conscience to higher aims than the amassing of wealth. He
preached the responsibility of the individual citizen, the social necessity
of personal character, the central role of righteousness in democracy.
He attacked that optimistic fatalism which assumed the country could
always, in a contemporary’s words, “slide down hill into the valley of
fullillment’’ and warned that the rights of men had to be freshly earned
every day. He reasserted America's championship of popular rights. He
told us that “the history of America is now the central feature of the
history of the world." He sought to put U.S. foreign policy in the central
position in that history, a position it was soon to occupy in fact.

A defiant doctrine

AMERICAN foreign policy before Teddy Roosevelt was sometimes
summarized as "the Monroe Doctrine and the Golden Rule." Both
were thoroughly consistent with American beliefs. If the Monroe Doctrine
seems too defensive today, it was for a century defiant of half the globe.
It aimed to keep European autocracy out of Latin America as well as to
allow the spread of democracy through our own territorial expansion. It
was not just the "manifest destiny” of continental geography, but also
democratic idealism that carried our flag to California, Hawaii and the
Philippines. It was George Bancroft himself who. as acting Secretary of
War, gave the order that sent U.S. troops into Texas in 1846—just as
young T. R.. as Assistant Secretary of the Navy, sent Commodore Dewey
into Manila Bay in 1898.

Preoccupation with our own hemisphere did not always blind us to
the cause of freedom and democracy elsewhere. National revolutionaries
like Kossuth in Hungary, freely admitting American inspiration, could
also count on at least unofficial American support. Commodore Perry
in opening Japan, John Hay in proclaiming the Open Door against colonialism 
in China, Captain Mahan in his lectures at the Naval War College—
all were prophets of the fact that American interests were becoming 
as global as the American cause.

In 1909 the Monroe Doctrine was re-analyzed by Herbert Croly, author 
of The Promise of American Life, which greatly influenced T.R.’s
thinking. Now that Europe was democratized, Croly argued, Europe’s
interests and America's could no longer be considered “essentially incompatible." 
as some interpreters of the Doctrine had maintained. A
time was coming when we would have to assume a wider and more active
role. George Washington, in his Farewell Address, had enjoined us to
avoid foreign entanglements and “give to mankind the magnanimous
and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice
and benevolence." These words, said Croly, had been more honored in
the letter than in the spirit. The time was coming when we should seek

CONTINUED    33


MATURING WORLD POLICY

The Monroe Doctrine
In his message to Congress in 1823 President James Monroe extended traditional 
U.S. “don’t tread on me" foreign policy to entire hemisphere, European 
meddling there, he said, was “dangerous to our peace and safety.’

thus for the ultimate pence of the world and
for the liberation of its peoples, the German
peoples lnduded: for the rights of nations
groat and small and the privilege of men
everywhere to choose their way of life and of
obedience. The world must be made safe for
democracy. Its peace must be planted upon
the tested foundations of political liberty.
We have no selfish ends to serve. We desire
no conquest, no dominion. We seek no indemnities 
for ourselves, no material compensation 
for the sacrifices we shall freely make.
We are but one of the champions of the rights
of mankind. We shall be satisfied when those
rights have been made as secure as the faith
and the freedom of nations can make them.

A Stand for World Liberty
On April 2, 1917 U.S. aloofness from foreign entanglements ended. Reading
message to Congress from specially printed cards (above). Woodrow Wilson
urged war on Germany because "the world must be made safe for democracy.”

NATIONAL PURPOSE continued

allies in order to build democracy into “a world system." In such a system. 
peace would inevitably depend on “the righteous use of superior
force," and America's force would be needed on that righteous side.

Croly’s contemporary patriots, however, were happier setting a no-
longer-so-novel example than leading a magnanimous crusade. They responded 
more to the idea of a happy American destiny than to a clear
American purpose. To Woodrow Wilson fell the sad task of proving the
unreality of this distinction and of testing the American devotion to
righteousness in a great European war. His war message of April 2, 1917
linked our destiny with that of democracy all over the world:

“The world must be made safe for democracy. Its peace must be
planted upon the tested foundations of political liberty. . . . Civilization
itself seeming to be in the balance. But the right is more precious than
peace, and we shall light for the things which we have always carried nearest 
our hearts—for democracy, for the right of those who submit to authority 
to have a voice in their own governments, for the rights and liberties 
of small nations, for a universal dominion of right by such a concert 
of free peoples as shall bring peace and safety to all nations and make
the world itself at last free. . . . America is privileged to spend her blood
and her might for the principles that gave her birth. . . ."

The “concert of free peoples" eventually became the Wilson-inspired
League of Nations. The League failed for various reasons, but one of
them was surely the failure of follow-through in America's political will.
Another and even greater war, another and even more “pluralistic"
league called the United Nations, and the Wilson-era failure has at least
been patched up. Said Franklin Roosevelt in 1945: “We have learned
that we cannot live alone, at peace: that our own wellbeing is dependent
upon the wellbeing of other nations far away.”

The Preamble and the stated Purposes of the U.N. contain many statements 
in which Americans can take pride, since they could never have
been written had not America long preached and exemplified them—
most notably the declaration of “equal rights of men and women and
of nations large and small." Yet this declaration is made hypocritical by
the nature of the U.N.'s membership, which includes Communist states
and thus severs the cause of peace from its anchor in freedom and principle. 
The word “righteousness," which to Wilson as to T.R. was synonymous 
with the higher patriotism, was not popularized by F.D.R., is not
used in the U.N. charter and is seldom heard in its debates.

Our greatest spokesman

Wilson's war message was in many ways the last great documentary
link between modern America and “the principles that gave her
birth." Its echoes of the Declaration of Independence are not mere rhetoric. 
Those echoes had been enriched for Wilson's generation by the
memory of our most profound national experience, the Civil War, and
our greatest spokesman of national purpose, Abraham Lincoln.

Lincoln's first show of ‘stubborn grandeur,** said Carl Sandburg,
was in the passionate seriousness with which he took the words of the
Declaration. To him it was a charter of political truth for "augmenting 
the happiness and value of life to all people of all colors everywhere."
Because slavery was incompatible with the Declaration, the Declaration
was the real issue of the Civil War. But this issue had been so long evaded
and compromised that Lincoln could exploit it only within the larger
cause of saving the Union. Thus political and military necessities robbed
the words of his Emancipation Proclamation of great documentary
lightning, but the deed was as “fundamental and astounding" as any-
thing he said. Forced into the Constitution by war, by conscience and by
the Declaration, the Proclamation was what Whitman called “by far
the greatest revolutionary step in the history of the U.S."

Lincoln's greatness was more than verbal. It lay in the resolution with
which he preserved the idea of union through our most tragic crisis.
Such resolution could be sustained only by faith in “the proposition that
all men arc created equal." The national purpose that Lincoln stated
for the union was that free government of the people, by the people
and for the people should not perish from the earth.

Since Lincoln's time government by the people has been broadened
step by step and deepened here and abroad with a cumulative effect
scarcely less revolutionary than the Emancipation Proclamation itself.
The abstraction for which Lincoln fought is now operative in more than
half the world. Scores of new nations have been born since World War I
because of the conviction that men should govern themselves, and the
I960 crop will be at least a half dozen more in Africa alone. Yet the


popularity of Lincoln's abstraction has not made democracy any safer.
On the contrary, some of the nations for whose freedom we fought under 
Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt, notably in eastern Europe and the
Far East, have long since succumbed to ancient tyranny in its newest and
most insidious guise, Communism. In all countries the new tyranny, like
the old, is still abetted by ignorance and poverty, and in the poorer ones
by a widespread belief that freedom and morality are luxuries—“first the
grub, then the morals." Meanwhile in America, suffused in real luxuries,
freedom and morality are taken for granted as casually as bread.

This does not mean that the U.S. has altogether forsaken its traditional 
purposes in foreign affairs. They have guided our reactions to
many new and puzzling challenges, such generally creditable reactions
as the Marshall Plan, the North Atlantic treaty, the defense of Korea,
the upholding of the U.N. in the Suez and other crises, the spending of
billions for alliances and aid. At vast expense but with fair success,
the U.S. has contained Communism since 1949. We have defended the
chance of many nations to choose freedom and establish self-government, 
from Guatemala to Vietnam.

But at other times and places we have failed to defend this right. From
Hungary in 1956 the appeal to American principles for American help
was so direct and unmistakable that many
Americans, in our government's blank
failure to respond, thought they heard the
snapping of a great cord to the most
precious part of our past. To others this
sound was muffled by the very scope and
complexity of the challenge, for tyranny
is only one of the conditions of human
life that wears a new. confusing and very
non-18th Century mask.

The whole order of organized power
has changed. The once worthy title of
"nation" may now denote either a monster 
or a pygmy state. Both weaponry and
economies have made nonsense of long
established boundaries between nations.
Strange new alignments seem to be forming, 
one perhaps being an alignment of
races. The scientific and technical revolution, 
which has already overthrown the
social structure of some very old nations,
may have overnight changes in store for
many others, either from within their own laboratories or from some
point in outer space. As for what Communism has done to international 
politics, in the words of a recent Rockefeller Brothers Fund
report, "The chessboard itself may be said to have disappeared."

Nation states may no longer be the most meaningful integers of creative 
political thought. No existing state is or can be safe for democracy
or freedom. Whatever may he hoped or feared from regional or racial
alignments, any lasting political purpose must take the whole great
globe for its arena. Nor is it just the Ghanaian, or the American, whose
chance at happiness is threatened by technology. Human nature itself
is threatened by dehumanization. A great political purpose today must
have something to say about human nature, how to keep it as human
and as rational as may be.

Such are the fantastic new conditions in which our old beliefs must
find a home, a grave or a toehold. How can we best adapt our beliefs to
the conditions? What purposes may rightfully be considered today?
Survival. Sensible patriots have proposed that our true cause today is
sheer national survival. They say that this is important enough, and
doubtful enough, to engage our full attention. Biology tells us that survival 
is a primary concern. Yet if survival by military means is meant,
modern weapons are two-edged. Our present strategy of nuclear deterrence, 
if ever tested, could so reduce our population that its survivors,
the bearers ol our beliefs about liberty and self-government, might prefer 
to live elsewhere. On the other hand, since America is now the
world's chief home and hope of freedom, a refusal to defend it could demoralize 
the cause of freedom for a thousand years. From this dilemma
the only escape is to perceive that survival alone is not an adequate goal.

What is, then? No single goal, perhaps. A great power's foreign policy
cannot be reduced to a phrase. The Council on Foreign Relations, analyzing 
our "Basic Aims" lor the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
made a multiple recommendation: that while maintaining our negative

CONTINUED

Open Door
In 1899, Secretary of State
John Hay stretched U.S.
foreign responsibility with
Open Door Policy defending
China's territorial integrity

FIFTH DRAFT

18

The first is freedom of speech, and expression everywhere
in the world.

The second is freedom of every person to worship God in
his own way everywhere in the world. 

The third is freedom from want - which translated into
world terms means economic understandings which will secure
to every nation a healthy peace time life for its 
inhabitants - everywhere in the world. 

The fourth is freedom from fear - which translated into
world terms means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such
a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will
be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any 
neighbor - everywhere in the world. 

That kind of a world is the very antithesis of the so-called
"new order" which the dictators seek to create with it. . . . 
[?] in Europe and in Asia.

To that "new order" we oppose the greater conception - the
moral order. A good society is able to face schemes of world domination
and foreign revolutions alike without fear. It has no need either
for the one or for the other.

The Four Freedoms
In 1941 message to Congress, Franklin Roosevelt spelled out American ideals.
He felt so strongly about U.S. responsibility “everywhere in the world” that
in fifth draft (above) he added thought to the third and fourth freedoms.

CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS
DETERMINED
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime 
has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and
to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the
human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and
small, and
to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising
from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and
to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.
AND FOR THESE ENDS
to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good
neighbors, and
to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and
to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that
armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and
to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social
advancement of all peoples,
HAVE RESOLVED TO COMBINE OUR EFFORTS
TO ACCOMPLISH THESE AIMS.
Accordingly, our respective Governments, through representatives assembled in
the city of San Francisco, who have exhibited their full powers found to be in good
and due form, have agreed to the present Charter of the United Nations and do
hereby establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations.

Charter for Human Rights

At San Francisco, on June 26. 1945, 50 nations, including the U.S., signed
the United Nations Charter. Its preamble (above) marked acceptance by the
world of principles originally laid down in the Declaration of Independence.


Immortal Statement of Ideals
In his Gettysburg Address at 1863 dedication of new Civil War cemetery,
Abraham Lincoln sublimely summed up the war’s meaning as the supreme
test of national purpose. He began first draft {top) in ink. finished it in pencil.

The Task for the Future
Lincoln delivered his Second Inaugural Address on March 4. 1865, in which
he called the nation to the fresh task of reconstruction. Handwritten draft, including 
famous closing words {above), is at Library of Congress in Washington.

NATIONAL PURPOSE continued

policy of resisting and containing Communism, we must at the same
time do much more to anticipate “the world's other problems,”and try
to link the non-Communist nations more closely through more and
better institutions of law and order, security, economic development,
freedom and peace. A large order!— but not necessarily an inspiring
one. Although the U.S. has virtually unlimited responsibilities, can it
respond to all alarms everywhere in the free world at once?

Self-government. The one principle that Americans have preached most
consistently since their own founding is that men can govern themselves 
in freedom under law, and that all of them deserve a chance to
try. Perhaps this simple message is too 18th Century for the world's
needs today, or America's complex relation to it. But the millions who
have not yet had their chance seldom say so. Self-government is clearly
a central purpose for many peoples of the world.

Moral Law. Democracy, though we have treasured it, is not the highest 
value known to man. Indeed, it is only because enough Americans
have had still higher allegiances that we have made democracy work.

America's public love affair with righteousness, for example, was not
confined to the speeches of T.R. It began with the Mayflower Compact,
whose ultimate purpose was the quest of God's truth. The same quest
underlay our insistence on religious freedom, and the assumption of a
moral order in the universe underlies much of our constitutional law.
Said John Marshall, the great interpreter of the Constitution: “There are
principles of abstract justice which the Creator of all things has impressed 
on the mind of his creature man. and which are admitted to regulate 
in great degree the right of civilized nations.” Our very right to self-government 
is derived from “the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God,”
and to its harmony with these laws democracy owes its moral sanction.

If this moral order of the universe exists in fact—if there is such a
thing as the Natural Law in which our Founding Fathers trusted—then
it is surely the highest of man's political purposes to contrive his human
institutions in conformity with this order, while realizing that all human
institutions are subject to constant change. No more challenging task
faces American leaders and intellectuals, if they believe in natural law,
than to find its mundane applications in this revolutionary age. Certainly 
there resides in every human breast a natural instinct for justice, which
experience has refined into the world’s systems of law. A world that
needs peace, which is the work of justice, needs clearer codifications of
its sense of justice-i.e. more and better national and international law.

But those of us who make World Law our national purpose must he
sure the positive laws that we champion enjoy maximum consent. For
example, by throwing its economic weight around, the U.S. can do much
to promote free enterprise and freer trade in the non-Communist world.
But it could do this better with less friction if Americans should produce
a new definition of the right to property, which John Locke and our
Founding Fathers considered basic to liberty. Such a definition would
have to appear in harmony with natural justice to farmers and workers
as well as to businessmen in all industrialized societies.

Private Purposes. Many Americans will approve the above-mentioned
purposes and still deny that they should be avowed by the nation or its
government. A consensus of private purposes can give shape and direction 
to our national life without getting into formal policy at all. Yet
“in the fatness of these pursy times” our private purposes do not add up
to anything so firm. As one Air Force lieutenant wrote to TIME, "What
America stands for is making money, and as the society approaches
affluence, its members are left to stew in their own ennui.”

As monarchies were said to live by honor, so republics live by virtue.
Yet republics have no public means of supplying a lack of virtue in the
sovereign people. The public educational system can set and inculcate
standards of the mind, and with this aim the Rockefeller Brothers Fund
proposed to raise these standards, calling its report on our schools The
Pursuit of Excellence. Even the citizen who thinks that virtue is old-fashioned, 
or that it is none of the state's business, can perhaps subscribe
to excellence as a public purpose, and in a context of intellectual excellence, 
moral excellence (which must always be an individual purpose
and achievement) may have a better chance. As T.R. used to say, a patriot 
will make the most of himself. If enough do, so will the nation.

These are a few of (he paths which thoughtful Americans can follow
in their search for a new or renewed national purpose. There are undoubtedly 
others. But with the background for debate now sketched in, we can
proceed to the individual views of Life’s eminent contributors. The first
two articles will appear next week.

The Bloody Decision at Gettysburg

Union General Gouverneur Warren in bronze gazes across Gettysburg battlefield 
from Little Round Top, the hill on which he stood in alarm on July 2,
1863, watching Confederates roll forward against his undefended post. Union
troops, rushed to the scene, drove the Southerners from the slope. After Gettysburg 
the South never regained the initiative and this battle determined the
outcome of the conflict of purposes that had divided the nation for 30 years.

CONTINUED



NATIONAL PURPOSE continued
The Nation Enters the Modern World

Steel Road to Industrial Might
With the agonies of the Civil War past, the nation turned to the postponed
job of mastering the continent, binding it together with steel rails—like this
stretch of Union Pacific track, blazing straight across Nevada toward California. 
The railroads prepared America for the surge of the century's last decades,
which was transforming the nation from rural society to industrial mammoth.

Champion of Aggressive Citizenship
The Hero of San Juan, whose bust stands amid his trophies in his home at
Sagamore Hill, Long Island, personified the particular virtues of his age—confidence, 
aggressiveness, simple morality and rugged individualism. For a nation
feeling its oats as a world power Theodore Roosevelt obtained the Panama
Canal Zone. At home he championed the common citizen against big business.


[?]OSE CONTINUED
[?]ion Enters the Modern World
[?] Industrial Might
[?] our past, the nation turned to the postponed
[?]inding it together with steel rails—like this                                                          
[?]zing straight across Nevada towards Califor-                
[?]ca for the surge of the century's last decades,           
[?] from rural society to industrial mammoth.                
             
   

The Hero of San Juan, whose bust stands amid his trophies home at 
Sagamore Hill, Long Island, personified the particular  virtues of his age—
confidence, aggressiveness, simple morality in his rugged individualism. For a nation feeling its oats as a world power Theodore Roosevelt obtained the Panama Canal Zone. At home he championed the common citizen against big business.

NATIONAL PURPOSE continued

Wilson and World War I
The sepia snapshot, the doughboy helmet, the Rainbow Division insignia (below) 
are reminders, somewhat blurred today by nostalgia, of a fateful decision
from which there could be no real turning back. In 1917 the U.S., breaking
with what had been an overriding concern with domestic problems, made its
first serious commitment to the outside world and sealed that commitment
with blood. The man who led the country into World War I was Woodrow Wilson, 
whose bust by Jo Davidson is shown (right) at Princeton University where
he served as president from 1902 to 1910. An idealist and ardent pacifist, Wilson 
at first resisted U.S. involvement in the war. Afterward he tried through the
League of Nations to bring American-bred notions of justice into world affairs.

FDR and a Concert of Nations
Coming into the presidency in 1933. when the nation's chief and desperate
aim was to survive the Depression, Franklin Delano Roosevelt rallied the people's 
courage and launched the series of New Deal recovery measures. Roosevelt, 
whose bronze head (right) by Jo Davidson is shown in front of his Hyde
Park mansion, gained a closer rapport with the people than any President before 
him, partly because of his personality and partly because of modern communications. 
He involved the U.S. on the side of the Allies even before the nation 
was formally in World War II. He committed the country to cooperate
with other nations in upholding the Four Freedoms in the postwar world-
but he died two weeks before the United Nations (right) was born in 1945.

BATHED IN THE GLOW OF FLOODLIGHTS, THE U. N. RISES AGAINST THE NIGHT SKY OF NEW YORK CITY

ONTINUED
orld War I
e Rainbow Division insignia (be-
by nostalgia, of a fateful decision
back. In 1917 the U.S., breaking
ith domestic problems, made its
rld and sealed that commitment
World War I was Woodrow Wil-
ht) at Princeton University where
idealist and ardent pacifist, Wil-
r. Afterwards he tried through the
otions of justice into world affairs.

ncert of Nations
when the nation's chief and desperate
nklin Delano Roosevelt rallied the peo-
of New Deal recovery measures. Roose-
Davidson is shown in front of his Hyde
with the people than any President be-
lity and partly because of modern com-
the side of the Allies even before the na-
de committed the country to cooperate
Four Freedoms in the postwar world-
ited Nations (right) was born in 1945

BATHED IN THE GLOW OF FLOODLIGHTS, THE U.N. RISES AGAINST THE SKY OF NEW YORK CITY

N.A.W.S.A.
[*Edna Stadial made this list at Huntington 1950*]

Memo re William Lloyd Garrison papers
at Huntington Library, San Marino, Calif.

10514 William Lloyd Garrison
Anna Adams Gordon, Jan. 3, 1881
Frederick Dent Grant, c 1880
Mary Grew, Dec. 26, 1893
Maud Healy, Nov. 17, 1902
John I. Ingalls, 1883
Sallie Holley, Sept. 1, 1857
Julia Ward Howe, Feb. 3, 1883
Albert H. Horton, Feb. 16, 1887

10634 - Annie LePorte Diggs, Nov. 11, 1894
10501 - Fred. Douglass, Sept. 1850
10523 -	"	"	Jan.	5, 1861
10506 - Neal Dow, Apr. 22, 1853
10581 James Graham Fair, May 15, 1862
10548 - Emily Faithfull, Oct. 18, 1872

Francis Jackson, Nov.10,1857
Oliver Johnson, Mar. 18, 1887
Frances E. Willard, Sept. 23, 1882
Frances E. Willard, Jan. 11, 1899



ANTI-SLAVERY LANDMARKS IN BOSTON

Scores of Places Identified with the Great Struggle for the Freedom of the Black Men Are Passed Daily Without a Thought of the Stirring Scenes That Were Witnessed There---Where Garrison Published the Liberator---Refuges for Fugitives---Some Famous Cases of Kidnapping---Birthplaces of Popular War Songs.

 A fine series of lectures in the Old South on the anti-slavery struggle has brought the subject anew before Bostonians, and it seems well worth the while to make an imaginary pilgrimage to the places in Boston made sacred to all lovers of human freedom by events of that struggle. Already many landmarks have disappeared. It is well for the present generation to make haste and mark their locations for the guidance of those who are to follow, and who, perchance, may thus be helped to remember, as we should never forget, that "one man that thinks for himself is the salt of a generation poisoned with printer's ink and cotton dust."
An anti-slavery pilgrimage in Boston might properly begin with the grave of John Eliot, the apostle to the Indians, in the ancient burial place on the corner of Washington and Eustis streets. In 1675,  John Eliot "presented to the Colonial Legislature of Massachusetts a memorial against the slavery of Indians and others."
On the corner of Tremont street, Nos, 1 and 3, and Pemberton square, about where William H. Brine's store now stands, lived Chief Justice Samuel Sewall, who, in 1700, published "The Selling of Joseph," a protest against slavery, and supposed to be the first publication on that subject issued in America. A lineal descendant of his, bearing his name, appears one hundred and fifty years later to renew the protest, along with Garrison and Phillips in 1851, at the rendition of Thomas Sims, Samuel E. Sewall.
Come now to the old Granary Burying Ground on Tremont street, by Park Street Church, and see the tomb of John Hancock, first signer of the Declaration of Independence, first governor of the State of Massachusetts under the constitution, and, according to Robert T. Teamoh, the first recorded public negro liberator in the colony. In 1788 three men were kidnapped in Boston by a man named Avery and carried off to Martinico. As governor of Massachusetts, John Hancock wrote to all the governors of the West India Islands in favor of the poor creatures, and, as a result, they were soon returned. His home used to stand on Beacon street a few doors below the State House, Nos. 29 and 30. Many relics of his person, as well as a picture of his Beacon Hill home, are to be found in the old State House. A good portrait may be seen in the vestibule of the John Hancock Building on Federal street, near Milk street.
The old Hancock Tavern, named after John Hancock when he was elected governor, and which he used to frequent, is in Corn court, off Faneuil Hall square, and still in service as a temperance restaurant and hotel.
At 15 Milk street, W. C. Brooks & Co., tailors, opposite the Old South Meeting House, is a building which claims to cover the site of Benjamin Franklin's birthplace, and bears his bust in a niche on the front.
"The first abolition society in this country was formed in Pennsylvania," and the typical Bostonian, Benjamin Franklin, became its president in 1787. The grave of Franklin's father and mother is in the centre of the old Granary Burying Ground, marked by a tall pyramidal granite monument. They lived at one time about where the middle of Union street, east side, of Hanover street, now is. The place where Franklin, as a boy, practised the printer's trade in his brother James's office was on the northeast corner of Court street (No. 29) and Franklin avenue, opposite Young's Hotel. The very press on which he worked is still to be seen in the attic of the Old State House. Richard S. Greenough's statue of Franklin is in the City Hall yard, School street, near the site of the first school in Boston, of which he and John Hancock were pupils. Franklin Park and Franklin street are named after him.

WHERE GARRISON AND WHITTIER LIVED.

Standing in front of the Hancock Building, 35 Federal street, you have before you, at No. 30 Federal street, approximately, the site of "Parson Collier's boarding-house." Rev. William Collier, a Baptist city missionary, was the founder of the National Philanthropist, the first paper in the world established expressly to advocate the abstinence from intoxicating liquors. The day should come when for this alone Federal street shall receive the world's grateful attention. Parson Collier installed in the editorial chair of the National Philanthropist a certain young man named William Lloyd Garrison. This young man, in turn, remembering a younger friend of his, named John Greenleaf Whittier, later to be somewhat known as a poet, secured for him a position in the city as editor of the American Manufacturer. The two boarded and roomed together in 1829 at Collier's house. In 1828 Benjamin Lundy, the anti-slavery reformer, came from the South to Collier's house, found Garrison there, and soon turned him into as vigorous an opponent of slavery as he himself was.
The next year, July 4, 1829, Mr. Garrison delivered his first anti-slavery address, in Park Street Church, on the same ground over which the sails of the frigate Constitution, "Old Ironsides," were made, and on which, later, July 4, 1832, for the first time was sung, in Park Street Church, under the direction of Lowell Mason, by a choir of Sunday school children,
"My country, 't is of thee, Sweet land of liberty"---
thus imparting to that historic site a threefold interest for Liberty's pilgrim.
On the northeast corner of Milk street and Congress street, at the head of Federal street, now occupied by a corner of the post office extension and the broad sidewalk, stood in those days Julien Hall. Here, in 1830, on invitation of the "infidel preacher," Abner Kneeland, William Lloyd Garrison gave his first course of three lectures against slavery, and secured thereby the immediate and future help of Rev. Samuel J. May, A. Bronson Alcott, the philosopher, and Samuel E. Sewall, a descendant of Chief Justice Sewall.
Rev. Dr. Lyman Beecher was also present, but not to approve. Here, also, George Thompson once lectured against slavery and narrowly escaped seizure by a mob whose plot was discovered by Samuel J. May, and rendered unavailing by the anti-slavery ladies.
The Howe Building, standing on the northeast corner of Walter street and Congress (No, 60), covers the site of Merchants' Hall. In one of the upper rooms of this old Merchants' Hall Building, destroyed by the great fire of 1872, the first number of "The Liberator" was printed. Here was the place of which James Russell Lowell wrote:

"In a small chamber, friendless and unseen, 
Toiled o'er his types one poor, unlearned young man;
The place was dark, unfurnitured and mean, 
Yet there the freedom of a race began."

Here was the small, dark chamber, says Archibald Grimke, in which Garrison, brave as Luther, wrote these immortal words for the first "Liberator:"
"I am in earnest; I will not equivocate; I will not excuse; I will not retreat a single inch; and I will be heard."

A MEMORABLE PROPHECY.

Now if we cross the city to Joy street, and turn in to Smith's court, we may find one of the most interesting and notable relics of the struggle for human liberty that the world contains. It is the very church in which was organized by the famous "twelve apostles" on the evening of Jan. 6. 1832, the "New England Anti-Slavery Society." Just as [these] nineteenth-century apostles were about to separate at midnight, their young leader, William Lloyd Garrison, uttered this prophecy:
"We have met tonight in this obscure schoolhouse; our numbers are few and our influence limited; but mark my prediction; Faneuil Hall shall ere long echo with the principles we have set forth. We shall shake the nation by their mighty power."
The lower part of this church, A. Grimke tells us, was used at that time as a schoolroom for colored children, Boston not then tolerating mixed schools. The upper part was used as a church. It was in the schoolroom that the Anti-Slavery Society was organized. In this meeting-house Garrison, Wendell Phillips, Charles Sumner, Henry Wilson and Anson Burlingame have lifted their voices against the iniquity of slavery. To this place, when driven from Tremont Temple by a pro-slavery mob, bent on blood, Wendell Phillips once repaired and delivered his speech. Frederick Douglass, in a letter to Mary Livermore, describes how Maria Weston Chapman, leaning on Wendell Phillips's arm for his protection, threaded her way with him through a frantic mob, looking "as serene as a rainbow over a thundering cataract."
To Mr. Douglass's intense relief they reached safely the little pulpit in this same Baptist church, where John Brown Jr., son of that John whose soul still marches on, stood with two loaded pistols in his hands ready for defence. At the close of the meeting Wendell Phillips and his friends silently passed out by a rear passage, and thus escaped the violence of the howling mob which was awaiting them in Smith court. 
Oct.21, 1835, the annual meeting of the "Boston Female Anti-Slavery Society" had been advertised to take place that afternoon at their hall, in a building, the site of which is now occupied by Wilkinson's hardware store on the eastern side of Washington street, No. 186, between Adams square and State street. George Thompson, the English abolitionist, was to address it. In opposition, Mr James L. Homer, editor of the Commercial Advertiser, wrote out in his office, at the request of two "respectable" merchants of Boston, the notorious handbill which bore its fruit in the "Broadcloth Mob" a few hours later. From two to five thousand people gathered in reply to this outrageous call in the vicinity of the Liberator office, a mob likened by Archibald Grimke to a "huge, irregular cross," with its head darkening at the Liberator office and its foot resting at the Joy Building (now Rogers Building), while one arm embraced the Old State House, and the other stretched along Court street to the Old Court House. On this living cross it was proposed to crucify that day freedom of speech in Boston. The object of attack was George Thompson, but he was not to be found.
The mob accordingly demanded Mr. Garrison. Discovering him in a carpenter's shop, in the rear of the building, they were about to throw him bodily out of the window to the ground. Someone objected, so a rope was tied around his body, and he was made to descend by a ladder into Wilson's lane, now that part of Devonshire street between Adams square and State street. There he was seized and dragged into State street, in the rear of the old State House.
Already his clothes were torn from his back, and the hat from his head. Mayor Lyman, with some officers, rescued him, taking him through the south door of the Old State House up-stairs, where he was disguised in a fresh suit of clothes. Then the mayor passed him out of the north door into a hack, where a fearful struggle ensued with the maddened multitude. The horses were forced through Court street to Bowdoin square, and thence hurriedly driven through Cambridge street into Blossom street, and from there to Leverett Street Jail, which was situated on the north side of Leverett street, near the corner of Causeway street. This old jail was taken down in 1852. Here it was that George W. Latimer, the first fugitive slave hunted in Massachusetts, was confined for weeks in the fall of 1842, but finally freed on payment by the abolitionists of $400 to his master. It was at this time that Whittier wrote "Massachusetts to Virginia." (See a good account of the Latimer affair in the Boston Globe, June 2, 1896.) Just around the corner from the jail, at 23 Brighton street (as things were then, but changed now), Mr. Garrison and his young wife lived at the time, and five weeks before, a strongly built gallows, having two nooses dangling from it, one for Thompson and one for Garrison was erected before their [?]

FREE SPEECH WAS SAVED THERE.

Let us now return to that notable meeting of ladies in the hall by the Liberator office, who had been notified that afternoon by Mayor Lyman that it was dangerous for them to remain. The words of Maria Weston Chapman in reply are worth listening to: "If this is the last bulwark of freedom, we may as well die here as anywhere." However, they finally adjourned to No. 31 Hollis street, a brick house still standing, three doors from the corner of Tremont street, going towards Washington street, the home of Francis Jackson, being assailed during their perilous march through the mob with epithets too vile for utterance, and their very lives at times being endangered. Owing to the illness of Mrs. Jackson, they adjourned to the home of Mrs. Chapman, No. 11 West street. A month later, in the parlors of Mr. Francis Jackson, as a partial result of that mob, Harriet Martineau avowed her full agreement with the principles of the society.
Twenty years afterward Wendell Phillips, who with J. G. Whittier also witnessed the mob, declared the fact "That free speech was saved in Boston, in 1835, was owing to fifty or sixty women, and mainly to one man, Francis Jackson, who gave to the women, driven from their hall, the use of his house." In his speech on "The Philosophy of the Abolition Movement," Mr. Phillips said:
"Our youthful city can boast of but few places of historic renown, but I know of no one which coming time is more likely to keep in memory than the roof which Francis Jackson offered to the anti-slavery women of Boston, when Mayor Lyman confessed he was unable to protect their meeting, and when the only protection the law could afford William Lloyd Garrison was the shelter of the common jail.
In the Old State House on State street, we find a copy of the small poster which caused the riot of 1835. The proprietor of The Liberator office became alarmed and serviced notice after the "Broadcloth Mob," for the publishers to remove the paper. The next office for the paper was at No. 25 Cornhill, up-stairs, the Anti-Slavery Society occupying the ground floor. Next door to it, No. 23 Cornhill, was Mr. Jewett's place, the first office of publication of "Uncle Tom's Cabin" as a book. Later they removed to No. 21  Cornhill, the society occupying rooms in the second story, and The Liberator the fourth story until the year before the civil war, when a final removal was made to the Washington Building, still standing on Washington street, No. 383, opposite Franklin, in the third story, right, front, as one looks up from Franklin street. Here they remained from 1860 to 1865, when The Liberator ceased to exist, its work being accomplished. Franklin street was then the wholesale dry goods district and frequented by wealthy Southerners, making purchases. As they looked up at the Liberator office they could not help seeing plainly the Anti-Slavery Society's sign, and the unregenerate of them would thereby be led to make decidedly "unsanctified" remarks. The press work for The Liberator for a score of years was done at No. 37 Cornhill, where now are Messrs. Frost & Adams, the well-known dealers in artists' materials. Mr. William Henderson Chandler, who superintended the presswork of The Liberator for twenty years, at No. 37 Cornhill, is still living and at work at his craft, book and job printing, 21 Cornhill. At No. 14 Brattle street, underneath what used to be the old Lynn & Boston horse-car station, but where now is Talbot's dining-room, as near as Hon. E. G. Walker has been able to ascertain, was the shop of his father, David Walker, an African who published in 1829, fifteen months before the birth of The Liberator, a pamphlet against slavery, known as "Walker's Appeal," which went into three editions. Copies found their way South, and produced such a sensation that parties in South Carolina offered a reward of thousands of dollars for the author's head, and the governors of Georgia and Virginia officially brought the matter to the attention of their respective Legislatures.
David Walker was born in North Carolina. His father was a slave, but his mother was free, which made the boy free. He lived in his native State until he was of age; then he travelled, observing closely, in various States, the condition of his people. He came to Boston and published the Appeal as a result of his observations. This information was obtained from his son, Hon. E. G. Walker, the well-known colored lawyer, No. 27 Pemberton square. Hon. E. G. Walker, who was one of the "Burns rioters," and Charles L. Mitchell, of the Boston Custom House, who used to work for Mr. Chandler, the printer of The Liberator, were elected together in 1866 as members of the Massachusetts Legislature, and were, possibly, the first of their race to hold such a position, in the country's history.

CASES OF KIDNAPPING.

Hard by, on Brattle street, was the clothes-cleaning shop of Coffin Pitts, the employer of Anthony Burns, when Burns was kidnapped in 1854 on Court street, near the head of Brattle street.
 With the Old Court House on Court street are associated some of the most exciting episodes of the anti-slavery conflict. In 1836 Charles P. Curtis and Benjamin R. Curtis appeared as counsel for the slave-hunters in the famous case of the girl, Med, originally a slave in the West Indies, and brought to Boston by her mistress. "Med claimed her freedom on the ground that slavery was not recognized by the laws of Massachusetts." The Curtises "held that. . . slaves were property by the law of nations, and that an ownership which is legal in the West Indies continued in Boston, at least so far as the right to seize and carry away, but the Supreme Court of Massachusetts held otherwise."
In 1842 George W. Latimer was kidnapped.
The next case of interest was that of William and Ellen Crafts, who were slaves in Macon, Ga. Ellen, who was practically white, disguising herself as a young Southern planter, successfully got her husband Nort with her as her body servant, and came to Boston, where they joined Theodore Parker's society. Unfortunately, after their arrival, the fugitive slave law passed, indorsed by Daniel Webster and greeted by the merchants of Boston with approving salute from one hundred guns. Immediately the liberties of the refugees were in danger. Theodore Parker received the wife into his own house at the risk of a thousand dollars' fine. It was decided not to have the husband run from the city, but to "fight it out." Accordingly he was well armed, Mr. Parker himself inspecting the weapons, and sufficiently "large" stories were judiciously passed about the town of the negro's muscular ability and general "dangerous" character, especially intended for the benefit of kidnappers. Meanwhile the "vigilance committee: kept watch on a slave-catcher named Hughes, of infamous reputation, who had come on from Macon, Ga., and stopped with his assistant at the United States Hotel, waiting his opportunity.
Although Crafts appeared boldly upon the street, yet, at one time, the chase waxed so hot that he sought refuge in Lewis Hayden's house, No. 66 Phillips street. Mr. Hayden was a respectable and determined colored man, himself a refugee. Placing two kegs of gunpowder under the steps of his front door, it was well understood that if the slave-catchers came over the threshold Mr. Hayden stood with matches ready to blow up the whole house. The abolitionists by "discreet" management soon made it so hot for the slave-hunters that they left town without their prey. The Crafts family went to England, where they attracted much attention at the great exposition at Crystal Palace.
Feb.15, 1851, a refugee named Shadrach was arrested in Taft's Cornhill Coffee House by deputies of the United States Marshal Devens, on a warrant issued by George T. Curtis, United States marshal, on the complaint of George T. Caphart, attorney of John DeBree of Norfolk, Va. After a brief hearing in the court house before G. T. Curtis, commissioner, the case was adjourned to the following Tuesday. In Colonel T. W. Higginson's "Cheerful Yesterdays" in the Atlantic Monthly for March, 1897, an amusing account is given of how a party of negroes, passing up unconcernedly through the court-room, received Shadrach as he stood there into their midst. (Another account names Lewis Hayden as their leader.) When they reached the large door with a lantern on each side, opposite the extension to Yount's Hotel, on the eastern side of the court house, the same door out of which Sims and Burns were taken later, the negroes scattered, and no one could tell "Shadrach" from "Abednego." His course has been followed by carriage to  Cambridge, thence to Concord, and a little farther. Beyond that, as was mysteriously said by Theodore Parker, "the Lord took him." Certainly the kidnappers did not take him, as he was heard of later in Montreal, Canada. The acting President, Millard Fillmore, issued his proclamation, countersigned by Daniel Webster, secretary of state, requiring prosecutions to be set in motion against all who participated in the rescue, and a series of annoying "rescue" trials followed, but it was impossible to get a jury to pronounce anyone guilty. In later years, when R. H. Dana, counsel for the defence, asked one of the ex-jurymen for an explanation, "Possibly," suggested the juryman, "some clew to the difficulty might be found in the fact that I was the man who drove Shadrach from Cambridge to Concord."
Thursday evening, about nine o'clock of April 3, 1851, a negro named Thomas Sims, who had escaped from Savannah, Ga., was arrested on Richmond street, near Ann, now known as North, street. After a desperate resistance, in which officer Butman was stabbed in the thigh by the negro, Sims was forced into a carriage and taken to the court house under the pretence that he was a thief. Every facility that the civil power could give was rendered to the kidnappers. in the early morning, April 12, 1851, under a guard of two hundred policemen, armed with United States cutlasses, Thomas Sims was taken out of the east door of the court house, the main, middle door, with lanterns and with steps going up (not one of the small doors on either side of it with steps leading down) from the sidewalk. The prisoner was marched down State street to Long wharf, and placed on board the brig Acorn, belonging to John H. Pierson & Co., and carried to his master. Some of the "respectable" citizens of Boston who had encouraged the kidnapping also went on the ship to Savannah. They were there publicly feasted by the citizens. It was the 19th of April, 1831, the anniversary of Concord and Lexington, on which these sons of liberty-loving sires from Boston, enjoyed their savory repast at the expense of a suffering slave, who had been torn from freedom in sight of Bunker Hill, and was on that very day placed in the Savannah jail, to be beaten with a certain number of blows every day on his naked back, whether sick or well. This was one of the sacrifices of manhood that "aristocratic" Boston made to "save the Union." It is a comfort to know that at last Sims escaped again and returned to Boston.

HOW BURNS WAS SENT BACK TO HIS MASTER.

Anthony Burns was a regularly licensed Baptist minister, and is said to have belonged to the same church with his master, Colonel Charles T. Suttle of Alexandria, Va. He ran away. Arriving in Boston, he wrote a letter to his brother in Alexandria, also a slave of Mr. Suttle, stating that he was at work with  Coffin Pitts in Brattle street, cleaning old clothes. According to the custom of the South, when letters were received, directed to slaves, it appears to have been delivered to the master, Colonel Suttle, to open, who thereby obtained a clew to his missing slave. The colonel came to Boston with a witness named William Brent. Burns was arrested on Court street, near the head of Brattle street, on a warrant granted by United States Commissioner Edward Greeley Loring, who was also a lecturer on law in Harvard University. On arrest he was falsely accused of theft. He was placed in an upper-story room of the Court House, under a strong guard. The hearing began the next morning before Mr. Loring, but was adjourned till Saturday, May 27.

THE LIBERATOR                                                                                                  UNION WITH SLAVEHOLDERS.
—IS PUBLISHED—                                                                             The United States Constitution is 'a covenant with
EVERY FRIDAY MORNING,                                                                             death, and an agreement with hell.'
—AT—                                                                                            - "The free States are the guardians and essential 
221 WASHINGTON ST., ROOM NO 6.                                      supports of slavery. We are the jailers and constables 
ROBERT F. WALLCUT, General Agent.                                     of the institution. . . . There is some excuse
  -TERMS—Two dollars and fifty cents per annum                for communities, when, under a generous impulse,
in advance.                                                                                 they espouse the cause of the oppressed in other States, 
  -Five copies will be sent to one address for TEN                 and by force restore their rights; but they are without
DOLLARS, if payment be made in advance.                           excuse in aiding other States in binding on men an                           
  -All remittances are to be made, and all letters                   unrighteous yoke. On this subject, OUR FATHERS, IN       
relating to the pecuniary concerns of the paper are to         FRAMING THE CONSTITUTION, SWERVED FROM THE       
be directed, (POST PAID,) to the General Agent.                   RIGHT. We their children, at the end of half a century,       
  -Advertisements making less than one square inserted     see the path of duty more clearly than they,           
three times for 75 cents—one square for $1.00.                    and must walk in it. To this point the public mind      
  -The Agents of the American, Massachusetts,                     has long been tending, and the time has come for looking      
Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan Anti-Slavery Societies      at it fully, dispassionately, and with manly and 
are authorised to receive subscriptions for THE                     Christian resolution. . . . No blessing of the Union 
LIBERATOR.                                                                                 can be a compensation for taking part in the enslaving 
  -The following gentlemen constitute the Financial               of our fellow-creatures; nor ought this bond to be 
Committee, but are not responsible for any of the                 perpetuated, if experience shall demonstrate that it 
debts of the paper, viz:—FRANCIS JACKSON, EDMUND      can only continue through our participation in wrong
QUINCY, EDMUND JACKSON, and WENDELL                        doing. To this conviction the free States are tending.' 
PHILLIPS.                                                                                     —WILLIAM ELLERY CHANNING

                                                          THOU SHALL LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THY SELF
                                                                                       THE LIBERATOR.
WM. LLOYD GARRISON. Editor.     Our Country is the World, our Countrymen are all Mankind.      J. B. YERRINTON & SON, Printers.
VOL. XXX. NO. 51.                                     BOSTON, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 21, 1860.                                     WHOLE.NO.1565

                                                                                REFUGE OF OPPRESSION.
                                                                   EBULLITION OF PATRIOTIC SENTIMENT.
   The townsmen of philosophers Redpath, Phillips, and others, did not appreciate their generous feel-ings for wicked and ugly old Osawontomie Brown. To be plain, the people of Boston are quite satisfied that the fanatic performed not a great act, but perpetrated a great crime; and he has been justly hanged for it in an ignominious manner; and that in place of honour, he deserves reprobation. And alive with this correct view of the whole case, they spiritedly proceeded to the Temple the day of the meeting, and effectually hindered the rabid abolition firebrands from manufacturing laurels for the contemptible hero of Harper's Ferry. 
   We are proud of this. It is true, the interruption has given the meeting some notoriety, which is to be regretted; but as the same meeting was intended by its authors to express the highest appreciation of the people of Boston for John Brown, the interruption, though a violation of the freedom of speech, cannot be well objected to. It is now clear to the country, that in Boston, John Brown is a very wretched individual—that in it, there is no irrational desire to interfere with the property of the South. Our city has been often grossly misrepresented on this point. Mr. Phillips and others of his class have too frequently saddled their own extreme views on their fellow-citizens. The ice is now broken. It is not likely that the furious abolitionists amongst us will ever again attempt to make themselves the exponents of the public feeling. If they do, they are almost certain to gain nothing but failure from enterprise. While we cannot largely commend—for reasons already given—the interruption of this meeting; yet there are some thanks due to it spirited authors. Their act was violative of one of the highest American privileges—freedom of speech—but it was against a set of dangerous men they exercised it, and it has saved a great city from vile misrepresentation. Violence is often just. 
   It would be superfluous to reason with Mr. Redpath and his friends on the irrationality of their career. Enthusiasm for negros has so large a possession of their faculties, that no argument can reach them. Their principle, that illustrious men should be splendidly commemorated, is essentially good. But their application of it in the case of Brown shows them to be unable to distinguish between noble and ignoble acts; and the interruption they encountered in his apothesis in their own city, should convince them that the same metropolis holds both him and them in utter contempt. This is the proper fate of criminals and their abettors. It is particularly gratifying to find Boston speaking thus out, at the present time. The fact cannot but have good effect on the enthusiastic people of the South, whose secession movement [????] to the Abolitionists of the

                                                                                         SELECTIONS.
                                                                   From the National Anti-Slavery Standard.
                                                                                  THE TWO BOSTONS.
   Our readers have all of them read before now the details of the farcical attempt of the Boston Brokers to break up the John Brown Meeting in the Tremont Temple on the 3d inst. We say farcical, for though their good will was bloody enough, they had not the pluck to reduce it to act. They would have been very glad, no doubt, if some of their Irish accessories had assassinated Mr. Phillips on his way home from the evening meeting, but they had too much regard for their own necks to make a binding contract with any of them so as to secure the performance of the deed. In fact, it appears that the leaders of the mob prudently hid themselves, when the police were arrayed against them instead of on their side, and after they had received timely warning that there were men, not unused to fighting and well accustomed to the use of arms, who were determined 'to make n example' in the words of John Brown the Younger, of some of the rioters, should the police prove false or insufficient to keep them outside the door. However tragic their plot, the denouement of their drama was simply farce of the broadest kind. 
   The purpose of these heroes of the kerb-stone was doubtless to assure the slaveholders that Boston was still true to her tradition of kidnapping, as illustrated in the cases of Sims and Burns, and that she might be trusted, as in 1835, to 'snake out' and discomfit the disturbers of their peace and dignity. Had the history of the 4d of December ended with the clearing of the Tremont Temple by orders of the Mayor, by the expulsion of its lawful occupants on the demand of riotous intruders, there right have been what John Adams called 'a plausible appearance of a probability' of the truth of this gloss. But, unluckily for them, the meeting refused to be so suppressed, and adjourned to another place for the evening session. A demand being mad upon the City authorities for protection, the Mayor and Alderman gad the sense to see that it was a thing they could not refuse, without exposing themselves to wrath and indignation of much more consequences than that of the State-street not-shavers. Twenty-five years have wrought a mighty change, even in Boston; and the Boston of 1860 is very different from that of 1835. Then, the mob was openly instigated by men of the first social position and the greatest weight of character. Now, the leaders were men of no consideration or importance whatever—their claim to be gentlemen, which the Anti-`slavery papers even have conceded to them, resting solely, as we are credibly informed, upon their coats being whole at the elbows and their shirt not noticeably dirty. But neither pecuniarily nor politically were there of any significance what-[??????] noo part of the popula-

and a peaceable enjoyment of the paradise of office for themselves; but they may be assured that they are in much more danger of political ruin through the disruption of the Union. 
   And before leaving this subject, we think it no more than right by all parties, to correct an error which obtains extensively as to the quality of the men who called the Boston Meeting of the 3d of December. The Tribune, in its editorial comments on the affair even in its own correspondence in his excellent narrative on its details, speaks of them as ' the Garrisonians' or the 'Garrisonia part.' Nothing can be less justly descriptive of those excellent persons than such a characterization. We rather think that they would be much more justly described as 'the Republicans,' or the 'Republican party,' as we incline to believe that every man especially interested in that meeting voted for Abraham Lincoln. We do not think there was a Garrisonian, meaning thereby an Abolitionist of the stamp of the American Anti-Slavery Society, among them. They are always careful to distinguish themselves from us when they come into our meetings, as we are to make clear the specific difference which separate us from them when we go into their assembly. They believe insurrection to be the chief means by which abolition can be bought about. We do not. We hold that black men have the same natural right that white men have to rise and vindicate their liberties by force of arms, whenever there is a rational chance of success. We do not think it wise or humane, either towards the slaves or the masters, to stimulate and incite insurrectionary movements. We believe that the application of truth to the minds of the people of the free States, to which we owe the present hopeful condition of affairs, is still the true method of preparing the way for the peaceful deliverance of the slaves. We are ready to discuss these differences of method in our meeting or in theirs; but we think the gravity of those difference should be remembered by all those who recount this passage of our history.

                                                                     Correspondence of the Worcester Daily Spy.
                                                                                      LETTER FROM BOSTON. 
                                                                                                                                                                BOSTON, Dec. 5th, 1860.
  In spite of the financial and political anxieties now prevailing in this city, the late riot at the Tremont Temple furnishes the chief subject of conversation among all classes. Everybody compares it to the famous garrison mob of twenty-five years ago.  But the astonishing difference is seen in this, that whereas it then took some ten years to produce such a wholesome reaction, it has now taken but twenty-four hours. It is now difficult to hear of any man in any party, who justifies the affair, outside of the small knot of fast merchants, sporting men and custom horse bullies, with whom it originated. I hear a prominent Bell and Everett merchant say this morn-[???]

  One thing I must not omit to say. It was reported in advance that Southern law students from C[?]ridge were to have a hand in the riot. I am informed, however, that the only Southern man present took the side of the friends of the order. He was not the only one on that side who drew a wea[?] [??] had them, but were persuaded by [??] it is [?] keep them out of the way. This [?] light kept his hand on his boy [?] knife, with the pretty remark, 'I was driven out of Charleston for free speech, but I'm d—d if they drive me out of Bosto.' The State street gentlemen were observed to give him a wide berth, reserving their energies for small or elderly coloured men.
                                                                                                                                                                          FREE SPEECH.

                                                                                 THE BOSTON RIOTERS.
   When Captain Isiah Rynders essays to break up an anti-slavery meeting, it is well understood that he acts for political effect, and with a view to political reward. His Marshalship under Mr. Buchanan was well earned. The broadcloth rioters at Tremont Temple and Music Hall in Boston were avowedly actuated by political motives,—to pacify the South and save the Union,—though they themselves would be mobbed at the South, as Professor Mitchell was threatened, if they should there declaim in behalf of the Union. 
   As Mr. Buchanan is about to retire from office, and the Southern dynasty at Washington is drawing to an end, it is difficult to see what political reward the Boston rioters can hope for, unless it shall be the meagre consulship that the Southern Confederacy may seek to establish in Northern ports. Perhaps, however, a continued interest in Southern trade would be as satisfactory to these rioters and their backers as any political promotion. It is a pity they should work without pay; and that they may not fail of some reward, we give them the gratuitous benefit of a conspicuous advertisement.
   The leading rioter at Tremont Temple, the Ryudwers of he day, was RICHARD S. FAY who hails from Lynn, but is also said to have a house on Beacon street, Boston. It was no more respectable, and no less contemptible, for Richard S. Fay to usurp the direction of a meeting called by others, and to insult Mr. Frederick Douglass, than it was for Isiah Ryders to do precisely the same thing at the old Tabernacle in this city, a few years ago. 
   The cheif ally of Richard S. Fay, was JAMES MURRAY HOWE, of Brookline. All the reports of the riot at the Temple agree in the making this Fay and Howe the ringleaders of the rioter. Henceforth let them be recognised and remembered as such. But as the names of Fay and Howe are borne also by gentlemen of respectability and character in Massachusetts, these two rioters should be rightfully identified by their Christian names and their places of residence. The Boston correspondent of the Tribune adds quite a list of secondary names; but as the reward of the rioters may be too smallfor subdivision, the credit of the [???] the first instances to Richard St. 

meeting is unwise or not, affects not the principle of free speech. We care not whether the introducing party upon the meeting at Boston was composed of millionaires or beggars; it was a mob, and as such, deserving the execration of the whole North.—Cleveland Leader.

                                                                                VINDICATION OF MOBOCRACY.
   The Patriot thinks we should hardly dare to say to the face of the men who broke up the Tremont Temple meeting last week, that they were [??]. Why should we not? Does the Patriot mean to intimate that we, too, should be treated to mob argument, in such a case? We don't know how such a proposition strikes others, but to our mind it savours strongly of the Austrian despotism and the law of the bludgeon; and yet this is a fair interference, from the Patriot's article. As o our having sympathy with the Temple Meeting, that is a slander and a calumny. We have no desire to canonize John Brown or any of his gang; but the means employed to break up that meeting were disgraceful to the actors, and if any man of Cape Cod origin was engaged in it, we are very sorry to learn the fact. They were not obliged to go to the meeting; but when they were there, they had no right to outrage free speech by such a proceedings as those which we have commented upon. The Patriot ought to be ashamed of itself for countenancing or defending such miserable business.—Yarmouth Register. 

NO COMPROMISE WITH OPPRESSION.
   That long-tried and untiring friend of the oppressed Rev. SAMUEL J. MAY, of Syracuse, N. Y. deliver a timely, earnest and faithful Discourse from his pulpit on Thanksgiving Day, on the condition of the country—concluding in the following emphatic strain: —
   The spirit of oppression is insatiable. Tyrants must needs be full of fears—jealous of their power and incessantly seeking new securities. The Slaveholders are peremptory in demanding that their system of labor, though it has operated like an intellectual and moral blight upon their States, shall yet be extended into any and all of our National Territories, in order that their ascendency in the National Legislature and Federal Government shall be perpetuated forever—by the addition, from time to time, of new Slave States to our Union. In order to supply this increased demand for laborers, they would have us re-open the African Slave Trade,—roll back the civilization of our country ore than half a century. Nor would all this satisfy them. They have more than intimated that ur own laboring populations ought to be reduced to the condition of theirs! So that, if we would let the South Carolinans have their way, there would not be a man among us who guides the plow, or digs the soil or plies any of the tools of the mechanic, would any longer be free—certainly he would not be admitted to the elective franchise. 
   Nothing, then, is to be gained by concession and compromises! but everything may be lost. It is [???]

and keep forever what they, in their blinded eagerness for universal Empire, passionately threw back into our hands. Let us be as zealous for liberty as they were for slavery, and keep the door, as they have thrown it, open, that we may avert the curse of domestic servitude from the territorities South, of well as those North of the Missouri line. 
   As to the proposal in the Albany [?] Journal—that we should pay for the [?] may harbor or shield from recapture—[?] [?]ould not do it, if their legislators should [?] require it of them. It would be base so [?] would be recognising the right of the people [?] it would be paying for obeying the g[?] rule, paying for yielding to the impulses of our humanity; for refusing to be the brutes, the bloodhounds that the Fugitive Slave Act would make us.
   O, let me entreat you to make no further concessions to the oppressors of mankind !  The dissolution of our Union would indeed be a great calamity; but a far greater evil would it be to perpetuate our Union by agreeing to perpetuate, uphold, or extend the system of slavery. If we are calm, indulgent, allowing the Slave States to go out of the Union if they choose, they will soon find out their sad mistake - a mistake far more mischievous to them than to us. For what can they gain by the dissolution of their Union with us? Nothing but a temporary gratification of their passionateness. They will be equally near to the Free States, which will then be to the fugitives from slavery what Canada now is. They will be equally near to the dreaded abolitionists, who recognize no geographical boundary,  or political restrictions to their sympathies with the oppressed, and their exertions for the deliverance of the enslaved. They will be equally near to the north star, that will guide the flying bondmen as unerringly to the land of freedom then as now. They will be equally near to, or rather, I should say, equally far from God and Christ, and the common sentiment of humanity. These all are working together to effect the subversion of that system of all unrighteousness, which slaveholders are endeavoring to uphold. Unless, therefore, slaveholders are mightier than the true and the right, mightier that God, Christ, and the better part of man's nature, they must be discomfited in the unequal conflict. 
   The abolition of slavery is but a question of time and manner. Come it must, 'come it will' said Mr. Jefferson, 'if not by the generous energy of our own minds, it will come by the awful processes of St. Domingo' -servile and civil war. Would to God the men of his day had heeded his counsels, his warnings! We must listen to them,

It would be superfluous to reason with Mr. Redpath
and his friends on the irrationality of their
career. Enthusiasm for negroes has so large a possession
of their faculties, that no argument can
reach them. Their principle, that illustrious men
should be splendidly commemorated, is essentially
good. But their application of it in the case of
Brown shows them to be unable to distinguish between
noble and ignoble acts; and the interruption
they encountered in his apotheosis in their own
city, should convince them that the same metropolis
holds both him and them in utter contempt.
This is the proper fate of criminals and their abettors.
It is particularly gratifying to find Boston
speaking thus out, at the present time. The fact
cannot but have a good effect on the enthusiastic
people of the South, whose secession movement
may be justly attributed to the Abolitionists of the
Northern cities. If our city had acted in this manner
before, it is quite certain that the country would
not be so agitated as it now unfortunately is. But
better late than not at all; and the present ebullition
of true patriotic sentiment may be followed by
a great many.--Boston (Catholic) Pilot.
-
The calling of such a meeting at this time, to say
the least, was poor policy and worse taste; but
there are some men who never consult anything
but their own feelings and passions, regardless of
consequences. Such men do but little good in the
world, and are of little use, except to keep the elements
from stagnation, and to give the people
something to talk about. If they occasionally
meet with a rebuff, as in the present instance, they
only receive what every one must expect who goes
ahead of public sentiment. It is pretty evident
that the resolutions adopted at the meeting referred
to, express the sentiments of Bostonians, as
well as a majority of the people of the State, quite
as nearly as any that would have been passed by
Fred. Douglass and his associates. Whether that
was the proper time and place for the expression of
those sentiments, is a question for wiser heads to
decide. What we need now is cool and calm judgment,
and not frothy speeches and boisterous declamation.
Windy demagogues and sensation speaker
have ruled long enough, both North and South,
and it is time reason and common sense resumed
their sway.--Lynn Reporter.
-
We cannot too earnestly express the hope that if
any meeting should be called by the fanatics who assembled
in the Tremont Temple last week, all good
citizens will keep away from it. Such a meeting
would be an insignificant and contemptible affair if
attended only by those who sympathize with its object.
It would be elevated into undue importance
by an attempt to interrupt its proceedings. The
fellows who got up that meeting 'love to be persecuted,'
and nothing would please them better than
to be the martyrs of a riot. Garrison's fame, of
which many of them are emulous, dates from his
flight before a Boston mob, some quarter of a century 
ago.
If there are any citizens who suppose that a 'free
speech' meeting is necessary at the present time, let
them bear in mind that among those who favor the
utmost freedom of speech, there is a great difference
of opinion as to the proceedings in Tremont Temple.
The meeting was called--not as a meeting of the
sympathizers with John Brown--but as a 'People's 
Convention,' and under that call, all who chose had
a right to attend the meeting, and take part in its
proceedings. The majority in attendance, under
such a call, had a right to organize the meeting, and
pass such resolution as they please. Under this
view of the case, which is certainly a reasonable
one, the proceedings in Tremont Temple did not
violate the right of free speech, however impolitic
they may have been. Freedom of speech was fully
vindicated in the Joy street meeting in the evening,
where the crazy heads poured out their wrath and
bitterness against the very authorities who were protecting
them in the exercise of their right of free
speech, or rather of free vituperation.--Boston Journal.
-
A GOOD INDICATION.
From a telegram, we learn that James Redpath's
John Brown meeting, which was called at Boston,
on Monday last, was disposed of in a very summary
and appropriate manner. It was monopolized
by the anti-John Brown citizens of the place, who
chose Richard S. Fay, Chairman, and passed resolutions
denouncing Brown, justifying his execution
and lauding Virginia. The Abolitionists vainly endeavored
to get a hearing. Finally, the police
were called, and, amid much confusion, the hall
was cleared, and closed up by order of the Mayor.
The scene of the next 'wake' will probably be
North Elba, where unlimited freedom will perhaps
be given these pitiful beings to howl forth their 
dismal ditties. At all events, we are gratified to
see that the people of Boston are beginning to look
upon these demonstrations in their true character--
a public nuisance--a stench in the nostrils of every
good citizen.--Topeka (Kansas) Tribune--Border
Ruffian Democrat.

for protection, the Mayor and Aldermen had the
sense to see that it was a thing they could not
refuse, without exposing themselves to wrath and
indignation of much more consequence to them
than that of the State-street note-shavers. Twenty-
five years have wrought a mighty change, even in
Boston; and the Boston of 1860 is a very different
Boston from that of 1835. Then, the mob was
openly instigated by men of the first social position
and the greatest weight of character. Now, the
leaders were men of no consideration or importance
whatever--their claim to be gentlemen, which the
Anti-Slavery papers even have conceded to them,
resting solely, as we are credibly informed, upon
their coats being whole at the elbows and their
shirts not noticeably dirty. But neither pecuniarily
nor politically were they of any significance whatever.
In 1835, there was no part of the population,
excepting the hunted Abolitionists themselves,
that had a word to say against the Garrison Mob.
The mob party was in possession of the State, and
even Governor Everett was emboldened to hint at
potential penalties for free speech.
Now, the situation of affairs is entirely changed.
In Boston itself, there is a large minority which
have been educated by the Anti-Slavery agitation of
a quarter of a century into the apprehension of the
truth that mobs are not to put down meetings, and
that mayors are not to put down meetings, and
that mayors are not appointed to be their instruments.
And the State is entirely in the hands of
this promising class of political pupils who have
been brought up by the Abolition schoolmaster to
understand that free speech is the essential element
of their own life and growth. The examples
of New York and Baltimore, from whose incompetent
or corrupt municipalities the State has ininterposed
to take the protection of the persons
and properties of the citizens to whom it is due,
from the sovereign authority, no doubt were of
main weight with the Boston authorities. Plain
intimations which had been given, that Governor
Andrew would have the appointment of the police
of Boston the next year, struck terror into the
hearts of the men, and dismay into the souls of 
their master. At any rate, sufficient measures
were taken, by the detailing of a large body of the
police and the holding in readiness of an adequate
military force, to enable the John Brownists, as the
newspapers called them, to carry on their meeting
in the evening to a prosperous issue. Accordingly,
the report which will go down to the South, of
Boston, will be, that the municipal authorities,
with force and arms, sustained the right of the admirers
of Capt. Brown to hold their meeting, and
deliver their minds on any points they pleased, to
the fullest extent they liked. So that the whole
beneficial result of this bill-brokers' coup d'etat of
December, if any, will be to recommend the individual
heroes of the moving attack to the favor of
the slaveholders having business in Boston. An
advantage which, in the present state of affairs, we
apprehend, will not command a premium at the
Brokers' Board.
If these ridiculous persons, who undertook to
carry on a war of which they had not counted the
cost, had any motive for their absurd conduct, excepting
to curry favor with the slaveholder or
their advisers, (if there really were prompters of
any consequence behind the scenes,) it was undoubtedly
that of intimidating the Republican majority
of the Massachusetts Legislature into repealing
the Personal Liberty Bill, or performing such
other acts of degradation as may make the beaten
party forgive the successful one. If so, nothing
could be more intensely asinine than this means
directed to such an end. It is bad enough to be
asked to revoke the deliberately and repeatedly
defined policy of the State under menace of South
Carolina, without being expected to cower before
the puny fists of the petty Shylocks of their own
capital city. It is a kind of 'pitchfork-enticing'
which we rather think the members from the rural
districts of the Bay State will not think inviting
enough to yield to their seductions. If there is
one truth in the future which it needs no prophet to
foretell, and which the wayfaring man, though a
fool, cannot mistake, it is that any man in Massachusetts
who yield an inch or bates a hair of the
position she now occupies, in the presence of the
threats of the South, will be disgraced and dishonored
in her eyes, and forever discharged from
her service. And so we believe it will be as to all
the other free States which have ever undertaken
to perform the very first duty of civil government
--the protection of the weakest members of the
Commonwealth. If, in the several States, or in
Congress, there be any truckling on the part of
men charged with interests and the honor of
the North, before the menaces of the South, woe
be unto the men who consent to the dishonor of
the mother States that bore them! And, not
merely the men, but the party that shall consent to
the disgrace of the section, and the denial of the 
principles that raised them to power, will perish,
like Jonah's gourd, before the hot indignation of
the people. The leaders of the Republican party
are under great temptation to abase themselves,
in the hope of a quiet reign for Abraham Lincoln

Correspondence of the Worcester Daily Spy.
LETTER FROM BOSTON.
BOSTON, Dec. 5th, 1860.
In spite of the financial and political anxieties
now prevailing in this city, the late riot at the Tremont
Temple furnishes the chief subject of conversation
among all classes. Everybody compares it to
the famous Garrison mob of twenty-five years ago.
But the astonishing difference is seen in this, that
whereas it then took ten years to produce a wholesome
reactions, it has now taken but twenty-four
hours. It is now difficult to hear of any man in any
party, who justifies the affair, outside of the small
knot of fast merchants, sporting men and custom
house bullies, with whom it originated. I heard a
prominent Bell and Everett merchant say this morning,
--'It was an act of stupid folly. It was worse
than a crime, it was a blunder.'
It is conceded by all, that the meeting, if left
alone, would have been a failure. Its numbers were
very small, and many of the speakers announced
were not present. If the intruders had simply voted
to adjourn it, as they might have done, it would
have been dishonorable, but not riotous. But they
pushed their blackguardism so ridiculously far, in
passing those preposterous resolutions; and the
Boston Courier showed such inconceivable folly, in
its threat that the next persons silence should be 
Sumner and Wilson, that everybody awoke instantly
to the discovery that the city was under mob low.
What appeared at first merely ridiculous, began to
look dangerous.
The police indeed claim to have done their duty
in the evening, but that was beginning rather late.
Moreover, the African chapel was an easy place to
defend, being small and situated at the bottom of a
court, which could easily be kept clear. Even then.
Wendell Phillips had to be taken out the back way,
with a very strong guard of friends, around whom
the mob pressed with fierce cries and missiles. Colored
men were pursued by organized bands, and severely
beaten; in one case, a horse car was forcibly
stopped, and searched for colored men; this I hear
from one who was in it. Windows were broken in
all the colored quarter of the town. Indeed, the 
evening mob was much worse than the morning one;
that consisted merely of the aristocratic portion of
those who defeated Burlingame; in the evening they
brought in their degraded North street supporters
also. Not one half the outrages committed have
yet got into the newspapers.
The rioters had not the sense to obtain the shadow
of propriety that might have come from getting
regular control of the meeting--they being the majority.
After Mr. Martin had been called to the
chair regularly, taken his place, and appointed a
committee, a man in the body of the hall rose, and
nominated Mr. Fay for chairman, [?ut] the question
himself, and declared Mr. Fay elected, who thereupon
took possession of the chair. Of course, the
Massachusetts legislature might at any time be
broken up by an armed mob with equal plausibility.
So plain is this inference, that the proposal for a
metropolitan police system, similar to that of New
York, is meeting with great favor in influential
quarters. The ground is taken that as Boston is
the seat of the Legislature and the metropolis of
the State, it is absurd to leave the enforcement of
State laws to the whims, prejudices, or fears of a
mere city official, be he Mayor, or Chief of Police,
but that the State authorities should control the
city police. Such a measure will no doubt touch
keenly the pride of Bostonians, who have heretofore
delighted in contrasting their city with New
York, --but the days are gone by when Boston ruled
Massachusetts.
At any rate, this riot will furnish a fruitful subject
for comment in our new Legislature. The Personal
Liberty Bill will not undergo much alteration
for the worse, you may be sure: 'if is is touched, it will now be to make it more stringent,' as a very conservative
Republican politician sad to me just now.
I have not seen in the papers what I heard from
an intimate personal friend of Governor Banks, that he was exceedingly indignant at the occurrences of
Monday morning, and was personally present among
the crowd at the evening meeting, prepared to take
the command of the military, if necessary.  Two
companies were under arms during a portion of the
night, if not the whole.
The timid tone of the Advertiser and the Journal,
the day after the outrage, elicited much contemptuous 
remark:  but the extravagance of the Courier
proved an admirable tonic to the Journal afterwards.
The Atlas and the Transcript were much more manly.
There is a strong desire felt for an indignation
meeting, among persons who had no share in the
original convention: and it will be held, unless the
reaction is so complete as to make it seem better to
treat the whole brutal business with contempt. The
Superintendent of the Temple, Mr. Hayes, is very
indignant against the timidity of the Mayor, in ordering
the hall to be cleared, and stands ready to let
it at any time, to any respectable parties, black or
white, and will call on the police to protect them in
the use of it.
 
to usurp the direction of a meeting called by others,
and to insult Mr. Frederick Douglass, than it was
for Isaiah Rynders to do precisely the same thing
at the old Tabernacle in this city, a few years ago.
The chief ally of Richard S. Fay, was JAMES 
MURRAY Howe, of Brookline. All the reports of
the riot at the Temple agree in making this Fay
and Howe the ringleaders of the rioters. Henceforth
let them be recognized and remembered as
such. But as the names of Fay and Howe are
borne also by gentlemen of respectability and character
in Massachusetts, these two rioters should be
carefully identified by their Christian names and
their places of residence. The Boston correspondent
of the Tribune adds quite a list of secondary
names; but as the reward of the rioters
may be too small for subdivision, the credit of the
affair should go in the first instance to Richard S.
Fey, of Lynn, and James Murray Howe, of Brookline.
With such competitors, Rynders must look
well to his standing with the South. The kidnapping
of John Thomas was hardly so illustrious a
deed, as the forcible ejection of Mr. Frederick
Douglass from a hall hired and paid for by his personal 
friends. When the 'Union Men of Boston'
undertake the violent suppression of free speech, 
the old Empire Club of this city must look well to
its laurels.--New York Independent
The Reign of Terror
It has heretofore been the fashion for the hotheaded
Southern desperadoes to monopolize all the 
honors which may arise from the employment of
brute force in lieu of argument, when an adversary
undertakes to exercise his constitutional rights, in
that benighted land of blood and crime,--but it appears
from recent developments in the city of Boston,
that this delectable privilege is to be no longer
exclusively confined to the chivalry of the slaveholding
States.
Preston S. Brooks stands no longer alone as an 
embodiment of ruffianism, for a worthy compeer has
been found in the person of Richard S. Fay a merchant
of Boston, whilom a Director of the B. & S. 
Glass Co., whose conduct as a prominent lead of a
gang of 'respectable' rowdies, who, on Monday
last, assailed and broke up a peacable meeting of
people assembled under a call issued for a gathering
of persons to consider the most feasible method to
abolish the 'sum of all villainies,' American slavery,
entitles  him to the condemnation of every one
who possesses a spark of true manliness or love of
justice. We do not remember to have read of a
more dastardly outrage--a more despicable attempt
to put down free discussion and establish the reign
of terror than this foray of Richard S. Fay and his
band of 'respectable' scoundrels. We trust that
petitions will be immediately circulated throughout
the Commonwealth, for the signatures of every lover
of Free Speech in Massachusetts, praying our Legislature
to pass a Metropolitan Police Law; so that
the citizens of Boston may be protected hereafter in
their right to assemble whenever and wherever they
please, to discuss any and every question they please
unmolested by 'respectable' or any other ruffians;
and also that the laws of the Commonwealth affixing
proper penalties for disturbances of the public
peace be rigorously enforced. If the city of Boston
is powerless to protect her citizens, let it be understood
that the State authorities, uninfluenced by the
greed of gain, and the pressure of monied power,
will attend to their Constitutional duties, in such
cases, and perhaps Mr. Richard S. Fay may learn a
lesson which will tend to allay his zeal in behalf of slavery, and make him hereafter a more peaceable
member of the community.--Sandwich Advocate.
FREEDON OF SPEECH VIOLATED IN BOSTON.
The telegraph brought news of the breaking up
of a meeting of John Brown sympathizers, who
had gathered in Boston to celebrate the anniversary
of his death. We are told that those who
were foremost in breaking up the meeting were of
'the highest respectability' --men of wealth and
standing. And many Northern journals countenance
their acts, and stigmatize the meeting as one
of 'dangerous fanatics.' But what of that?  What
if the movers in the meeting were Abolitionists
and Garrisonites? Have they not a right to freedom
of speech? And who is to be the arbiter?
who is to decide whether or not a man is to fanatical
to be allowed to hold his own views, and
promulgate them too, if he can influence others to
become his followers?  These things are done in
the South, and we all cry out against it as a wrong
and a tyranny; in how much do the motive and
the principle differ, when put into practice in the
North? Suppose a meeting was called in Cleveland,
of all whose sympathies were with the secessionsists
of the South, is there a decent Republican
journal that would advise or countenance any body 
of men, however 'respectable,' in breaking up that
meeting by force?  And if freedom of speech is to
be allowed to one, why not to all? Whether the


 


202
The Liberator.
NO UNION WITH SLAVEHOLDERS.
BOSTON, DECEMBER 21, 1860.
EXTRAORDINARY SCENES FOR A NEW 
ENGLAND SABBATH.
THE POLICE ON DUTY AT A PLACE OF WORSHIP
Wendell Phillips speaks at Music Hall on 'Mobs 
and Education; -- He is Mobbed in the Street, 
but protected by the Police Authorities.
On Sunday forenoon, the Twenty-Eighth Congregational 
Society (Theodore Parker's Fraternity) held 
their usual Sunday meeting in Music Hall.  It having 
been rumored for several days previous, that 
Mr. Phillips was likely to be mobbed and assaulted, a 
large detachment of police was in attendance at the 
hall at an early hour.  Before the services commenced,
large numbers of the police were stationed in two 
small rooms adjoining the platform.  Others were 
stationed in various parts of the hall and building.
Members of the detective police force were also 
present.  The audience was truly immense.
The regular religious exercises of the day were 
commenced in the usual manner.  Mr John R. Manley 
read the hymn commencing—
'O true reformers, not in vain
Your trust in human kind;
The good which bloodshed could not gain,
Your peaceful zeal shall find."
Mr. Phillips then read the following selections from 
Scripture:—
'Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine
[?????] thing?
[cres] kings of the earth set themselves, and the
[For ano] take counsel together against the Lord, and
[?]st his Annointed, saying,
[Me] at sitteth in the heavens shall laugh : the
Lord shall have them in derision.
Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and
vex them in his sore displeasure.
* * * * * *
And it came to pass on the morrow, that the 
rulers, and elders and scribes,
And Annas the high priest, and Caiaphas, and 
John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the 
kindred of the high priest, were gathered together at 
Jerusalem.
And when they had set them in the midst, they
asked, By what power or by what name have ye done 
this?
Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto 
them, Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel,
If we this day be examined of the good deed done
the impotent man, by what means he is made whole;
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of
Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth,
whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead,
even by him doth this man stand here before you
whole.
This is the stone which was set at nought of you 
builders, which is become the head of the corner.
Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is
none other name under heaven given among men,
whereby we must be saved.
Now, when they saw the boldness of Peter and 
John, and perceived that they were unlearned and 
ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge
of them, that they had been with Jesus.
And beholding the man which was healed standing 
with them, they could say nothing against it.
But when they had commanded them to go aside 
out of the council, they conferred among themselves,
Saying, What shall we do to these? for that indeed 
a notable miracle hath been done by them is manifest 
to all the that dwell in Jerusalem, and we cannot 
deny it.
But that it spread no further among the people, let 
us straitly threaten them, that they speak henceforth 
to no man in this name.
And they called them, and commanded them not 
to speak at all, nor teach in the name of Jesus.
But Peter and John answered and said unto them, 
Whether it be right in the sight of God to harken 
unto you more than unto God judge ye.'
The following prophetic hymn, written by the late 
Henry Ware, Jr. was next impressively read by Mr. 
Phillips, and sung by the choir:—
'Oppression shall not always reign;
There comes a brighter day,
When freedom, burst from every chain,
Shall have triumphant way.
Then right shall over might prevail,
And truth, like hero armed in mail.
[??????] of tyrant wrong assail,
[???] And hold eternal sway.
What foes shall bid the progress stay
Of truth's victorious car?
What arm arrest the growing day,
Or quench the solar star?
What reckless soul, through stout and strong,
Shall dare bring back the ancient wrong,
Oppression's guilty night prolong,
And Freedom's morning bar?'
ADDRESS OF MR. PHILLIPS.
I was present here last Sunday, and noticed that 
some of the friends of the speaker expressed their
sympathy with his sentiments, by applause. You will
the wonder and the sturdy of statesmen. It was only
another proof that governments are not made, they
grow. that the heart is the best logician, that character,
which is but cousin to instinct, is a better guide
than philosophy. Wordsworth said, of a similar awakening,--
'A few strong instincts, and a few plain rules,
Among the herdsmen of the Alps, have wrought
More for mankind, at this unhappy day,
Than all the pride of intellect and thought.'
That sunrise has colored the whole morning of our
history. It is the cardinal principal of our national
life, that God has given every man sense enough to
manage his own affairs. Out of that, by short process,
come universal suffrage and the eligibility of
every man to office. The majority rules, and law
rests on numbers, not on intellect or virtue. A sound
rule, and if not the only one consistent with freedom
and progress, at least, the one that best serves these.
But the harm is , that while theoretically holding
that no vote of the majority can authorize injustice,
practically, we consider public opinion the real test
of what is true and what it false; and hence, as a 
result, the fact which DeTocqueville has noticed,
that practically, our institutions protect, not the interests
of the whole community, but the interests of 
the majority.  Every man knows best how to manage
his own affairs. Simple statement: perfectly sound;
but we mix it up, somehow, with that other rule, that
every man is eligible to office, and then we hurry on
to the habit of considering every man competent for
every thing.  Does a man achieve success in some
particular point, we hail him a universal Crichton,
and endow him with a genius for all work. A mechanic
invents a new stitch in a carpet-web; straightway
he is named for Congress. Does a man edit a
respectable daily to bankruptcy, we put him on a
commission to choose for us water not fit to drink, or
let him carry a railroad half-way to ruin, by paying
dividends that were never earned. That militia Colonel
survived a Western brawl, call it a battle and a
[?]. and choose him President at once. This
man is a brilliant historian--send him Ambassador to
England. Another has argued ably an india-rubber
case--send him to fade out in the Senate. Does a
man fail utterly--a bankrupt poet or an office-seeker,--
he edits a newspaper. We lack, entirely, discrimination.
Because a man is entitled to draw upon us for
fifty dollars, we put a thousand to his credit. That
a man edits the Tribune so as to pay--no very high
order of talent--is no proof that he knows better
than other men who should be President of the 
United States. Bayard Taylor may be a genius and
a traveller, without the least trace of patriotism or
the least spark of a gentleman. A hundred years ago,
you must have served a apprenticeship of seven
years to make a shoe; now talk seven months on the
right side, you may be Governor of a State.
I said that, in spite of the heedlessness and good
nature of this mistake, the rule is that every man
should be eligible to office is the best rule you can
have. Our large measure of national success, in
spite of this heedlessness, shows how truly the Swede
spoke when he said, 'Quantula sapientia regitur mundus,'--
how little wit it takes to hold office! But,
though life be long and sunny, one fit of severe illness
is a great evil. It is quite true, that routine incapacity stumbles along very well at common times,
but there come hours when we need a pilot, and then
we suffer. Such an hour we have just passed through.
Certain men, who seem utterly ignorant of the
principle that only by letting each man speak exactly
what he sees fit, at the time he chooses, can the progress
of truth be secured, attempted to put down certain
other men, assembled to discuss the abolition of
slavery. I want to look at that event as illustrating
the ignorance of the actors, the ignorance
of the press, and the incapacity of the City
Government. And I take this subject specially because
it enables me to lay before you a correct account
of the course of events that morning, which
no journal of the city has bestirred itself to procure.
And I seize this, the first opportunity given me, to do
justice to both parties. the assailants and the assailed.
Look first at the press. With the exception of the
Atlas and Bee, no one of the daily papers has uttered
one word of hearty, fitting rebuke of the mob. They
have all serious objections to the mobs in the abstract, but
none at all to mobs in the street, none to this particular 
mob. This was not a case of virtuous men refusing
to obey a bad law, of whom it has been well said--
'they do not dispute the right of the majority to command,
they only appeal from the sovereignty of the
nation to the sovereignty of mankind.' But this was
a case of the right of free speech, a right which no
sane man in our age and land denies. Yet you have
still to read the first word of fitting, fearless, hearty
rebuke from the daily press of Boston, of a mob,
well dressed, met to crush free speech. I have
known Boston for thirty years. I have seen many
mobs. With one exception, I have yet to see the first
word of honest rebuke, from the daily press, of a well




The following prophetic hymn, written by the late 
Henry Ware, Jr. was next impressively read by Mr. 
Phillips, and sung by the choir:—
'Oppression shall not always reign;
There comes a brighter day,
When freedom, burst from every chain,
Shall have triumphant way.
Then right shall over might prevail,
And truth, like hero armed in mail.
[??????] of tyrant wrong assail,
[???] And hold eternal sway.
What foes shall bid the progress stay
Of truth's victorious car?
What arm arrest the growing day,
Or quench the solar star?
What reckless soul, through stout and strong,
Shall dare bring back the ancient wrong,
Oppression's guilty night prolong,
And Freedom's morning bar?'
ADDRESS OF MR. PHILLIPS.
I was present here last Sunday, and noticed that 
some of the friends of the speaker expressed their
sympathy with his sentiments, by applause. You will
allow me to request that to-day, at least, we preserve 
the usual decorum of this place, and this hour, and 
listen, - -even if you should like anything particularly,
—in silence.
About a fortnight ago, —on the third of this 
month,—certain men, supported by the Mayor, broke 
up an Anti-Slavery meeting.  I propose to consider 
that morning, as illustrating American education. 
Some of you may think that everybody talks, now, 
of slavery, free speech, and the negro.  That is true; 
and I am not certain that the longest liver of you all 
will ever see the day when it will not be so.  The negro,
for fifty, or thirty, years has been the basis of 
our commerce, the root of our politics, the pivot of 
our pulpit, the inspiration of almost all that is destined 
to live in our literature.  For a hundred years, at least, 
our history will probably be a record of the struggles 
of a proud and selfish race, to do justice to one that 
circumstances have thrown into its power.  The effects
of slavery will not vanish in one generation, or 
even in two.  It were a very slight evil, if they could 
be done away with more quickly.
Frederika Bremer said, the fate of the negro is the 
romance of our history.  It will probably be a long 
while, a very long while, before the needle of
our politics will float free from this disturbance, before 
trade will cease to feel the shock of this agitation,
before the pulpit can throw off vassalage to this 
prejudice and property, before letters take heart and 
dare to speak the truth.  A bitter prejudice must be 
soothed, a bloody code repealed, a huckstering Constitution 
amended or made way with, social and industrial 
life re-arranged, and ministers allowed to take 
the Bible, instead of the Stock List, as the basis of 
their sermons.  Meanwhile, you must expect that 
every shock and oscillation of the stormy element 
will stir up the dregs of society, lewd fellows of the 
baser sort, to deeds of anger and outrage; and meanwhile 
every honest and earnest man will speak, and 
every such man will be glad to hear, as occasion calls, 
of this the great duty that Providence has placed in 
our hands.
I bate no jot of trust that this noble trial of self-
government will succeed.  Heirs of a glorious past, 
we have manhood enough to be the benefactors of 
the future, and to hand down this hard-earned fabric,
freed from its greatest, perhaps its only, danger.
The p[?]anting of these States always amazed the casual 
observer, and has been a subject of the deepest interest 
to thoughtful men.  'The wildest theories of the 
human reason were reduced to practice by a community  
so humble that no statesman condescended to notice 
it, and a legislation without precedent was produced 
off-hand by the instincts of the people.'  The 
profoundest scholar of that day said, 'No man is 
wiser for his learning,' a sentiment which Edmund
Burke almost echoed; and it seems as if our comparatively 
unlettered fathers proved it.  They framed a 
government which, after two hundred years, is still

count of the course of events that morning, which
no journal of the city has bestirred itself to procure.
And I seize this, the first opportunity given me, to do
justice to both parties, the assailants and the assailed.
Look first at the press.  With the exception of the
Atlas and Bee, no one of the daily papers has uttered
one word of hearty, fitting rebuke of the mob.  They
have all serious objections to mobs in the abstract, but
none to all mobs in the street, none to this particular
mob,  This was not a case of virtuous men refusing
to obey a bad law, of whom it has been well said--
'they do not dispute the right of the majority to command,
they only appeal from the sovereignty of the
nation to the sovereignty of mankind.'  But this was
a case of the right of free speech, a right which no
sane man in our age and land denies.  Yet you have
still to read the first word of fitting, fearless, hearty
rebuke from the daily press of Boston, of a mob,
well dressed, met to crush free speech.  I have
known Boston for thirty years.  I have seen many
mobs.  With one exception, I have yet to see the first
word of honest rebuke from the daily  press, of a well
dressed mob met to crush honest men; and the exception
was the Boston Daily Advocate of Mr. Hallett,
in 1835 and 1837. (Let me say, in passing, that it is a 
singular result of our institutions, that we have never
had, in Boston, any but well dressed mobs.  Still,
they are dangerous precedents--well dressed men hire
hungry mechanics to mob free speech.  Beware! such
men may 'better the instruction.'  The 'flour mobs'
followed close on the pro-slavery mobs in New York.)
But such a press-- what a tool, what a despicable
tool!
The press will think me unjustifiable, perhaps, for
they affect to have discovered that there was no mob,
only the majority taking rightful possession of a public
meeting.  We will consider that bye-and-bye.
The press says the mob was composed of 'Boston
gentlemen.'  A very natural mistake for a press that
does not know a mob when it sees it.  But can we let
that description stand?  Broadcloth and fine linen
do not  make a gentleman?  Ill manners and ignorance
do not make one.  Earning a right to twelve
months in the House of Correction does not make one.
(Laughter.)  Resisting the laws, to help the Stock
Market, does not.  Running, before you are sent,
with volunteer haste, to do the dirty work of the base
men, does not make one.  And yet these are the only
colors by which men before unseen made themselves
visible, that day, on the surface of affairs.  One must
be born again in to the Kingdom of Mammon, before
he thinks such men gentleman. And as the ringleaders
were not born in Boston, let us save the dear
old town from the disgrace of having them called
Boston gentleman.  The gossip of the street says they
were excusable on account of pecuniary losses--they
were men out of employ.  The ringleader said he
came there to save his property.  Let us examine of
what material the mob was really made.  We have a
right to inquire,--it is important we should know,
who make up this Chamber of Inquisitors, this new
Star Chamber, that undertakes to tell us, as Archbishop
Laud and Charles Stuart told our fathers, what
creed we shall hold,  and what public meetings we
shall attend.  Who were they?
Weak sons of moderate fathers, dandled into effeminacy,
of course wholly unfit for business.  But overflowering
trade sometimes laps up such, as it does all
obtainable instruments.  Instead of fire engines, we 
take pails and dippers, in times of sore need.  But
such the first frost nips into idleness.  Narrow men,
ambitious of office, fancying that the inheritance of
a million entitles them to political advancement.
Bloated distillers, some rich, some without wit enough
to keep the money they stole.  Old families run to
seed in respectable dullness,--fruges consumere nati,--
born only to eat.  Trading families, in the third generation,
playing at stock-jobbing to lose in State
street what their fathers made by smuggling in India.
Sweep in a hundred young rogues, the grief of mothers
and the disgrace of their names, good as noughts to



December 21.                  The Liberator.                 203

Another Bell-Everett Mob.

It was known in the early part of last week that
Wendell Phillips was to address the Twenty-Eighth
Congregational Society of Boston on Sunday, Dec. 
16th, at the Music Hall.  Even before the subject of
his discourse was announced, rumor spread round
the city that the rioters who had broken up the John 
Brown meeting at the Tremont Temple a fortnight
before, and who had been foiled in their attempt to
disturb the adjourned meeting on the evening of that
day, would repeat their effort to put down free 
speech in Boston, even on Sunday, and even by attacking
the regular service of a religious meeting.
On Saturday, these rumors had gained such currency,
and were virtually so encouraged by the gross
delinquency of the daily press, (which, in almost
every case, alluded to the past and prospective outrages 
in question merely as items of news, without
either earnest vindication of the right of free speech,
or earnest reprobation of the right of free speech,
or earnest reprobation of the assaults upon it.) that
the proprietors of the Music Hall applied to the 
Mayor for the protection of their building, and the
rights of the Society which had hired it for religious
worship.  The acting Mayor, Alderman Clapp, - fortunately, 
Mayor Lincoln was absent from the city, -
made prompt and thorough arrangements to that effect,
ensuring their execution by his own presence on
the platform during the services on Sunday morning;
doing, in short, just what Mr. Lincoln ought to have
done at the Tremont Temple.
Not only were the 2750 seats of the Music Hall
occupied, but the spaces around the platform and on
the sides of the Hall were all filled with persons
standing, so that there must have been 3300 people
present.
The subject of Mr. Phillips's discourse was -
'Mobs, and Education.'  The selections from Scripture 
which he read, among the preliminary exercises,
were significant and appropriate; the first being David's 
psalm - 'Why do the heathen rage,' &c, - and 
the second, that passage from the Acts of the Apostles
which describes a combination of conservatives
against free speech in their time; ending, 'Whether
it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you,
more than unto God, judge ye.'
Before commencing his discourse, Mr. Phillips remarked
that, having been there on the previous Sunday,
he had noticed that the friends of the speaker
(Mr. Frederick Douglass) responded to some of his 
remarks by applause.  On this occasion, he begged
that his friends would observe the customary decorum
of the time and place, and would abstain from
applauding, even if they should hear something that
particularly pleased them.  It is important to note
this request, for two reasons.  The pro-slavery papers,
('religious' and other) have been accustomed
so wantonly to lie respecting the usages of Mr. Parker 
and his congregation, that many people suppose
the clapping of hands to be of frequent occurrence
there.  And those who wished to disturb the meeting
on this occasion might be supposed to use this 
false impression to explain away their own disorder,
especially since one of the Tremont Temple rioters
had the impudence to say, when a bystander remonstrated
against the outrageous noise he was making -
'We have a right to applaud.'
During the progress of this discourse, one of the 
most admirable that even Mr. Phillips ever delivered,
clamors and hisses from time to time interrupted the
speaker, his friends, meanwhile, keeping silence, as
he had requested, save when, by a low sh, they protested
against these unseemly interruptions.  The 
clamors evidently proceeded from hundreds of voices,
almost all in the rear of the Hall, and the extreme
parts of the upper balcony.  If other well-dressed
ruffians, as is likely enough, had intended to aid the 
tumult in portions of the Hall nearer to the speaker,
they were overawed by the great assembly, one of
the noblest that ever appeared there, of friends of
Mr. Phillips and of freedom of speech.  On two different
occasions, these rioters repeated their howls
whenever the speaker recommenced, after waiting for
silence, showing a purpose to stop his discourse by 
drowning his voice.  But the sounds soon died away,
and the laugh, that some of the disturbers once or 
twice attempted, sounded mournfully hollow and
factitious.
At the close of the discourse, the mob, seeing
that they were outnumbered in the Hall, arranged
themselves partly in Winter street and partly in the 
passage leading form it to the Music Hall, to attack
Mr. Phillips as he came out.  As soon as he appeared,
they raised the Bell-Everett cry, 'All up,' and
rushed towards him. His friends kept a firm circle
around him, and the police encircled and assisted
them; and they thus proceeded to his house, the
baffled mob yelling and cursing around them all the
way home.
A policeman, who was one of the party, told me
that two hundred of the police assisted in guarding
this friend of humanity from brutal assault, on his
way through Washington street on Sunday noon.

Freedom of Speech Vindicated.
Our readers will recollect that among those who 
manfully endeavored to vindicate the right of free
speech at the Tremont Temple meeting on the 3d inst.
(which was riotously broken up by Richard S. Fay,
J. Murray Howe, and their lawless supporters,)was
Rev. Dr. Eddy, Pastor of the Baptist Church in Harrison
Avenue in this city, and formerly Speaker of the 
Massachusetts House of Representatives.  On the 
Sunday following, (9th inst.,) he promptly came forward
in his pulpit to rebuke the riotous outbreak, and
to maintain the sacredness of free speech.  That portion
of his discourse which related to that subject will
be found below.  The time is coming when the disclaimers
contained in it, relating to John Brown and
the Abolitionists, will be deemed unjust and absurd.

When a great nation is with 'thirty days of cruel
war,' it becomes men to consider what they do, to
walk carefully and act discreetly.  With dissolution
staring us in the face to-day, on the verge of rupture
and bloodshed, it would be a crime in any man to
trifle with the elements which are now working around
us.  No man knows what is before us; for a time like 
this has never been seen in the history of our nation -
a moment so pregnant with great events has never
been witnessed, since the days of the Revolution.  It
is a time for calm, deliberate utterance, and for earnest
appeal to God.  Angry contention, harsh denunciation,
and mob violence were never more out of place,
and never possessed of more fatal power than now.
At such a time as this, it becomes every Christian
man to take his stand on the right, and planting himself
there, stand firmly and kindly at his post of
duty.  But it is not to national affairs that I wish to 
call your attention, not to a political question that I
wish to refer; for you will all bear me witness that
this pulpit has never yet, on any Sabbath day during
the present ministry, had political themes introduced 
into it.  But a great outrage has been committed
during the past week, not on a political party, but on
the moral sense of the Christian community:  the 
privileges of freemen have been assailed, and free
speech has been stricken down in the city of Boston -
the Athens of America.  The pulpit would not be 
true to itself, if it should be silent under such an outrage.
It would deserve all the taunts and reproaches
that infidels and fanatics cast upon it; it would be
worthy of the scathing rebukes, the bitter invective
of skeptic tongues and pens, if it did not demand for
all men the sacred right of speech; - for if the pulpit
does not plead for freedom of speech, and rebuke
every sin, it is as useless as a wooden box filled with
cobwebs.
In a country like ours, where all are sovereigns,
and where mutual forbearance must be constantly
exercised, any invasion of the right of speech should
be promptly and decidedly rebuked.  If one class in
the community say what another class should talk
about; if a mob attempts to restrict one sect or party 
in its utterances, the government is at an end, law is
abolished, and society dissolved.  Every man has a 
right to speak freely.  The Roman Catholic has the 
same right to present his views as the Protestant, and
should receive the same protection.  The pro-slavery
man has the same right to utter his sentiments as 
the anti-slavery man.  If the infidel wishes to celebrate
the birthday of Thomas Paine, he has the same 
right, under our laws, to do so, that you have to come
to church, and celebrate the birthday of the Redeemer.
If any company of men wish to commemorate
the birthday of Benedict Arnold, they should 
be allowed to make their speeches unmolested.  If
the followers of that poor, wronged, misguided fanatice,
John Brown, wish to commemorate his death-
day, they have the same right to do so that we have
to meet here this morning.  And if for a moment
we allow the idea that a mob can control this principle,
or say who shall speak and who shall not, society is 
dissolved.  You say that a Benedict Arnold meeting
or a John Brown meeting is a nuisance.  Well, there
are not a few who will say that an Orthodox church
is a nuisance, and ought to be abolished; that a Baptist
church is a nuisance, and should be abated.  One 
morning, in the year 1680, the members of the First
Baptist Church in this city went to the house of God,
and they found its doors nailed up, and a placard on
the wall forbidding any person to enter.  A Baptist
church was a nuisance to be abated.  The Baptists of
Boston at that time fought out the battle of free
speech, and gained a victory, and they should be the
last set of men on earth to trample down the freeman's
sacred right.
Free speech cost too much to be surrendered without
a struggle.  As a denomination, we have ever 
been the advocates of free discussion.  It has been
our mission to fight out this question.  It was for
free speech that Roger Williams fled from his comfortable
home in Salem, and in mid-winter tracked
his way to Providence - then a wilderness - to build
up, among savages, a commonwealth where speech
should be free.  For this great right, President Dun-

in the nation.  Most of those men who usually go to
such meetings had wisely resolved to stay away, and
the papers had agreed to take no notice of the proceedings.
Now, as to the abstract right of those 
people to have that meeting, there can be no question
whatever.  Deny that right, and our landmarks are
gone at once.  Had the meeting been held peaceably,
it would have been attended by few persons, and at
night would have been committed to oblivion.  But
what was done?  One or two hundred men, led by 
prominent merchants, were at Tremont Temple an
hour before the time to commence, and when those
who had engaged the hall appeared to exercise their
just rights, they were met with storms of abuse, driven
or dragged from the platform, and the meeting controlled
by a mob of Boston gentlemen!  This city
has never seen a spectacle so disgraceful as that, since
William Lloyd Garrison was led through these streets
with a rope round his body, and freedom in his 
person received a wound which has yet scarcely
healed.  No anti-slavery man was allowed to speak.
Insults were heaped upon the humble persons who 
had called the meeting, and a disgraceful riot raged
from ten o'clock until one.  The Chief of Police
came with a posse of men, and could have restored
order in a few minutes.  The officers under his were 
ready and anxious to do their work; but the insufficiency 
of the Chief - who is evidently no more fir for
his position than a child, and who only made a bad
matter worse - prevented the restoration of order, or
the maintenance of peace.  And the Mayor, it is 
said, sent word from his cozy room in the City Hall
that he could not protect the meeting, in the just
exercise of its rights.  He had police enough to keep
a million people in order when the Prince of Wales
was here; but not enough to check a mob of a hundred
Boston gentlemen.  And out the ??
gone, North, South, East and West - that a mob has
broken up an anti-slavery meeting in Boston.  O, 
what disgrace!  O, what shame! It is to be told at
Five Points in New York; it is to be told in the 
streets of Charleston; it is to be repeated in distant
Texas - that free speech has been trampled under
foot in the New England metropolis.  What comfort
it will give to the mobbers and the lynchers in
the South, where some of you have creditors, but
where none of you dare go to collect your bills!
They will feel glad that they have some in the North
ready to do their work - infamous work it is, quashing
discussion, trampling on free speech.  When men
inquire who the rioters were - whether they came
from North Street or Commercial Street, the answer
will be - 'No, they were Boston gentlemen'! O 
shame! shame!!  These men have blotted the fair
name of Boston, put a stain on the history of the 
city which all the waters of Massachusetts bay cannot
wash off.  How it will sound in the West, in the 
South, in England!  How the check of the American
abroad will tinge with shame, when he reads it - a
peaceable meeting broken up in Boston by a mob!  I
saw church members!  I saw a grey-haired deacon
of a Christian church!  The Sunday before, he carried
the body and blood of Christ to the disciples.
Ah, when he was bearing about that cup, he was
thinking of Monday, of how loudly he would yell - 
Crucify him! crucify him!!  And there, too, was a 
man for whom twenty thousand people, voted to put
him in the highest office of the Commonwealth.  Of 
course, as they were there, they are willing that we
should say so.
Well, then, this mob of gentlemen passed some
resolutions - the thing you see was premeditated.
The resolutions were all prepared, and one of them 
read as follows: -
4.  That the people of this city have submitted too
long in allowing irresponsible persons and political
demagogues of every description to hold public meetings
to disturb the public peace and misrepresent us
abroad; they have become a nuisance, which, in self-
defense, we are determined shall henceforward be
summarily abated.
What does that mean?  Surely, that all persons
who print or in public speeches utter language unpalatable
to the 'mob of gentlemen,' shall be disposed
of, the meeting broken up, the rights of the 
speakers trampled under foot, and the city disgraced
by mob violence.  I say here, and now, that Francis
II. of Naples, of Francis Joseph of Austria, never
issued an edict more diabolical than that.  A mob of
Boston gentlemen resolve that free speech shall be no 
longer tolerated in the metropolis of New England!
And what interpretation does the Boston Courier put
upon it?  On Tuesday morning, it said this: - 
'No such assembly for that or any similar purpose 
is likely to be held in any conspicuous place in 
Boston again.  Nor do we believe that our people will
listen hereafter, as they have hitherto done, to the 
fierce tirades of Phillips and his crew, to the empty
platitudes of Sumner, or the insolent bravado of Wilson.'
It is, then, resolved by a mob in Boston, that the 
most eloquent of all the 'fanatics' of our times, and
even our honorable Senators in Congress, shall no

New Publications.

Mary and Florence; or , Grave and Gay.  From the 
Tenth London Edition.  pp. 265.
Mary and Florence at Sixteen.  From the Fifth
London Edition, with Illustrations.  pp. 323.
Leila; or, The Island.  pp. 232.
Leila in England.  A Continuation of Leila; or, 
The Island.  pp. 312.
Leila at Home.  A Continuation of Leila in England.
pp. 283.  Boston:  Published by Crosby, 
Nichols, Lee & Co.  1861.

These five volumes, beautifully illustrated, are
printed and bound in uniform style.  They are by 
Ann Fraser Tytler, and have attained a wide circulation
in England, and will doubtless find many
purchasers here.  The authoress evinces excellent
conversational and descriptive talent, and keeps up
an unbroken interest from the beginning to the end
of each volume.  The incidents are numerous, and
the moral lessons inculcated excellent; but much of
the theological teaching is distasteful to us, though
it will prove highly acceptable to the orthodoxy of
the age.  In the preface to Mary and Florence, the
writer says it has often been remarked with regret by
her, 'that in books written for the purpose of conveying
religious instruction to children, the scheme of
Redemption and the doctrine of the Atonement have
been generally explained in language too vague and
obscure to meet the comprehension of a child' - and
she therefore offers this little story as 'a very feeble
attempt, when touching on these most solemn points,
to simplify to the youthful reader what has been so
much more ably done by others, in works addressed
to those of maturer years.'  We agree with her that
it is 'a very feeble attempt' - throwing, as it does, no
light upon the subject, and dealing in pious commonplaces, 
to which no definite meaning can be attached.
There is no end to the religious cant in Christendom
about these doctrines; and, as usually presented, they
are snares rather than helps to a true life.  At least,
such is our belief; and to this extent we are willing
to be considered heretical.  Aside from this incidental
portion of these volumes, they will be found very
pleasant and entertaining reading for suitable gifts
for the season will find every variety at the establishment
of Crosby, Nichols, Lee & Co.

The Land of the Sun; or, What Kate and Willie
Saw There.  By Cornelia H. Jenks.  Boston:
Crosby, Nichols, Lee & Co.  1861.
This is a real child's book, with a score of pictures,
narrating in a simple and agreeable manner the incidents
of a voyage to Cuba, and giving lively descriptions 
of scenery, cities, towns, plantations, public
buildings, festivals, manners and customs, &c.  It will
make a very acceptable Christmas or New Year's 
present.  Although the most prominent thing to be
seen in Cuba, especially in connection with the plantations, 
is slavery in all its deformity, the writer makes 
no allusion whatever to the system.  Could any but
an American woman make such an omission?  Does
it imply insensibility of her part, or the fear of giving
offence, and thus curtailing the sale of the work?

Optimism the Lesson of Ages.  A Compendium of
Democratic Theology, designed to illustrate Necessities
whereby all things are as they are, and to 
reconcile the Discontents of Men with the perfect
Love and Power of ever-present God.  Written by
Benjamin Blood.  Boston:  Published by Bela 
Marsh, 14 Bromfield Street.
A cursory perusal of this neatly printed volume of
132 pages satisfies us of its original strength, manly
directness, and power of thought and expression.  But
it instantly challenges a slow and thoughtful examination 
by all thinkers, and we must take time to read
it more carefully.  It treats upon Democratic and 
Autocratic Theology; the Authority of Reason; the
Motives of Theorists; the Unity of God; the Will
and Free Agency; Social Relations; Our Evils -
&c., &c.  We have no acquaintance with the author,
but his blood appears to be vital, and its circulation
vigorous.  It is commended by Ralph Waldo Emerson
as 'a work to be prized by the most thoughtful
people;' and by Wendell Phillips - justly styled as
'unexceptionable in matters of taste, if not of politice,
- a chivalrous, scholarly, find undoubted gentleman,'
- as 'terse, fresh, original, (as far as any thing
may be now-a-days,) mainly true, and, as a whole,
masterly.'  Read, and see if it be not so.

Glenelvan; or, The Morning Draweth Nigh.  By
Annie Maria Minster.  New York; A. B. Burdick,
Publisher, 145 Nassau Street.  1861.
This volume is 'most affectionately dedicated to
Samuel Longfellow, the friend of genius, the inspired
thinker, the saint in the man.'  It is well written,
and, aside from its literary merits, deserves special
commendation for its humane and reformatory spirit,

Excitement in Brooklyn, N. Y. - The
Spirit of Violence Spreading.

Correspondence of the Boston Traveller.

New York, December 17, 1860.

We - and when I say we, I mean the respectable
and civilized members of this community - are combatting
here, as you are in Boston, the enemies of
Free Speech.  The Herald advocates in the most insidious
manner the uprising of discharged workmen,
their mobbing of obnoxious political leaders, and the 
interruption of the services at places of public worship.
We had a few faint attempts, yesterday, on the part
of some of our city roughs in that line, which, however, 
did not prove successful.  Henry Ward Beecher,
who seems particularly offensive to the Herald, was
informed on Saturday that a mob would attack his 
church on the Sabbath, and gut his house at night.
He paid no particular attention to the matter, but the 
Trustees of Plymouth Church felt it to be their duty
to have their pastor and church protected.  So they
sent for a couple of hundred Metropolitan policemen,
who at night were gathered at the Lecture Room and
in the Church.  The jam of people was fairly terrific,
and all expected a row.
Nothing, however, occurred to mar the services,
with the exception of the crashing of one window,
caused by the throwing of a stone.  When the crash
came, the audience were a good deal startled, and 
manifested signs of great uneasiness, but Mr. Beecher
quietly ignored the interruption, and went on to the 
end.
'Be patient with all men' was the text; and the 
sermon will cause a sensation when it is published.
The latter part of it was particularly fine, and referred
more specifically to the troubles of the present day.
After church, a great crowd accompanied Mrs.
Beecher to his residence, from the steps of which he
made a characteristic address, which, as it is short
and to the point, I enclose: -
'My friends, I thank you for this quiet manifestation
of your devotion to the cause of free speech, and 
of your love for me.  I do not think there was any
occasion for alarm, nor do I imagine that I really
needed any protection.  It, however, there had been 
trouble, and I had fallen, it would be the very best 
thing that could happen for the cause in which I am
working - but nothing will happen to me or my family
or my house - I have not lived in this city thirteen
years for nothing.  (Voice - "That's so.")
You all know full well that though laboring earnestly, 
I labor in love.  (We won't give you up -
we'll stand by you," &c.)  I have no doubt of it.
You always have done so, and I trust we shall always
yet be found working together in the cause of freedom
- the cause of freedom for all men, of all opinions
-and, above all, for free speech and the cause of
God.  Good night!'
Hearty 'Good nights,' 'You're all right,' and an 
occasional 'God bless you,' from the crowd, saluted 
Mr. Beecher's retreating form, and ended the 'mobbing 
of Plymouth Church,' and the 'lynching of its 
pastor.'
In some remarks upon his course, Mr. Beecher
said: -
'Some people ask me - Why don't you go down 
South, and say these things?  Why don't you go to
Charleston?  Because I prefer that Charleston should
come to me.  Why don't you go to Mobile, and preach
these doctrines?  Because I have no disposition to run
into danger.  Because they would hang me.  I have 
observed that pulpits are not very long-lived in Mobile
that preach such things.  I have no desire to be
killed.  Not that I fear death - I do not fear it.  But
I do love to work, and I have no mind to have my
work cut short if I can help it.
I do not mean to run my head into the halter that
is dangling there, because they want to hang me.  I 
have no desire to die vertically.  (Laughter.)  My
Master has commanded me, saying - "If they persecute 
you in one city, flee to another."  And a man is
a fool who would not get out of a certain danger if
he could, and escape to where he could fight again.
(Laughter.)  So much for going down South - I mean
to stay in Brooklyn, and preach - yes, and preach just 
what we think.'

Unpaid Pledges in aid of the Massachusetts A. S. 
Society, made January last, or previously, are now
payable, and it is hereby requested that the same may
be paid at the earliest practicable day.  Donations
in behalf of the Anti-Slavery cause will be faithfully
consecrated to the redemption of the millions of
'the suffering and the dumb' of our land.  All payments 
should be made to Edmund Jackson, Treasurer, 
or E. H. Heywood, General Agent pro tem., 221
Washington street.

'Woman's Rights Under The Law.'
Mrs. Dall's Lectures, 16 Summer Street.
Mrs. Dall will deliver a course of Lectures on
three successive Wednesday afternoons, at the Room
of the Young Men's Christian Union, No. 16 Summer 
street, to commence
Wednesday, Jan. 9th, at 3 o'clock, P. M.
Jan. 9. French and English Law.
Oriental basis for the Law's estimate of woman.
Common proverbs.  Roman Law not pertinent.  The
estimate of the French Law shown in the rights of 
property, marriage and franchise.  Women in the 
public employ never promoted.  The estimate of the 
Law regulates the price of Labor.  Divorce for hopeless
insanity not allowed.  Results.  Anecdote of
a London Court Room.  Sir Charles Morgan's Aunt,
and her opinion of the Law.
Jan. 16.  The English Common Law - continued.
Equity.  The Law's estimate of a woman's truthfulness.
Divorce by Act of Parliament.  The Hon.
Mrs. Norton.  Hungarian Law contrasted with the
English.  Practical immorality of the Law, which
makes virtue in the wife depend on vigilance in the 

New Series of Tracts.
Published by the 
American Anti-Slavery Society
and to be obtained at the 
Anti-Slavery Offices, 5 Beekman Street, New York;
107 Fifth Street, Philadelphia; 15 Steuben
Street, Albany; and 221
Washington Street, Boston.

No. 1. Correspondence between Lydia Maria Child
and Governor Wise and Mrs. Mason, of Virginia.
pp. 28. 5 cents.
No. 2. Victor Hugo on American Slavery, with letters
of other distinguished individuals, vis., De
Tocqueville, Mazzini, Humboldt, Lafayette, &c.
pp 24. 5 cents.
No. 3. An Account of some of the Principal Slave Insurrections
during the last two Centuries.  By
Joshua Coffin.  pp. 36. 5 cents.
No. 4. The New Reign of Terror in the Slaveholding
States, for 1859-60.  pp. 144. 10 cents.
No. 5 Daniel O'Connell on American Slavery; with
other Irish Testimonies.  pp. 48. 5 cents.
No. 6. The Right Way the Safe Way, proved by
Emancipation in the West Indies and elsewhere.
By L. Maria Child.  pp. 95. 10 cts.
No. 7. Testimonies of Capt. John Brown at Harper's
Ferry, with his Address to the Court.  pp. 16.
3 cents.
No. 8. The Philosophy of the Abolition Movement.
By Wendell Phillips.  pp. 47. 5 cents.
No. 9. The Duty of Disobedience to the Fugitive Slave
Act: An Appeal to the Legislature of Massachusetts.
By L. Maria Child.  pp. 36.  5 cents.
No. 10.  The Infidelity of Abolitionism.  By Wm. Lloyd
Garrison.  pp. 12.  3 cents.
No. 11.  Speech of John Hossack, convicted of a Violation
of the Fugitive Slave Act at Chicago, Ill.
pp. 12.  3 cents.
No. 12.  The Patriarchal Institution, as described by 
Members of its Own Family.  Compiled by
Lydia Maria Child.  pp. 55. 5 cents.
No. 13. No Slave-Hunting in the Old Bay State:  An
Appeal to the People and Legislature of Massachusetts.
pp. 24. 5 cents.
A deduction of fifty per cent. from the above



ing on this occasion might be supposed to use this 
false impression to explain away their own disorder,
especially since one of the Tremont Temple rioters
had the impudence to say, when a bystander remonstrated
against the outrageous noise he was making -
'We have a right to applaud.'
During the progress of this discourse, one of the 
most admirable that even Mr. Phillips ever delivered,
clamors and hisses from time to time interrupted the
speaker, his friends, meanwhile, keeping silence, as
he had requested, save when, by a low sh, they protested
against these unseemly interruptions.  The 
clamors evidently proceeded from hundreds of voices,
almost all in the rear of the Hall, and the extreme
parts of the upper balcony.  If other well-dressed
ruffians, as is likely enough, had intended to aid the 
tumult in portions of the Hall nearer to the speaker,
they were overawed by the great assembly, one of
the noblest that ever appeared there, of friends of
Mr. Phillips and of freedom of speech.  On two different
occasions, these rioters repeated their howls
whenever the speaker recommenced, after waiting for
silence, showing a purpose to stop his discourse by 
drowning his voice.  But the sounds soon died away,
and the laugh, that some of the disturbers once or 
twice attempted, sounded mournfully hollow and
factitious.
At the close of the discourse, the mob, seeing
that they were outnumbered in the Hall, arranged
themselves partly in Winter street and partly in the 
passage leading form it to the Music Hall, to attack
Mr. Phillips as he came out.  As soon as he appeared,
they raised the Bell-Everett cry, 'All up,' and
rushed towards him. His friends kept a firm circle
around him, and the police encircled and assisted
them; and they thus proceeded to his house, the
baffled mob yelling and cursing around them all the
way home.
A policeman, who was one of the party, told me
that two hundred of the police assisted in guarding
this friend of humanity from brutal assault, on his
way through Washington street on Sunday noon.
Wishing to get his opinion, I asked - Was it necessary 
to have so many?  And he answered - 'Without 
them, he never would have got home alive!
'They would have trampled him down in the street!'
I asked a 'reporter,' who had seen the whole
transaction-' Were there any of the roughs there? 
He answered - 'No, they were merchants' clerks';
adding, by way of explanation - 'They have to do it!
It's their living!'  The brutal ferocity of this mob
of well-dressed young men, like that of its predecessor
in the Tremont Temple, was incited and directed
by the cotton interest.
Such is another of the spasmodic efforts of the evil
spirit of slavery.  When its casting out is seen to be
inevitable, it tears and rends the patient.  When
Satan comes down, 'in great wrath,' it is 'because he
knoweth that he hath but a short time.' - C. K. W. 

No Slave-Hunting in Massachusetts.
The following petition is now in the hands of reliable 
friends of freedom, in all parts of the Commonwealth,
for immediate circulation.  It is precisely
the same which, for the two preceding years,
has been signed by thousands of the most virtuous
and humane portion of the people, and which ought
to be subscribed by every man and woman in Massachusetts.
Those to whom it has been sent are earnestly
urged to be up and doing, for the time is short
between the present and the period for the assembling 
of the Legislature.  Let every family, and every person, 
be tested by its presentation; let it be (as it will)
a revelation of character and of purpose; and let the 
world know how many there are among us who 'remember
those in bonds as bound with them,' and are 
therefore for protecting the fugitive, or, on the other
hand, how many are still for allowing slave-hunters
to seize their prey with impunity on the Puritan and
Revolutionary soil of the old Bay State, and to act as 
heir accomplices in kidnapping.

To the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives
of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts:
The undersigned, citizens of
Massachusetts, respectfully ask you to put an end to 
slave-hunting in Massachusetts, by enacting
that no person, who has been held as a Slave, shall
be delivered up, by any officer or court, State or Federal,
within this Commonwealth, to any one claiming
him on the ground that he owes 'service or labor'
to such claimant, by the laws of one of the Slave
States of this Union.

We have on hand at least fifty columns of important 
matter, pertaining to the Southern seccession
movement, and the state of the country generally, -
and not less than a score of communications on file, -
but we are constantly driven to the closest quarters
for lack of space.  Correspondents must exercise patience,
especially when they see that we habitually 
occupy less room for their greater accommodation.

?? attempts to restrict one sect or party 
in its utterances, the government is at an end, law is
abolished, and society dissolved.  Every man has a 
right to speak freely.  The Roman Catholic has the 
same right to present his views as the Protestant, and
should receive the same protection.  The pro-slavery
man has the same right to utter his sentiments as 
the anti-slavery man.  If the infidel wishes to celebrate
the birthday of Thomas Paine, he has the same 
right, under our laws, to do so, that you have to come
to church, and celebrate the birthday of the Redeemer.
If any company of men wish to commemorate
the birthday of Benedict Arnold, they should 
be allowed to make their speeches unmolested.  If
the followers of that poor, wronged, misguided fanatice,
John Brown, wish to commemorate his death-
day, they have the same right to do so that we have
to meet here this morning.  And if for a moment
we allow the idea that a mob can control this principle,
or say who shall speak and who shall not, society is 
dissolved.  You say that a Benedict Arnold meeting
or a John Brown meeting is a nuisance.  Well, there
are not a few who will say that an Orthodox church
is a nuisance, and ought to be abolished; that a Baptist
church is a nuisance, and should be abated.  One 
morning, in the year 1680, the members of the First
Baptist Church in this city went to the house of God,
and they found its doors nailed up, and a placard on
the wall forbidding any person to enter.  A Baptist
church was a nuisance to be abated.  The Baptists of
Boston at that time fought out the battle of free
speech, and gained a victory, and they should be the
last set of men on earth to trample down the freeman's
sacred right.
Free speech cost too much to be surrendered without
a struggle.  As a denomination, we have ever 
been the advocates of free discussion.  It has been
our mission to fight out this question.  It was for
free speech that Roger Williams fled from his comfortable
home in Salem, and in mid-winter tracked
his way to Providence - then a wilderness - to build
up, among savages, a commonwealth where speech
should be free.  For this great right, President Dunster
gave up his presidency of Harvard College,
choosing to leave the station of so much honor,
rather than stifle the truthful utterances of his lips.
For free speech, Obediah Holmes was beaten until
his breath was almost exhausted, and he was taken
down from the whipping-post with the flesh hanging
in gory welts.  For free speech, our fathers suffered
proscription, privation and death.  To purchase this
right, they gave up all.  No principle was dearer to 
the men of the Revolution.  And in the memorable
struggles for independence, in the conflicts with tyranny
in England, in all the contests for Italian independence 
and unity, free speech never has been lost 
sight of, never has been forgotten.  The price of this 
freedom has been paid in agonies and blood.
It is also worth too much to us to be surrendered
without a struggle.  The pride of New England has
long been, its freedom of speech.  When in the 
South free discussion has been crushed out, we have
said to our Southern friends. 'Massachusetts is a 
place where all may speak.'  Faneuil Hall, Music 
Hall and Tremont Temple, are open alike to Senator
Toombs, Mr. Yancey, or Jefferson Davis.  We have 
said to men of all calls, 'We will protect you in free
speech.'  Nothing has added more to the glory of 
New England than this.  If men did not wish to 
hear this or that doctrine discussed, they remained at
home, and toleration of all opinions has been allowed.
And if for a moment we yield the right of speech,
where are we?  The mob breaks up a meeting of one 
kind in Tremont Temple to-day: to-morrow, it breaks
up a meeting of another kind.  By-and-by, this same
mob will turn upon the pulpit and say, 'you must be
silent.'  If we preach on slavery, the mob will cry, 
'stop.'  If we preach on intemperance, the mob will
forbid it; and every minister will be obliged to ask a
mob what he shall say in the pulpit.  You see at
once that there will be no safety anywhere, if the 
principle of free speech is given up; and it is the
duty of every man to rally to its support.  When a 
mob strikes down the right of the humblest citizen of
this Commonwealth, it strikes down you and me, and
all of us.  The only principle we can establish is 
toleration of all opinions.  Other men have the same 
right to express their views as we have ours.  They
have the same right to discuss our principles as we
have theirs.  The moment free speech is given up, we
are at the mercy of a mob.
Now let us look at a few facts.  A few days ago, a 
public meeting was called in this city, to be held on
the anniversary of the death of unfortunate John
Brown.  The call for the meeting, which was published
in all the papers for a week, stated expressly
that the object of the gathering was not to eulogize
John Brown, but to consider the great question of
our age, 'How can American Slavery be Abolished?'
Among those announced to speak were clergymen of
four or five different persuasions.  It was deemed unfortunate
by many that the meeting should be called 
at this time, in the midst of unparalleled excitement
  
And such a mob!  I saw in it men of wealth! I
saw church members!  I saw a grey-haired deacon
of a Christian church!  The Sunday before, he carried
the body and blood of Christ to the disciples.
Ah, when he was bearing about that cup, he was
thinking of Monday, of how loudly he would yell - 
Crucify him! crucify him!!  And there, too, was a 
man for whom twenty thousand people, voted to put
him in the highest office of the Commonwealth.  Of 
course, as they were there, they are willing that we
should say so.
Well, then, this mob of gentlemen passed some
resolutions - the thing you see was premeditated.
The resolutions were all prepared, and one of them 
read as follows: -
4.  That the people of this city have submitted too
long in allowing irresponsible persons and political
demagogues of every description to hold public meetings
to disturb the public peace and misrepresent us
abroad; they have become a nuisance, which, in self-
defense, we are determined shall henceforward be
summarily abated.
What does that mean?  Surely, that all persons
who print or in public speeches utter language unpalatable
to the 'mob of gentlemen,' shall be disposed
of, the meeting broken up, the rights of the 
speakers trampled under foot, and the city disgraced
by mob violence.  I say here, and now, that Francis
II. of Naples, of Francis Joseph of Austria, never
issued an edict more diabolical than that.  A mob of
Boston gentlemen resolve that free speech shall be no 
longer tolerated in the metropolis of New England!
And what interpretation does the Boston Courier put
upon it?  On Tuesday morning, it said this: - 
'No such assembly for that or any similar purpose 
is likely to be held in any conspicuous place in 
Boston again.  Nor do we believe that our people will
listen hereafter, as they have hitherto done, to the 
fierce tirades of Phillips and his crew, to the empty
platitudes of Sumner, or the insolent bravado of Wilson.'
It is, then, resolved by a mob in Boston, that the 
most eloquent of all the 'fanatics' of our times, and
even our honorable Senators in Congress, shall no
more be heard in this city - that free speech shall be 
reserved for Yancy and Toombs when they come, but 
denied to Bostonians!
On what times have we fallen? and whither are we
drifting?  Do men who have grown rich on the proceeds 
of slave labor, who have been fattening on the 
blood of the poor creatures who toil in bondage, think
that they can stop free speech in Boston?  Do they
think they can prevent the pulpit from telling the  
world that slavery is an accursed thing?  Do they
think they can stop the lips of the advocates of reform?
The thing is a monstrous impossibility.  I tell
you, that that question will be discussed in that same
hall, by lips that no insult can silence.
the meeting to which I have referred as being held
at the Temple would have had few sympathizers, if
let alone, but a mobbed meeting, a persecuted band
will find a multitude of friends.  With the men who 
had control of that assembly, we as Christians have 
little in common.  With the anti-church, anti-Union
views of Messrs. Garrison and Phillips, we can have
no sympathy.  With those who glorify John Brown, 
we have no part or lot.  With those who at this time
would inflame and agitate without end or aim, we 
must not join.  But when men are mobbed, we are a 
libel on manhood if we do not speak for freedom of
speech.  That is too sacred a thing to be trampled 
down, even when the majority (and the majority is
often nothing but a tyrant,) decide that it is abused 
and perverted to vile or wicked purposes.  I have no
sympathy with disunion, or unjust aggressions upon
North or South, but I have sympathy with persecuted
people; and if ever may heart fails to go out towards 
the oppressed, I will disown it as a worthless
heart, a false heart.
But perhaps some one says that the subject of slavery 
is so terribly exciting, that it must not be discussed; 
that to prevent the magazine from exploding,
free speech must be trampled under foot.  Strange
argument in an age of reason!  Suppose a man has a 
store house which he stocks with powder, and then 
in great alarm runs up and down the city, saying to 
the people, 'You must put all your fires out, lest the 
sparks should ignite my powder; the foundries must
stop, the steam mills must suspend, the fires must be
all put out.'  What would you say to him?  Why,
of course, you would say, 'Sir, you must remove your 
powder; our fires shall burn.'
So, if you have a curse that will not stand free discussion, 
that will not bear free speech, we say to you,
'Move your curse! Take your magazine of powder 
out of the way; the sparks of thought shall not be 
quenched.'  You may be sure that a cause which will 
not allow of free speech is very weak, and very bad.
Truth has nothing to fear form freedom of utterance -
nothing to fear.  It is error - black,  deformed, misshapen 
error - that howls when free speech is enthroned; 
and if the time ever comes in this land 
when freedom of utterance is denied, then the world
will gaze upon a continent of darkness.

**********************

New Publications.

Mary and Florence; or , Grave and Gay.  From the 
Tenth London Edition.  pp. 265.
Mary and Florence at Sixteen.  From the Fifth
London Edition, with Illustrations.  pp. 323.
Leila; or, The Island.  pp. 232.
Leila in England.  A Continuation of Leila; or, 
The Island.  pp. 312.
Leila at Home.  A Continuation of Leila in England.
pp. 283.  Boston:  Published by Crosby, 
Nichols, Lee & Co.  1861.

These five volumes, beautifully illustrated, are
printed and bound in uniform style.  They are by 
Ann Fraser Tytler, and have attained a wide circulation
in England, and will doubtless find many
purchasers here.  The authoress evinces excellent
conversational and descriptive talent, and keeps up
an unbroken interest from the beginning to the end
of each volume.  The incidents are numerous, and
the moral lessons inculcated excellent; but much of
the theological teaching is distasteful to us, though
it will prove highly acceptable to the orthodoxy of
the age.  In the preface to Mary and Florence, the
writer says it has often been remarked with regret by
her, 'that in books written for the purpose of conveying
religious instruction to children, the scheme of
Redemption and the doctrine of the Atonement have
been generally explained in language too vague and
obscure to meet the comprehension of a child' - and
she therefore offers this little story as 'a very feeble
attempt, when touching on these most solemn points,
to simplify to the youthful reader what has been so
much more ably done by others, in works addressed
to those of maturer years.'  We agree with her that
it is 'a very feeble attempt' - throwing, as it does, no
light upon the subject, and dealing in pious commonplaces, 
to which no definite meaning can be attached.
There is no end to the religious cant in Christendom
about these doctrines; and, as usually presented, they
are snares rather than helps to a true life.  At least,
such is our belief; and to this extent we are willing
to be considered heretical.  Aside from this incidental
portion of these volumes, they will be found very
pleasant and entertaining reading for suitable gifts
for the season will find every variety at the establishment
of Crosby, Nichols, Lee & Co.

The Land of the Sun; or, What Kate and Willie
Saw There.  By Cornelia H. Jenks.  Boston:
Crosby, Nichols, Lee & Co.  1861.
This is a real child's book, with a score of pictures,
narrating in a simple and agreeable manner the incidents
of a voyage to Cuba, and giving lively descriptions 
of scenery, cities, towns, plantations, public
buildings, festivals, manners and customs, &c.  It will
make a very acceptable Christmas or New Year's 
present.  Although the most prominent thing to be
seen in Cuba, especially in connection with the plantations, 
is slavery in all its deformity, the writer makes 
no allusion whatever to the system.  Could any but
an American woman make such an omission?  Does
it imply insensibility of her part, or the fear of giving
offence, and thus curtailing the sale of the work?

Optimism the Lesson of Ages.  A Compendium of
Democratic Theology, designed to illustrate Necessities
whereby all things are as they are, and to 
reconcile the Discontents of Men with the perfect
Love and Power of ever-present God.  Written by
Benjamin Blood.  Boston:  Published by Bela 
Marsh, 14 Bromfield Street.
A cursory perusal of this neatly printed volume of
132 pages satisfies us of its original strength, manly
directness, and power of thought and expression.  But
it instantly challenges a slow and thoughtful examination 
by all thinkers, and we must take time to read
it more carefully.  It treats upon Democratic and 
Autocratic Theology; the Authority of Reason; the
Motives of Theorists; the Unity of God; the Will
and Free Agency; Social Relations; Our Evils -
&c., &c.  We have no acquaintance with the author,
but his blood appears to be vital, and its circulation
vigorous.  It is commended by Ralph Waldo Emerson
as 'a work to be prized by the most thoughtful
people;' and by Wendell Phillips - justly styled as
'unexceptionable in matters of taste, if not of politice,
- a chivalrous, scholarly, find undoubted gentleman,'
- as 'terse, fresh, original, (as far as any thing
may be now-a-days,) mainly true, and, as a whole,
masterly.'  Read, and see if it be not so.

Glenelvan; or, The Morning Draweth Nigh.  By
Annie Maria Minster.  New York; A. B. Burdick,
Publisher, 145 Nassau Street.  1861.
This volume is 'most affectionately dedicated to
Samuel Longfellow, the friend of genius, the inspired
thinker, the saint in the man.'  It is well written,
and, aside from its literary merits, deserves special
commendation for its humane and reformatory spirit,

Excitement in Brooklyn, N. Y. - The
Spirit of Violence Spreading.

Correspondence of the Boston Traveller.

New York, December 17, 1860.

We - and when I say we, I mean the respectable
and civilized members of this community - are combatting
here, as you are in Boston, the enemies of
Free Speech.  The Herald advocates in the most insidious
manner the uprising of discharged workmen,
their mobbing of obnoxious political leaders, and the 
interruption of the services at places of public worship.
We had a few faint attempts, yesterday, on the part
of some of our city roughs in that line, which, however, 
did not prove successful.  Henry Ward Beecher,
who seems particularly offensive to the Herald, was
informed on Saturday that a mob would attack his 
church on the Sabbath, and gut his house at night.
He paid no particular attention to the matter, but the 
Trustees of Plymouth Church felt it to be their duty
to have their pastor and church protected.  So they
sent for a couple of hundred Metropolitan policemen,
who at night were gathered at the Lecture Room and
in the Church.  The jam of people was fairly terrific,
and all expected a row.
Nothing, however, occurred to mar the services,
with the exception of the crashing of one window,
caused by the throwing of a stone.  When the crash
came, the audience were a good deal startled, and 
manifested signs of great uneasiness, but Mr. Beecher
quietly ignored the interruption, and went on to the 
end.
'Be patient with all men' was the text; and the 
sermon will cause a sensation when it is published.
The latter part of it was particularly fine, and referred
more specifically to the troubles of the present day.
After church, a great crowd accompanied Mrs.
Beecher to his residence, from the steps of which he
made a characteristic address, which, as it is short
and to the point, I enclose: -
'My friends, I thank you for this quiet manifestation
of your devotion to the cause of free speech, and 
of your love for me.  I do not think there was any
occasion for alarm, nor do I imagine that I really
needed any protection.  It, however, there had been 
trouble, and I had fallen, it would be the very best 
thing that could happen for the cause in which I am
working - but nothing will happen to me or my family
or my house - I have not lived in this city thirteen
years for nothing.  (Voice - "That's so.")
You all know full well that though laboring earnestly, 
I labor in love.  (We won't give you up -
we'll stand by you," &c.)  I have no doubt of it.
You always have done so, and I trust we shall always
yet be found working together in the cause of freedom
- the cause of freedom for all men, of all opinions
-and, above all, for free speech and the cause of
God.  Good night!'
Hearty 'Good nights,' 'You're all right,' and an 
occasional 'God bless you,' from the crowd, saluted 
Mr. Beecher's retreating form, and ended the 'mobbing 
of Plymouth Church,' and the 'lynching of its 
pastor.'
In some remarks upon his course, Mr. Beecher
said: -
'Some people ask me - Why don't you go down 
South, and say these things?  Why don't you go to
Charleston?  Because I prefer that Charleston should
come to me.  Why don't you go to Mobile, and preach
these doctrines?  Because I have no disposition to run
into danger.  Because they would hang me.  I have 
observed that pulpits are not very long-lived in Mobile
that preach such things.  I have no desire to be
killed.  Not that I fear death - I do not fear it.  But
I do love to work, and I have no mind to have my
work cut short if I can help it.
I do not mean to run my head into the halter that
is dangling there, because they want to hang me.  I 
have no desire to die vertically.  (Laughter.)  My
Master has commanded me, saying - "If they persecute 
you in one city, flee to another."  And a man is
a fool who would not get out of a certain danger if
he could, and escape to where he could fight again.
(Laughter.)  So much for going down South - I mean
to stay in Brooklyn, and preach - yes, and preach just 
what we think.'

Unpaid Pledges in aid of the Massachusetts A. S. 
Society, made January last, or previously, are now
payable, and it is hereby requested that the same may
be paid at the earliest practicable day.  Donations
in behalf of the Anti-Slavery cause will be faithfully
consecrated to the redemption of the millions of
'the suffering and the dumb' of our land.  All payments 
should be made to Edmund Jackson, Treasurer, 
or E. H. Heywood, General Agent pro tem., 221
Washington street.

'Woman's Rights Under The Law.'
Mrs. Dall's Lectures, 16 Summer Street.
Mrs. Dall will deliver a course of Lectures on
three successive Wednesday afternoons, at the Room
of the Young Men's Christian Union, No. 16 Summer 
street, to commence
Wednesday, Jan. 9th, at 3 o'clock, P. M.
Jan. 9. French and English Law.
Oriental basis for the Law's estimate of woman.
Common proverbs.  Roman Law not pertinent.  The
estimate of the French Law shown in the rights of 
property, marriage and franchise.  Women in the 
public employ never promoted.  The estimate of the 
Law regulates the price of Labor.  Divorce for hopeless
insanity not allowed.  Results.  Anecdote of
a London Court Room.  Sir Charles Morgan's Aunt,
and her opinion of the Law.
Jan. 16.  The English Common Law - continued.
Equity.  The Law's estimate of a woman's truthfulness.
Divorce by Act of Parliament.  The Hon.
Mrs. Norton.  Hungarian Law contrasted with the
English.  Practical immorality of the Law, which
makes virtue in the wife depend on vigilance in the 
husband. Suffrage. Objections met. The Art Critic
and Rosa Bonheur. Suffrage a death-blow to three
kinds of Law. Harris v. Butler. Delicate discussions
in Parliament. Divorce Bill. Duke of York's
Trial. John Stuart Mill on Suffrage. Women of 
Upsal. 'Dames de la Halle.' Blackwood in 1854.
Abbesses in Parliament. Buckle's Lecture. Changes
in Canada. Pitcairn's Island.
Jan. 23. The U.S. Laws and the Secret of Success.
The despotism of a Republic. Kent. The man's
notion. Poynter on Consistency. The Laws of
nineteen States changed in ten years. Graham's
decision. Mrs. Dorr's claim. New York Bill. Complication
of legislation. Mrs. John Adams and Mrs.
Hannah Cobbold. 'Human rights." Patient thoroughness
the title to respect. Through Labor to Suffrage. 
Mean men. Woman's right to man as counsellor and
friend. The historical development of the question.
The practical question. Mahomet and the Venetian
Catechism.
These lectures are given in the afternoon in order
to permit persons from the neighboring towns to attend.
The subject is very little understood by women,
and this course of lectures concludes the twelve
Mrs. Dall originally Projected.
Doors open at 2 P.M. Admittance to each lecture,
25 cts.

H. FORD DOUGLASS will speak at
Hubbardston, Friday, Dec. 21.
Barre, Sunday, " 23.
Rutland, Monday, " 24.
North Oxford, Friday, " 28.
Leicester, Sunday, " 30. 
Oakdale, Monday, " 31.
West Boylston, Tuesday, Jan. 1.
Princeton, Wednesday, " 2.
Holden, Thursday, " 3.
Chinton, Sunday, " 6.
Lancaster, Tuesday, " 8.
Harvard, Wednesday, " 9.
Groton, Thursday, " 10.
Pepperell, Sunday, " 13.

HENRY C. WRIGHT will lecture at Bethel,
Vt., in Bullard Hall, Sunday, December 23.
He will attend a Free Convention in the same place,
to commence on Tuesday, Dec. 25, and to continue 
three or four days, as shall be deemed best by the
Convention.

SIXTEENTH COURSE.
The Fourth Lecture before the Salem Female Anti-Slavery
Society will be given by F. B. SANBORN,
of Concord, (Mass.) on Sunday evening, Dec. 23d,
in Lyceum Hall, at 7 o'clock. Admittance five cents.
CAROLINE BALCH, Rec. Sec.

MRS. MALINDA NOLL gratefully returns
her thanks to the kind friends who have assisted her
in efforts to purchase her sons, and takes this opportunity
to announce that, after having bought her 
first-born, who is now free, she has succeeded, also,
in procuring enough to liberate her second boy, who
is yet in slavery in Missouri. She has still a mother
in bondage, whom she desires to liberate, but she will
do so by the profits on anti-slavery books which she
proposes to sell; as she does not desire to tax further 
the liberality which has already been shown to her,
but to permit others, situated as she once was, to enjoy
it.
Boston, Dec. 18, 1860.
Anglo-Saxon and Anti-Slavery Standard please
copy, and send bill to Mrs. Bell, New York.

New Series of Tracts.
Published by the 
American Anti-Slavery Society
and to be obtained at the 
Anti-Slavery Offices, 5 Beekman Street, New York;
107 Fifth Street, Philadelphia; 15 Steuben
Street, Albany; and 221
Washington Street, Boston.

No. 1. Correspondence between Lydia Maria Child
and Governor Wise and Mrs. Mason, of Virginia.
pp. 28. 5 cents.
No. 2. Victor Hugo on American Slavery, with letters
of other distinguished individuals, vis., De
Tocqueville, Mazzini, Humboldt, Lafayette, &c.
pp 24. 5 cents.
No. 3. An Account of some of the Principal Slave Insurrections
during the last two Centuries.  By
Joshua Coffin.  pp. 36. 5 cents.
No. 4. The New Reign of Terror in the Slaveholding
States, for 1859-60.  pp. 144. 10 cents.
No. 5 Daniel O'Connell on American Slavery; with
other Irish Testimonies.  pp. 48. 5 cents.
No. 6. The Right Way the Safe Way, proved by
Emancipation in the West Indies and elsewhere.
By L. Maria Child.  pp. 95. 10 cts.
No. 7. Testimonies of Capt. John Brown at Harper's
Ferry, with his Address to the Court.  pp. 16.
3 cents.
No. 8. The Philosophy of the Abolition Movement.
By Wendell Phillips.  pp. 47. 5 cents.
No. 9. The Duty of Disobedience to the Fugitive Slave
Act: An Appeal to the Legislature of Massachusetts.
By L. Maria Child.  pp. 36.  5 cents.
No. 10.  The Infidelity of Abolitionism.  By Wm. Lloyd
Garrison.  pp. 12.  3 cents.
No. 11.  Speech of John Hossack, convicted of a Violation
of the Fugitive Slave Act at Chicago, Ill.
pp. 12.  3 cents.
No. 12.  The Patriarchal Institution, as described by 
Members of its Own Family.  Compiled by
Lydia Maria Child.  pp. 55. 5 cents.
No. 13. No Slave-Hunting in the Old Bay State:  An
Appeal to the People and Legislature of Massachusetts.
pp. 24. 5 cents.
A deduction of fifty per cent. from the above
price will be made where a dozen or more copies
are taken. Gratuitous copies will be sent by mail,
for examination, on receiving the postage charge.

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS.
MIDDLESEX, ss. To the Heirs at Law, Creditors, and
all other persons interested in the last will of
JOHN CABOT, late of Newton, in said county,
deceased, testate:
WHEREAS, application has been made to me to
appoint GEORGE JACKSON, of Boston, Trustee
under the Will of said deceased, in the place of FRANCIS
JACKSON, of Boston, in the county of Suffolk, resigned--
you are hereby cited to appear at a Probate
Court, to be held at Cambridge, in said county of
Middlesex, on the second Tuesday of January next,
at nine o'clock before noon, to show cause, if any
you have, against granting the same.
And the said George Jackson is hereby directed
to give public notice thereof, by publishing this citation
once a week, for three successive weeks, in the
newspaper called the Liberator, printed at Boston--
the last publication to be three days, at least, before
said Court.
Witness my hand, this 27th day of November,
in the year eighteen hundred and sixty,
WILLIAM A. RICHARDSON,
Judge of the Probate Court.
A true copy: attest, J. H. TYLER, Register

IMPORTANT FACTS ABOUT
THE PERUVIAN SYRUP.
INTERESTING TO ALL INVALIDS.

THREE-FOURTHS of all the sickness and suffeing
in this world are the result of derangement of
the physical system, consequent upon a weakness and
impaired condition of the natural forces.
The principal vital force is the iron contained in
the blood. This is derived from the food we eat:
but, if from any cause or derangement, the necessary
amount of iron is not taken into the circulation, the
whole system suffers, and unless the deficiency is
supplied, all the natural powers are weakened, and
sometimes to a degree which brings on entire prostration
of the physical and mental forces. Then
follows every imaginable complaint, all arising, however.
from a deterioration or bad state of the blood.
Among these are Dyspepsia, Nervous Debility, Languor
and Depression of Spirits, Serofula, Piles, Skin
Diseases of every description, Tendency to Consumption,
Weakness of the Sexual Organs, Prolapsus Uteri,
and diseases of the female system generally, and all
complaints accompanied by weakness or prostration of
physical and mental energy. In all these cases THE
PERUVIAN SYRUP has effected the most astonishing
cures, and the great secret of the wonderful
success is, the simple fact that it at once supplies the
deficiency of that indispensable ingredient, Iron in
the Blood.
The statements of cures which are published
in our pamphlet may be relied on as strictly true
in every case, in proof of which, we will, at any 
time, on application, show the original letters and
statements of the persons cured.
EVERY INVALID SHOULD READ THESE FACTS, and
avail himself or herself of this invaluable remedy.
JOHN P. JEWETT & CARTER,
No. 39 Summer Street, Boston.
For sale by all Druggists.
Oct. 26. 6w.

The Liberator. December 21.
 Poetry.
--------------
The Pine Tree.
By John G. Whittier.
Life again the stately emblem on the Bay State's 
   rusted shield,
Give to Northern winds the Pine Tree on our banter's 
   tattered field!
Sons of me who sat in council with their Bibles
   round the board,
Answering England's royal missive with a firm, 'Thus
   saith the Lord!'
Rise again for home and freedom!-set the battle in
   array!--
What the fathers did of old time, we their sons must
   do today.
Tell us not of banks and tariffs--cease your paltry
   peddler cries--
Shall the good State sink her honor that your gam-
   bling stocks may rise?
Would ye barter men for cotton?--That your gains
   may be the same,
Must we kiss the feet of Moloch, pass our children
   through the flame?
Is the dollar only real?--God and truth and right a
   dream?
Weighed against your lying ledgers must our manhood
   kick the beam?
Oh, my God!--for that free spirit, which of old in 
   Boston town 
Smote the Province House with terror, struck the
   crest of Andros down!--
For another strong-voiced Adams in the city's streets
   to cry:
'Poor God and Massachusetts!--Set your feet on
   Mammon's lie!
Perish banks and perish traffic-spin your cotton's 
   latest pound--
But, in Heaven's name, keep your honor--keep the 
   heart o' the Bay State sound!'
Where's the MAN for Massachusetts? Where's the 
   voice to speak free?
Where's the hand to light up bonfires from her 
   mountains to the sea?
Beats her Pilgrim pulse no longer? Sits she dumb
   in her despair?
Has she none to break the silence? Has she none to
   do and dare?
Oh, my God! For one right worthy to lift up her rusted
   shield,
And to plant again the Pine Tree in her banner's tattered
   field!
---------------------------------
SILENCE IS CRIME. 
By John G. Whittier.
Now, by our fathers' ashes! Where's the spirit
  Of the true-hearted and th' unshackled gone?
Sons of old freemen, do we but inherit
      Their names alone?
Is the old Pilgrim spirit quenched within us?
  Stoops the proud manhood of our souls so low
That Mammon's lure or party wile can win us
      To silence now?
No! When our land to ruin's brink is verging,
  In God's name, let us speak while there is time!
Now, when the padlocks for our lips are forging,
      SILENCE IS CRIME!
What! Shall we henceforth humbly ask, as favors,
  Rights all our own? In madness shall we barter,
For treacherous peace, the FREEDOM Nature gave us,
      God and our charter?
Here shall the statesman seek the free to fetter?
  Here Lynch law light its horrid fires on high?
And, in the Church, their proud and skilled abettor
      Make truth a lie?
Torture the pages of the hallow'd Bible,
  To sanction crime, and robbery, and blood;
And, in Oppression's hateful service, libel 
      Both man and God?
Shall our New England stand erect no longer,
  But stoop in chains upon her downward way,
Thicker to gather on her limbs, and stronger,
      Day after day?
O no! Methinks from all her wild, green mountains-
  From valleys where her slumbering fathers lie-
From her blue rivers and her welling fountains,
      And clear, cold sky--
From her rough coast, and isles, which hungry Ocean
  Gnaws with his surges--from the fisher's skiff,
With white sail swaying to the billow's motion
      Round rock and cliff--


Free as our rivers are
  Ocean-ward going--
Freed as the breezes are 
  Over us blowing.
Up to our altars, then,
  Haste we, and summon
Courage and loveliness,
  Manhood and woman!
Deep let our pledges be:
  Freedom forever!
Truce with oppression,
  Never, oh! Never!
By our own birthright gift, 
  Granted of Heaven--
Freedom for heart and lip,
  Be the pledge given!
If we have whispered truth,
  Whisper no longer;
Speak as the tempest does,
  Sterner and stronger;
Still be the tones of truth
  Louder and firmer,
Startling the haughty South 
  With the deep murmer:
God and our charter's right,
  Freedom forever!
Truce with oppression,
  Never, oh! Never!

THE LIBERATOR.
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
---
THE ANTICHRIST OF NEW ENGLAND. A Sermon 
preached at the opening of the Essex North Conference, 
Haverhill, Mass. Sept. 9, 1860. By Charles 
Beecher, Georgetown, Mass. Boston: Crosby, 
Nichols, Lee & Co. pp. 35.
   This pamphlet shows all the eccentricity, but less 
than the strength, that one expects of a Beecher.
   Commencing with the declaration that the Bible is, 
'unquestionable, the strongest, the most successful 
work ever published,' it assumes, in addition to this, 
the hypothesis constantly assumed by the Orthodox 
clergy as a fact--namely, that that collection of books 
is infallibly inspired of God--and it then takes the 
further position of denying 'that the Bible contains 
a single doctrine contrary to common sense, or that 
cannot be defended as honorable and right.'
   What is 'the Antichrist of New England' referred 
to in this pamphlet, remains somewhat obscure, in 
spite of the thirty-five pages that are occupied with 
describing, satirizing and opposing it. It seems to 
be, however, a 'school,' a 'system,' a 'criticism,' 
which denies the clerical hypothesis above 
mentioned, or demands sufficient evidence before admitting 
it.
   It is stated on p. 7 that the 'criticism' in question 
'tells us we do not know certainly the authorship of 
a single book of the Bible'; and further, that 'the 
apostles' of this 'school' allege that 'None of the 
writers of the Bible claim to have written by divine 
inspiration, and therefore it is a gratuitous thing to 
assume that they did.' As I do not happen to know 
any persons who hold the two positions last mentioned, 
I should have been left quite in the dark as to 
who Mr. Beecher meant by 'the apostles' of the 
'school' that he declares to teach them, but that in 
other parts of his pamphlet he names Theodore Parker 
and Mr. Garrison as the persons he is opposing, 
and calls their system (p. 28) 'a moral sans culottism, 
a gospel of the guillotine.' This malicious statement 
ignores the material opposing fact that Mr. 
Garrison is a teacher of Peace no less than of Anti-
Slavery, and that, in this and some other respects, his 
ideas are materially different from those of Mr. Parker. 
But these are only specimens of a disingenuousness, 
an unfairness of statement, (to select the 
mildest of the appropriate terms,) which characterize 
the whole work. If the sophistry should be abstracted 
from Mr. Beecher's defense of his own theories, 
and the error from his statements and insinuations 
respecting other men, and their ideas, little 
bulk, and less weight, would remain to the pamphlet 
in question. 
   To give an example of the sophistry of which I 
speak-- a sophistry by no means peculiar to Mr. 
Beecher, but freely used by all clergymen of his class 
when defending their professional hypothesis in regard 
to the Bible-he constantly seeks to represent 
'The Bible' as a unitary work; a work describing 
and inculcating one system, instead of two; a work, 
the several portions of whose two great, and sixty-
six small divisions, are in perfect harmony with each 
other; a work in which the dignity, authority, in-


He answers, 'That does not make it so!' But is it a 
claim!
   I answer--It is by no means certain that it is a 
claim, even, of what Mr. Beecher represents; for the 
Greek of the ambiguous passage in question (spoken 
after the specification of one particular excellence in 
the Hebrew Scriptures) requires this rendering rather 
than the one given it in King James's version--
   'All God-inspired scripture is also profitable for 
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction 
in righteousness,'
   A still worse specimen of Mr. Beecher's habit of 
misusing passages of scripture is where he tries to 
make is appear (pp. 10, 11,) that the threat which 
closes the account of John's visions in the isle of Patmos 
is designed to cover the two collections of Jewish 
and Christian scriptures, instead of the single 
book, called 'Revelation,' in which it occurs. There 
is not the slightest reason to suppose that the writer 
of that book for a moment imagined a binding up of 
his work with other works to form the New Testament, 
still less an attempt to represent it as appropriately 
connected with the Old Testament also.
   Another sophistical assumption, used by Mr. Beecher 
as by his clerical brethren, is the use of the term 
'Word of God' as synonymous with the Bible. He 
should first show that such a term is applicable to that 
book.
   Such enormously deceptive claims, assumptions and 
implications are made by writers of Mr. Beecher's 
class, that it is worth while to quote another passage 
from him, to show his method of 'argument,' and 
his way of bringing and argument to a point:--
   'Let us, then, to bring the argument to a point, 
look a moment at the Pentateuch. Why, we ask, is 
it not reasonable certain that Moses wrote these 
books?
   "O, because the last chapter contains his obituary; 
and if you give that up, you are all afloat."
   That is, an obituary notice, by an unknown hand, 
appended to an ancient author's work, is sufficient to 
destroy its genuineness, however well attested. Does 
that seem reasonable?
   "But there are interpolations, here and there." 
   None, we reply, of any consequence. But are we 
to adopt the principle that interpolations in an ancient 
work are fatal to its genuineness as a whole? Would 
it not be suspicious if, in so very ancient a document, 
there were not some interpolations?
   "But how can we tell which is which?"
   The presumption is, that all is genuine which is not 
proved spurious. The burden of proof is therefore on 
the negative.' pp. 4, 5.
   Mark the crafty implication, that the account of 
the death and burial of Moses, which forms a continuous 
part of the narrative of the book of Deuteronomy, 
was 'appended' to that book!
   Mark the entirely groundless assumption, that the 
authorship of the Pentateuch by Moses, apart from 
the objections cursorily noticed here, is 'well attested'!
   Mark the deceptive manner in which the objector is 
made to concede that certain passages scattered 
through these books, which show a knowledge, on the 
part of the writer, of events in Jewish history long 
after the time of Moses, are 'interpolations,' instead 
of parts of the original document!
   It is worth while briefly to describe here the force 
of the argument which Mr. Beecher attempts to 
evade by the crafty use of the word 'interpolations.'
   If a writer on the early history of the Pilgrim Fathers 
of New England spoke incidentally, in the 
course of his remarks, of the Missouri Compromise 
and the Dred Scott decision, we should be perfectly 
assured (should we not?) that his work must
have been written after the occurrence of those two 
events, because he could not else have known of 
their existence. 
   Now, the book of Genesis contains this passage; 
(12:6, 7,) I designate the significant part by italics:
   'And Abram passed through the land unto the 
place of Sichem, unto the plain of Moreh. And the 
Canaanite was then in the land. And the Lord appeared 
unto Abram, and said--Unto thy seed will I 
give this land.'
   The middle one of these three sentences refers to a 
time as past, which was not past until the latter part 
of Joshua's reign, many years after Moses. It is 
plain, then, that the document, of which this sentence 
forms a continuous part, must have been written by 
someone who lived as late as the expulsion of the 
Canaanites; therefore not by Moses.
   Again, the book of Genesis contains the passage, 
the commencement of a genealogy of Edomite rulers: 
(36:31.)
   'And these are the kings that reigned in the land 
of Edom before there reigned any king over the children 
of Israel. And Bela, the son of Beor, reigned 
in Edom,' &e., &e.
   It is plain that the document of which this forms a 
continuous part must have been written by some one 
who lived at least as late in the Hebrew history as the 


If you bind into one volume the writings of fifty 
men, especially of men varying in period by several 
centuries, and varying in condition from semi-barbarous 
to semi-civilized, you will of course have errors 
and contradictions. You may have great and noble 
truths also. And we actually have both these in 
the Bible. We must 'prove' its contents, and 'hold 
fast' that in them which is 'good.'
   In spite of Mr. Beecher's persistent talk about plenary 
inspiration, and claim that all parts of the Bible 
are infallibly inspired of God, he also, in practice, 
takes the liberty of judging what parts of it to obey, 
and what not to obey. The difference between him 
and Messrs. Parker and Garrison, as far as practice 
goes, is a difference of degree, and not of kind. An 
instance in point is suggested by on of his boastful 
questions, left unanswered, but designed to suggest 
the implication that it must be answered in his favor. 
He asks--(p. 33,)
   'Who instituted the Lord's day, in commemoration 
of the Resurrection, if not the first generation?'
   By 'the Lord's day,' he means Sunday. And by 
'instituting' it, he means instituting such a use of 
Sunday as is now practiced by his particular sect, and 
the allied group of kindred sects, under the utterly 
unauthorized name of the 'Christian Sabbath.'
   Who instituted the Lord's day in commemoration 
of the Resurrection? I don't know that it ever was 
instituted for such a purpose. Certainly, the present 
churches of Orthodox Congregationalists do not understand 
it so. Ask them why they go to meeting 
on Sunday, and forty-nine out of fifty of their church-
members will confidently point to the fourth commandment 
of the Jewish decalogue, or else to the first 
two verses of the second chapter of Genesis, as the 
[?] and absurdly inappropriate as both of 
them are for such a purpose. And not one in fifty of 
them will even think of citing 'the resurrection,' as 
his reason for the observance of Sunday as a Sabbath, 
until he has been driven from several previous refuges 
of lies in the attempt to account for it.
   It is needful to the maintenance of the power and influence 
of Mr. Beecher and his clerical brethren, that 
they persuade their people to observe Sunday as a 
Sabbath. To secure their compliance with this custom, 
Mr. Beecher tells his people that God requires it 
of them, and the God's command to them, to this 
effect, is found in the Bible!-In spite of the directly 
opposing facts that the writers of the Bible are unanimous, 
from beginning to end, in designating Saturday 
as the Sabbath, and declaring that the Sabbath 
was an institution peculiar, and designed to be peculiar, 
to the Jews. Here is one instance where Mr. 
Beecher takes the liberty to depart from the teaching 
of the Bible, and to preach (and practice) 'another 
gospel.'
   I will give one more instance.
   Mr. Beecher claims 'plenary authority for apostolic 
teaching,' and triumphantly declares that the twelve 
apostles had 'power to bind and loose on earth and in 
heaven.' Let us see how he regards their authority 
when he chances to differ with them in opinion.
   The apostle James gives the following precept respecting 
the treatment of the sick. (5:14.)
   'Is any sick among you? Let him call for the 
elders of the church; and let them pray over him, 
anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.'
   In Mr. Beecher's hypothesis respecting the inspiration 
of the Bible, and the plenary authority of the 
Apostles, is correct, this passage points out an explicit 
and imperative duty for the sick and their friends; a 
duty which Mr. Beecher is bound to practice in his 
own family, and to enjoin upon his people, especially 
if they are accustomed to disregard it. Does he fulfil 
this duty? Does he, when any member of his own 
family is sick, send for the elders of his church, and 
have them put oil on the patient? Does he, when, 
being called to visit sick persons, he finds they have 
neglected this duty, admonish them with regard to it, 
and urge its performance? Does he, when he finds 
that the members of his church, with one consent, 
imitate 'the world' in utterly neglecting to obey this 
precept, preach in favor of it, condemn disobedience 
to it, and insist that the sick shall be oiled by the 
elders of the church, 'according to the Scripture'? 
Nothing of the sort!
   In this case, Mr. Beecher chooses to use reason in 
opposition to Scripture. He chooses, in this particular, 
to agree with Mr. Parker and Mr. Garrison. I 
think that, in so far, he does well! But why does he 
insist on the hypothesis (even while belying it by 
his practice) of James's absolute inspiration and plenary 
authority? How does he dare to 'take away' a 
command of Scripture in this case, and to 'add' to 
Scripture a command for the observance of Sunday as 
a Sabbath, if the denunciation at the end of the book 
of 'Revelation' covers the whole Bible, as he represents, 
and if it is a denunciation really to be feared, 
as he represents? His theory and practice do not 


the introduction of 'controverted topics'! And whose 
nurseries--the 'Young Men's Christian Associations'
--send delegates to the sister prayer-meetings of 
slaveholders in the South, armed with certificates 
that they are 'all right' in regard to the 'peculiar 
institution'!
   But stop! I am going too fast. The readers of 
this sermon know the anti-slavery faith of Mr. Beecher's 
church, as far at least as words can show it. He 
has taken off the bushel, and, lo! There is a candle 
clearly burning, which has been burning--so he tells 
us--for twenty years. On close examination, it proves 
to be a genuine wax candle. What a pity that it 
was not taken from under the bushel, and set on a 
candlestick, twenty years ago!
   The resolutions of Mr. Beecher's church, which have 
been slumbering in the clerk's record book for twenty 
years, are very excellent resolution, if the pastor or 
the church had the heart to use them. But, to all 
outward appearance, they remain a dead letter, used 
merely for show on certain occasions, as the Catholic 
priest uses the wood of the true cross. To all outward 
appearance, South-side Adams is acknowledged 
as a Christian brother of Mr. Beecher, and his church 
as a sister with Mr. Beecher's church, in the same 
denomination.
   Call you this backing of anti-slavery? 'A plague 
upon such backing!'
   Even in the act of calling upon the churches of New 
England 'prayerfully' to do more than they have 
ever done against slavery, Mr. Beecher takes pains to 
give a thrust at Dr. Cheever's 'Church Anti-Slavery 
Society,' saying that this doing should be effected--
'not by new societies-we have societies enough, and 
to spare--but by the local churches.' Very well. In 
this statement I heartily agree with Mr. Beecher. 
But will he and his 'local church' set the example? 
And, if they really do not fraternize with South-side 
Adams and his church, (especially since his recent 
intensely pro-slavery Thanksgiving sermon,) will they 
set their candle on a candlestick, and make that fact 
manifest?--C.K.W.
----
ARTEMUS WARD AND OLD ABE.
   The last Vanity Fair has an account of an interview 
between the President elect and Artemus Ward. 
The latter finds Mr. Lincoln persecuted by applicants 
for office, and describes the means by which he 
clears the premises:—
   'Good God!' cried Old Abe, 'they cum upon 
me from the skize--down the chimneys, and from 
the bowels of the yearth!' He hadn't moren 'n got 
them words out of his delikit month before two fat 
offiss-seekers from Wisconsin, in endeverin to crawl 
atween his legs for the purpuss of applyin for the 
tollgateship at Milwawky, upsot the President eleck 
& he would hev gone sprawlin into the fire-place if 
I hadn't caught him in these arms.  But I hadn't 
more'n stood him up strate, before another man cum 
crushin down the chimney, his head strikin me vilently 
agin the innards and prostratin my voluptoous 
form onto the floor. 'Mr Linkin," shoutid the 
infaooated being, "my papers is signed by every 
clergyman in our town, and likewise the skoolmaster!'
   Sez I, 'you egrejis ass,' gittin up & brushin the 
dust from my eyes, "I'll sign your papers with this 
bunch of bones, if you don't be a little more keerful 
how you make my bread baskit a depot in the futur. 
Hw do you like that air perfumery?' sez I, shuvin 
my fist under his nose. 'Them's the kind of papers 
I'll give you! Them's the papers you want!' 
   'But I workt hard for the ticket; I toiled night 
and day! The patrit should be rewarded!'
   'Virtoo," sed I, holdin' the infatooated man by 
the coat-collar, 'virtoo, sir, is its own reward. 
Look at me!' He did look at me, and qualed be4 
my gase. 'The fact is,' I continued, lookin' round 
upon the hungry crowd, 'there is scacely a offiss for 
every ile lamp carried round durin' this campane. I 
wish thare was. I wish thare was furrin missions 
to be filled on varis lonely islands where epydemics 
rage incessantly, and if I was in Old Abe's place I'd 
send every mother's son of you to them. What air 
you here for?' I continnered. warmin' up considerable, 
'can't you giv Abe a minit's peace? Don't 
you see he's worrid most to death! Go home, you 
miserable men, go home & till the sile! Go to pedlin 
tinware—go to choppin wood—go to bilin sope—
stuff sassemgers—black boots—git a clerkship on 
sum respectable manure cart—go round as original 
Swiss Bell Ringers—becum 'origenal and only' 
Campbell Minstrels—go to lecturin at 50 dollars a 
nite—imbark in the peanut bizniss—write for the 
Ledger—saw off your legs an go round givin concerts,
 with techin appeals to a charitable public 
printed on your handbills—anything for a honest 
livin',but don't come round here drivin Old Abe 
crazy by your outrajus cuttings up!
   Go home. Stand not upon the order of your goin', 
but go to onct! Ef in five minits from this 
time,' sez I, pullin out my sixteen dollar 
huntin cased watch, and brandishin' it before their 
eye, 'Ef in five minits from this time a single sole 
of you remains on these here premises I'll go out 
to my cage near by and let my Boy Constructor 
loose1 morning & if he gits amung you, you'll think Old 
Solferino has cum again and no mistake!' You 
ought to hev seen them scamper, Mr. Fair. They 
[?] as tho Satun hisself was arter them with a


streak of chain lightnin aout of blue sky—a thunderbowl 
when it want at all expected, new tetters 
in Jinoonry, a cattamount without no bar on or an 
Ethiopian nigger changin his spots, couldn't hev 
knocked us furder into the latter eend of next week, 
than did the news of Abraham Hanibal's election!
   Of course a taown meetin was the fust thing in 
order arter we got over the fust shock.
   Cap'n Porterbation Pillsbury on takin the cheer 
remarked as follors—
   'Feller citizens, Fust an last it hes bin my lot 
to preside over several or more meetins—but never
before hev I approximated the discharge of manifest 
duty with such a tumultooous feelin of swful responsibility.
   'Feller citizens. We've heern an talked of crisises 
afore, but it all the crisises that ever was since 
crisises was inwented, together, multiply em by all 
the figgers in the multiplication table, add the remainder 
an carry for every ten, bile an steep from
july to etarnity, an this ere that we've met to consider 
is more crisiser than the hull. I may my with
the classics—it are—"Hoc some bonen knee plus 
horribus que se cundun arter em."
   'Feller citizens. It ar my painful duty to announce 
to you that Abram Hannibal—quodocter-
genarian, an Illinoy nigger, with eight quarter parts 
merlatter blood into him, has been elected to sway
the destinations of these suvrin states!'
   At this pint Jim Peabody ris for information. He
'would respectfully ax the cheer how many quarter
parts make a hull?'
   The cheer decided the question aout of order, and 
directed that Jim should be cared aout of the meeting, 
which, arter a hard tussle, was done, an the 
to Cap'n continered.
   'Feller citizens'—says the Cap'n says he, 'What 
is to be did! Shall we put up with this violation
of aour constitootional rights, or—'
   Here another Black Republican wanted to know 
what constitootional right hed bin violated! 'The
people,' says he, 'hev only exercised their onalenable
legal frankincense an I should like, Mr. Cheerman, 
to hev you pint—'
   Afore he could finish, his hat was promply knocked 
over his eyes, an he was cared into the entry to 
cool his heels with Jim Peabody. 
   The Charman thanked me an tothers who toted
the feller aout, for aour promptness in maintainin 
the right of speech, an said he 'would take this occasion 
to say—that this war a free meetin, an hoped
everybody would free their minds.'
   There want only one other black' in the baouse, 
an when the cheer said this, he half ris, but I gin 
him a look that meant some pison, an he sot daown 
mighty spry, an tried to look as though he'd hed no
idee of gettin up.
   'To resume' said the cheer. 'Shall we give in, 
squizzle, kerflumux an back daown, or shall we rise from 
in the vartooous indignation of insulted majesty an 
daown trodden what do ye call it, raise hail Kerlumby, 
an tharby set an example which will go 
daown to onborn footoority?
   'Mr. President—beg parding—I forgot I war 
that flunckshanary myself—Feller citizen—I haint 
got no great of a voice, owin to bein choked when 
young with a tough doughnut; but sich as it ar, it 
is for war! Sir—leastwise gentlemen of the jury—
or more properly speakin feller citizens—I love the 
Union—I do by hokey! But, "Hic son jacket," I 
love Hornby more. I love to contemplate the spar 
stangled banner underlatin its brazen folds amid the 
stary amplitoods of onmittigated spiflication. I 
yield to no livin critter, whether that critter ar 
found mid the tarnal snows of the equatorial phalanx, 
or brilin neath the tepsicorial visisitoods of 
torrid empyreans, in admiration of the American 
Eagle! But sir, I would see that flag cut up for 
poultice bandages—I would see that eagle plucked 
barer than bare-rock, and his meat used for wolf-bait 
afore I'll see the rights of this suvrin taoun invaded 
or upot. Gentlemen, I dont know what ther 
rights is, but my praoud motter is naow an ever, 
54—40 or fite!
   'I will naow appint Permission Peabody a committee 
of the hull to draft resolutions expressive of 
the common sense of this meetin.'
   While the committee was nout making the sense 
of the meetin, the Tipsycorial Glee Club sang the 
Marcellus hymn—altered for the occasion.
          'Sons of Hornby,
           Wake to glory—'
   'Old Dan Tucker' an 'The frog he would a 
wooing &e.' with great effect. Deacon Pendergrass 
was axed to pray, but he would nt, so we passed the 
balance of the time in stompin, imitation pigs, 
roosters an tom-cats.
   The committee on resolutions offered the followin:
   'In the name of the State—forevermore, amen. 
SS. Whereas the people of Hornby, being of sane 
mind an lawful age, do depose an say—
   1st. Resolved: That all men is created free an 
equal—exceptin them that is'nt.
   2d. Resolved: That the election of Abram Hanibal 
is a direct insult to Hornby, and ortent to be 
put up with, so it ortent.
   3d. Resolved: That onless the said Abraham shall 
take back everything he hes said agin the peace an 
dignity of this suvrin moonicipality—or ef he hes'nt 
said nothin, he dus not faithfully promise not to do 
it agin, then this moonicipality will proceed to stultily 
itself accordin to statoote made in provided
   4th. Resolved: That we hev the right, an will
see-seed--forcibly ef we can, peacently of we must. 
   5th. Resolved: That the Selick men be empowered 
to borry on the credit of the taoun, ef they can,
the sum of $24,19, to put the Hornby Phalanx on 
a war footin.
   6th. Resolved: That the "Stars an Stripes" be


And, in the Church, their proud and skilled abettor
Make truth a lie?

Torture the pages of the hallow'd Bible, 
To sanction crime, and robbery, and blood;
And, in Oppression's hateful service, libel
Both man and God?

Shall our New England stand erect no longer,
But stoop in chains upon her downward way,
Thicker to gather on her limbs, and stronger,
Day after day?

O no! methinks from all her wild, green mountains --
From valleys where her slumbering fathers lie -- 
From her blue rivers and her welling fountains,
And clear, cold sky --

From her rough coast, and isles, which hungry Ocean 
Gnaws with his surges -- from the fisher's skiff,
With white sail swaying to the billow's motion
Round rock and cliff --

From the free fire-side of her unbought farmer -- 
From her free laborer at his loom and wheel -- 
From the brown smith-shop, where, beneath the 
hammer,
Rings the red steel --

From each and all, if God hath not forsaken
Our land, and left us to an evil choice,
Loud as the summer thunderbolt shall waken
A PEOPLE'S VOICE!

Startling and stern! the Northern winds shall bear it
Over Potomac's to St. Mary's wave;
And buried Freedom shall awake to hear it
Within her grave.

O, let that voice go forth! The bondman sighing
By Santee's wave, in Mississippi's cane,
Shall feel the hope, within his bosom dying, 
Revive again.

Let it go forth! The millions who are gazing
Sadly upon us from afar shall smile,
And unto God devout thanksgiving raising,
Bless us the while!

O, for your ancient freedom, pure and holy;
For the deliverance of a groaning earth;
For the wrong'd captive, bleeding, crush'd and lowly,
Let it go forth!

Sons of the best of fathers! will ye falter
With all they left ye perilled and at stake?
Ho! once again on Freedom's holy altar
The fire awake!

Prayer-strengthened for the trial, come together,
Put on the harness for the moral fight,
And, with the blessing of your heavenly Father,
MAINTAIN THE RIGHT!
-----------------
SONG OF THE FREE.
BY JOHN G. WHITTIER.
'Living, I shall assert the right of FREE DISCUSSION;
dying, I shall assert it; and, should I leave no 
other inheritance to my children, by the blessing of 
God I will leave them the inheritance of FREE PRINCIPLES, 
and the example of a manly and independent 
defence of them.' - Daniel Webster.

Pride of New England!
Soul of our fathers!
Shrink we all craven-like,
When the storm gathers?
What though the tempest be
Over us lowering,
Where's the New Englander
Shamefully cowering?
Graves green and holy
Around us are lying,--
Free were the sleepers all,
Living and dying!
Back with the Southerner's
Padlocks and scourges!
Go--let him fetter down
Ocean's free surges!
Go--let him silence
Winds, clouds, and waters--
Never New England's own
Free sons and daughters!

[*top line is partially cut off*]
ideas are materially different from those of Mr. [???ker]. 
But these are only specimens of a disingenuousness, 
an unfairness of statement, (to select the 
mildest of the appropriate terms,) which characterize 
the whole work. If the sophistry should be abstracted 
from Mr. Beecher's defence of his own theories, 
and the error from his statements and insinuations 
respecting other men, and their ideas, little 
bulk, and less weight, would remain to the pamphlet 
in question.

To give an example of the sophistry of which I 
speak--a sophistry by no means peculiar to Mr. 
Beecher, but freely used by all clergymen of his class 
when defending their professional hypothesis in regard 
to the Bible--he constantly seeks to represent 
'The Bible' as a unitary work; a work describing 
and inculcating one system, instead of two; a work, 
the several portions of whose two great, and sixty-six 
small divisions, are in perfect harmony with each 
other; a work in which the dignity, authority, influence 
and weight of character of each writer goes 
to support every statement and every idea of every 
other writer in the two collections of Hebrew and 
Christian Scriptures.

Here is a specimen of these assumptions, pp. 8, 9: 
'Does not the Bible claim that God called Abraham 
(Gen. 12: 1, Acts 7: 2,) and entered into a special 
covenant with him and his seed after him? (Gen. 15.) 
Does it not claim that that covenant was renewed 
to Isaac (Gen. 26: 2-5) and Jacob? (Gen. 28: 11-22;) 
that, in pursuance of it, (Ex. 3:) God brought Israel 
out of Egypt with signs and wonders and an outstretched 
arm, entering into a covenant with them at 
Sinai? (Ex. 24.) Does not the Bible claim that the 
whole national economy, in its three permanent 
parts, prophetic, sacrificial, and civil, was then and 
there directly instituted by God himself, through 
Moses? (Ex. 19: 5, 6; Deut. 4: 1-8.) Does it not 
claim that the prophetic office was then made permanent 
and paramount? (Deut. 18: 15-20.) Does 
it not claim that God established the nation in Canaan 
by miracles, raised them up judges, sent them prophets, 
and finally gave them his son, Messiah? Does 
not the Bible distinctly claim that the nation in all 
this is the unique and special organ of divine communications 
for the race? (Rom. 9: 4, 5; 3: 2. Ex. 4: 
22;) and that no such thing had ever been seen or 
heard of before? (Deut. 4: 32-37.) Does it not 
claim that Christ came as the express fulfilment of 
that covenant? (Gal. 3: 16; Rom. 10: 3, 4.) 
Does it not claim for Christ absolute jurisdiction 
over human belief and affection, saying, 'He that 
believeth not on the Son shall not see life, but the 
wrath of God abideth on him'? (John 3: 36. 1 John 
5: 9-12.) .... Does it not claim that he ordained 
twelve apostles, and gave them the keys of the kingdom 
of heaven, with power to bind and loose on earth 
and in heaven. (Matth. 16: 19; 18 : 18.)'

The true answer to these questions is--No! the Bible 
does not claim any one of these things. The references 
which Mr. Beecher has appended to these passages, 
to try to make his questions seem to require an affirmative 
answer, do not show this, but they show something 
very different, namely; that in some of these 
cases, not in all, the thing claimed by Mr. Beecher 
was really claimed by one or two individuals among 
the writers of the thirty-nine books which were afterwards 
collected by somebody, (we know not whom,) 
to form the Old Testament; or else by one or two individuals 
among the writers of the twenty-seven 
books which were afterwards collected by somebody, 
(we know not whom), to form the New Testament. 
And the force of each of these claims depends upon the 
evidence we can find of the integrity, intelligence and 
good judgement of the particular writer in  question. 
Each of these writers, and his book, must stand or fall 
by the evidence respecting himself and itself.

But Mr. Beecher's unfairness is not confined to 
sophistical assumptions like the above. He misrepresents 
the scope and meaning of the individual writers 
of particular passages of Scripture. Thus he 
asks (p. 9,)
'Does not Paul, at a time when the Old Testament 
canon was regarded with almost idolatrous reverence, 
say--"All Scripture is God-inspired"?' 
(2 Tim. 3: 16.)

I answer--It is by no means certain that he says 
this.

Again Mr. Beecher asks, (p. 11,)
"What does the objector say then to the specific 
claim, e.g., of Paul, 'All Scripture is God-inspired'?


[??????????????]
place of Sichem, unto the plain of Moreh. And the 
Canaanite was then in the land. And the Lord appeared 
unto Abram, and said--Unto thy seed will I 
give this land.'

The middle one of these three sentences refers to a 
time as past, which was not past until the latter part 
of Joshua's reign, many years after Moses. It is 
plain, then, that the document, of which this sentence 
forms a continuous part, must have been written by 
some one who lived as late as the expulsion of the 
Canaanites; therefore not by Moses. 

Again, the book of Genesis contains this passage, 
the commencement of a genealogy of Edomite rulers: 
(36: 31.)
'And these are the kings that reigned in the land 
of Edom before there reigned any king over the children 
of Israel. And Bela, the son of Beor, reigned 
in Edom,' &c., &c.

It is plain that the document of which this forms a 
continuous part must have been written by some one 
who lived at least as late in the Hebrew history as the 
time of Saul, the first king; therefore not by Moses. 

If Mr. Beecher wishes to have these constituent 
parts of the book of Genesis regarded as 'interpolations,'
let him prove that they are such. But to 
prove is no part of his purpose; for, with unspeakable 
hardihood, he goes on to tell us that his theory 
respecting the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch 
is to be presumed to be certainly correct! These are 
his words, at the close of the passage above quoted: 
'The presumption is, that all is genuine that is not 
proved spurious. The burden of proof is, therefore, 
on the negative.'

I ask the author of this astonishing sentence--
Why should we entertain such a presumptuous 'presumption'?

If another book, or another system, contained instances 
of direct and irreconcilable contradiction so 
numerous  as those of the Bible, the claim of plenary 
inspiration for it would be simply ridiculous and absurd. 
But in the case of the Bible, these very contradictions 
(which Mr. Beecher guardedly calls 'differences,' 
strengthen his belief. Here is his language: 
(p. 15.)
'And what shall we say of the differences fundamental 
to the salvation of science, if not of the soul? 
Do they cast suspicion on the plenary inspiration of 
the Bible? Methinks it would be far more philosophical 
to say that, properly considered, they 
strengthen it; for it is not likely bodies so widely 
oppugnant would continue loyal to the same book, 
unless it had a divine strength.'

To assume "a divine strength," inhering equally 
in every part of the multifarious collection of writings 
which form the Bible, is one of Mr. Beecher's 
ingenious little manoeuvres for explaining its reception 
among men as a highly valuable book, honored, 
cherished and complimented, however imperfectly 
obeyed: but he remembers to forget to speak of 
the very weighty influence operating to the same 
end, of forty thousand clergymen, scattered through 
the whole mass of the population of this country, and 
possessed of their confidence and respect, who twice 
a week vehemently urge upon them that it is their 
duty and interest so to cherish the Bible. If we add 
this influence to the influence of so much of the 
Bible itself as is true and highly valuable, the problem 
will be solved without the hypothesis of 'plenary 
inspiration.'

Let me say here, since this pamphlet assails Mr. 
Parker and Mr. Garrison for their statements respecting 
the Bible, that these eminent benefactors of their 
age have not only never denied the high value and 
excellence of that book, but they have constantly 
asserted it; none more than they have diligently 
studied its meaning, echoed its truths, and called on 
the people to obey them.

It needs to be said also, (since Mr. Beecher and his 
clerical brethren are constantly trying to represent
the recognition of errors in the Bible, and of contradictions 
between its different parts, as an injurious 
imputation against the Bible itself,) that the existence 
of errors and contradictions in that book, however fatal 
to the clerical hypothesis of its miraculous inspiration, 
by no means injures the character of the book 
itself, when its origin is taken into consideration.


[??????????]
neglected this duty, admonish them with regard to it, 
and urge its performance? Does he, when he finds 
that the members of his church, with one consent, 
imitate 'the world' in utterly neglecting to obey this 
precept, preach in favor of it, condemn disobedience 
to it, and insist that the sick shall be oiled by the 
elders of the church, 'according to the Scripture'? 
Nothing of the sort!

In this case, Mr. Beecher chooses to use reason in 
opposition to Scripture. He chooses, in this particular, 
to agree with Mr. Parker and Mr. Garrison. I 
think that, in so far, he does well! But why does he 
insist on the hypothesis (even while belieing it by 
his practice) of James's absolute inspiration and plenary 
authority? How does he dare to 'take away' a 
command of Scripture in this case, and to 'add' to 
Scripture a command for the observance of Sunday as 
a Sabbath, if the denunciation at the end of the book 
of 'Revelation' covers the whole Bible, as he represents, 
and if it is a denunciation really to be feared, 
as he represents?  His theory and practice do not 
hang together.

Among the eccentricities which I have mentioned 
as characterizing Mr. Beecher's pamphlet are the following. 
He thinks it important to believe in a preëxistence 
of souls, before their appearance in this world. 
He thinks it important to 'join on' where the Westminster 
Divines left off--a formula of which I do not 
pretend to understand the import. And he indulges, 
from time to time, in a strain of exalted phraseology, 
such as the Western people call 'high-falutin,' as 
follows:--

'Such are the concessions that have been quite 
generally made by the leaders of Christendom, and 
that on the very field of Waterloo, when the squadrons 
of the enemy, flushed with anticipated triumph, 
are thundering in upon our hollow square.' --p. 19.

'What shall we say of those who, while the squadrons 
of Antichrist come rushing in full onset on our 
squares, command us to ground arms, and let them 
ride us down?'--p. 20.

'I marvel the stones did not cry out, and the bones 
of the immortal Edwards bust from their cerements, 
when such voices echoed in Nassau Hall and Andover, 
in Philadelphia and Boston. When the proud 
Philistine walks up and down our New England 
Israel, and defies the armies of the living God, what 
answer do these Sauls and Abners send back to his 
deadly challenge?'--ib.

'Never is the New [Covenant] more effulgently 
divine than when, in a world full of blasphemy, the 
white horseman rides in, and with steady hand, and 
eye of fire, transfixes his elect through and through.'
--p. 34.

I have small space left in which to speak of the 
position of Mr. Beecher, in this sermon, (and elsewhere,) 
in regard to slavery. While admitting, 
(amazing exercise of candor!) that 'the churches have 
need to confess sins of omission towards the slave,' he 
declares that 'time will show their head, heart and 
system to be right in this matter.' And he humbly 
hopes that his own conviction that 'slaveholding is a 
sin' is also 'the honest conviction of the New England 
churches.'

Mr. Beecher's 'hope' in this matter has need to be 
humble, very humble. For, if the churches of New 
England cherish any such conviction as he attributes 
to them, (I mean humbly hopes concerning them,) 
they have kept it covered with a bushel as effectually 
as Mr. Beecher's church has done. 

Dr. Cheever also heartily believes that slaveholding 
is sin. We have no need to consult, or to publish 
certificates to that effect, for he has made it so plain 
by his energetic speech and action, in the pulpit and 
out of it, that, even with the disadvantage of having 
but half a church to coöperate with him, he is hated 
by the nation, saints and sinners alike, scarcely less 
than Mr. Parker and Mr. Garrison are hated, and for 
the same reason.

Who has ever heard of any specially anti-slavery 
character in Mr. Beecher or in his church? Who 
has seen even a ripple in the stream where they have 
been gliding smoothly along with that group of 
churches of the popular religion which forms, notoriously, 
the main bulwark of slavery? Churches 
whose revival sermons avoid comment on slavery as 
tending to cheek the 'work of grace'! and whose 
'business men's prayer-meetings' expressly forbid


send every mother's son of you to them. What are 
you here for?' I continnered, warmin' up considerable, 
'can't you giv Abe a minit's peace? Don't 
you see he's worrid most to death! Go home, you 
miserable men, go home & till the sile! Go to pedlin 
tinware--go to choppin wood--go to billin sope--
stuff sassengers--black boots - git a clerkship on 
sum respectable manure cart--go round as original 
Swiss Bell Ringers--becum 'origenal and only' 
Campbell Minstrels--go to lecturin at 50 dollars a 
nite--imbark in the peanut bizniss--write for the 
Ledger--saw off your legs and go round givin concerts, 
with techin appeals to a charitable public 
printed on your handbills--anything for a honest 
livin', but don't come round here drivin Old Abe 
crazy by your outrajus cuttings up! 

Go home. Stand not upon the order of your goin', 
but got to onct!  Ef in five minits from this 
time,' sez I, pullin' out my new sixteen dollar 
huntin cased watch, and brandishin' it before their 
eyes, 'Ef in five minits from this time a single sole 
of you remains on these here premises, I'll go out 
to my cage near by, and let my Boy Constructor 
loose! & if he gits amung you, you'll think Old 
Solferino has cum again and no mistake!' You 
ought to hev seen them scamper, Mr. Fair. They 
run orf as tho Satun hisself was arter them with a 
red hot ten pronged pitchfork. In five minits the 
premises was clear. 

'How kin I ever repay you, Mr. Ward, for your 
kindness?' sed Old Abe, advancin and shakin me 
warmly by the hand. 'How kin I ever repay you, 
sir?' 

'By givin the whole country a good, sound administration. 
By poerin ile upon the troubled waters, 
North and South! By pursooin a patriotic, 
firm, and just course and then if a State wants to 
secede, let 'em Seceesh!' 

'How 'bout my cabnit Ministre, Ward?' sed 
Abe. 

'Fill it up with Showmen, sir! Showmen is devoid 
of politics. They hain't got a darn principle! 
They know how to cater to the public. They know 
what the public wants, North & South. Showmen, 
sir, is honest men. Ef you doubt their literary
ability, look at their posters, and see small bills? 
Ef you want a Cabinit as is a Cabinit, fill it up 
with showmen, but don't call on me    The moral 
wax figger perfeshun mustn't be permitted to go 
down while there's a drop of blood in these veins! 
A. Linkin, I wish you well! Ef Powers or Walcutt 
wus to pick out a model for a beautiful man, I 
scarcely think they'd sculp you; but ef you do the 
fair thing by your country you'll make as putty a 
angel as any of us, or any other man! A. Linkin, 
use the talents which nature has put into you judishusly 
and firmly, and all will be well! A. Linkin, 
adoo! 

He shook me cordyully by the hand--we exchanged picturs, 
so we could gaze upon each other's 
liniments when far away from one another--he at 
the hellum of the Ship of State, and I at the hellum 
of the show bizness--admittance only 15 cents. 
ARTEMUS WARD. 
-----------------------
From the Portland (Me.) Transcript.
HORNBY SECEDES!!
---
LETTER FROM ETHAN SPIKE.
---
Hornby, Nov. 19, 1860.
The seventeen plagues of triberlation is come. 
From the airy concupisence of the purple zenith, 
the sun hes gone daown to the oriental chambers 
flingin its knockturnal rays on aour glorious Union 
for the last time! One bright an very pertickerler 
star is sot or abaout to set. 

It is no use tryin to disguise it--heartless Black 
Republicans may deride an larf. So Zero fiddled 
when the conflamation was burnin Rome--larfin 
won't squich the fires. 

Hornby is already nullified, an, onless suthin is 
done pretty quick, she'll see seed!

I haint time to write all the perticklers. I've 
ollers bin a Union-saver, and true to my perlitical 
instincts, am doing my best to hold on the pieces. 
But this time the Union is too much for me. While 
I'm runnin arter one piece, two or three more gets 
adrift, an the divil in a gale of wind hes an easy 
time compared to mine. 

Up to last teusday we thought everything was all 
right. We expected of course, that Bruckinbridge 
an Duglis was elected, and that the statootes of the 
constitootion was consequentially safe. But A lass! 
we was

---'mistaking souls, 
Wot drempt of heaven,'

 when in reality we stood on the slippery rocks with 
nothin to catch holt on, an billers underneath. A


'Old Dan Tucker' an 'The frog he would a 
wooing &c.' with great effect. Deacon Pendergrass 
was axed to pray, but he would nt, so we passed the 
balance of the time in stompin, imitation pigs, 
roosters an tom-cats. 

The committee on resolutions offered the followin: 
'In the name of the State--forevermore, amen. 
SS. Whereas the people of Hornby, being of sane 
mind an lawful age, do depose an say--

1st. Resolved: That all men is created free an 
equal--exceptin them that is'nt.

2d. Resolved: That the election of Abram Hanibal 
is a direct insult to Hornby, and ortent to be 
put up with, so it ortent. 

3d. Resolved: That onless the said Abraham shall
take back everything he hes said agin the peace an 
dignity of this suvrin moonicipality--or ef he hes'nt 
said nothin, he dus not faithfully promise not to do 
it agin, then this moonicipality will proceed to stultify 
itself accordin to statooe made an provided.

4th. Resolved: That we hev the right, an will 
see-seed--forcibly ef we can, peaceably ef we must. 

5th. Resolved: That the Selick men be empowered 
to borry on the credit of the taoun, ef they can, 
the sum of $24,19, to put the Hornby Phalanx on 
a war footin. 

6th. Resolved: That the "Stars an Stripes" be 
an hereby is abolished, an that a new flag be obtained, 
emblazoned with the taoun arms--a woodchuck 
rampant, with the motter "I bites," an one 
star in the center. 

7th. Resolved: That this ere goen aout of a snvrin 
loominary ar a sollum thing, an haouever much 
human critters may laaf an jeast, we is gratified to 
know that nater is more seriouser, an is makin 
demonstrations suitable to the sollum ewent. The 
airthquake of Oct. 19, was a leetle ahead of time 
to be sure, but on the hull creditable. Thar ar 
spots on the sun, an since the 6th of November it 
rises later and later, at the same time setting airlier 
an airlier. The moon also is gibeous, an some think 
its got the phases, for all of wich this meetin is 
suitably grateful. 

8th. Resolved: That moast of this distressin 
sitooation is owin to Portland. Tharfore Resolved 
that we will care aour tetters to some other market, 
an that we repudiate all demands wich Portland 
folks hold agin us.

9th. Resolved: That this meeting do naow adjourn--
wich it did.'

All the above is facts, I make no comments--its 
onnecessary. ETHAN SPIKE.
------------
SELF-CONTRADICTIONS OF THE BIBLE.
Fourth Edition.
One hundred and forty-four propositions, theological, moral, historical, and speculative, each proved affirmatively and negatively, by quotations from Scripture, without comment; embodying most of the palpable and striking self-contradictions of the so-called inspired World of God. Fourth Edition. Price 15 cents, post-paid. Eight for a dollar. Sold by all liberal booksellers, and by the publisher.
A. J. Davis & CO.,
Oct. 5-6m. 274 Canal street, New York.
IMPROVEMENT IN Champooing and Hair Dyeing.
Madam Bannister (formerly Madam Carteaux) would inform her kind and liberal patrons and the public, that she has removed to 323 Washington st., and 20 West st.; where will be found her Restorative, the most celebrated in the world, as it prevents hair from turning gray, and produces new in all diseases of the scalp. She stands second to none in Hair-Dyeing and Champooing. Ladies waited on at their residences, either in or out of town. Boston, May 1, 1860.
TENTH NATIONAL WOMAN'S RIGHTS CONVENTION.
Just published, a full Report of the proceeding of the TENTH NATIONAL WOMAN'S RIGHTS CONVENTION, held in the city of New York, May 10th and 11th, 1860, 100 pp. large octavo. This pamphlet contains the addresses and speeches of Mrs. E. Cady Stanton, Mrs. E. L. Rose, Rev. Mrs. Antoinette Brown Blackwell, Mrs. J. Elizabeth Jones, Wendell Phillips, Esq., Rev. Samuel Longfellow, William Lloyd Garrison, Rev. Berah Green, and others, with the resolutions, & c., making an exceedingly interesting and valuable document. But a limited number of copies have been printed, many of which have been disposed of in advance of publication. 'A word to the wise,' &c.
Price, 25 cents: by mail, 30 cents. Address Robert F. Wallcut, 221, Washington street.

Transcribed and reviewed by contributors participating in the By The People project at crowd.loc.gov.