2 10 250 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Poetry Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource EPISTLE TO WILLIAM WILBERFORCE, ESQ. On the Rejection of the bill for abolishing THE SLAVE TRADE Description An account of the resource In our research for papers issued in the slave's behalf, following the parliamentary vote, in 1791, which negatived a motion to abolish the slave trade, we met with the following very beautiful poem by one of England's most gifted daughters. Some elegant selections from her writing are given in Frost's British Poets; but this does not appear among them, nor do we believe it can be found in any other American volume. We suppose that to most of our readers it will be as new and acceptable as t was to us.--E[?]s. EPISTLE TO WILLIAM WILBERFORCE, ESQ. On the Rejection of the bill for abolishing THE SLAVE TRADE BY ANNA LETITIA BARBAULD (London, J. Johnson, M.DCC.XCI.) Cease, Wilberforce, to urge thy generous aim! Thy Country knows the sin, and stands the shame! The Preacher, Poet, Senator in vain Has rattled in her sigh the Negro's chain; With his deep groans assailed her startled ear, And rent the veil that hid his constant tear; Forc'd her averted eyes his stripes to scan. Beneath the bloody scourge laid bare the man, Claim'd Pity's tear, urg'd Conscience's strong controul, And flash'd conviction on her shrinking soul. The Muse, too, soon awak'd, with ready tongue At Mercy's shrine applausive peans rung; And Freedom's eager sons, in vain foretold A new Astrean reign, an age of gold: She knows and she persists--Still Afric bleeds; Uncheck'd, the human traffic still proceeds; She stamps her infamy to future time, And on her harden'd forehead seals the crime. In vain, to thy white standard gathering round, Wit, Worth, and Parts and Eloquence are found; In vain, to push to birth thy great design, Contending chiefs, and hostile virtues join; All, from conflicting ranks, of power possest To rouse, to melt, or to inform the breast. Where seasoned tools of Avarice prevail, A Nation's eloquence, combined, must fail: Each flimsy sophistry by turns they try; The plausive argument, the daring lie, The artful gloss, that moral sense confounds, Th'acknowledged thirst of gain that honours wounds: Bane of ingenuous minds, th'unfeeling sneer Which, sudden, turns to stone the falling tear: Thy search assiduous, with inverted skill, For forms of wrong, and precdents of ill; With impious mockery wrest the sacred page, And glean up crimes from each remoter age: Wrung Nature's tortures, shuddering, while you tell, From scoffing fiends bursts forth the laugh of hell; In Britain's senate, Misery's pangs give birth To justs unseemly, and to horrid mirth-- Forebear!--thy virtues but provoke our doom, And swell th'account of vengeance yet to come; For, not unmark'd in Heaven's impartial plan, Shall man, proud wo[?]m, contemn his fellow-man? And injured Afric, by herself redrest,  Darts her own serpents at her Tyrant's breast. Each vice, to minds deprav'd by bondage known, With sure contagion fastens on his own; In sickly languors melts his nerveless frame, And blows to rage impetuous Passion's flame: Fermentng swift, the fiery venom gains The milky innocence of infant veins; There swells the stubborn will, damps learning's fire, The whirlwind wakes of uncontroul'd desire, Sears the young heart to images of woe, And blasts the buds of Virtue as they blow. Lo! where reclin'd, pale Beauty courts the breeze Diffus'd on sofas of voluptuous ease; With anxious awe, her menial train around, Catch her faint whispers of half-utter'd sound; See her, in monstrous fellowship, unite At once the Scythian, and the Sybarite; Blending repugnant vices, misally'd, Which frugul nature purpos'd to divide; See her, with indolence to fierceness join'd, Of body delicate, infirm of mind, With languid tones imperious mandates urge; With arm recumbent wield the household scourge, And with unruffled mien, and placid sounds, Contriving torture, and inflicting wounds. Nor, in their palmy walks and spicy groves, The form benign of rural Pleasure roves; No milk-maids' song, or hum of village talk, Sooths the lone Poet in his evening walk: No willing arm the flail unwearied plies, Where the mix'd sounds of cheerful labour rise; No blooming maids, and frolic swains are seen To pay gay homage to their harvest queen: No heart-expanding scenes their eyes must prove Of thriving industry, and faithful love: But shrieks and yells disturb the balmy air, Dumb sullen looks of woe announce despair, And angry eyes thro' dusky features glare. Far from the sounding lash the Muses fly, And sensual riot drowns each finer joy. Nor less from the gay East, on essenc'd wings, Breathing unnam'd perfumes, Contagion springs; The soft luxurious plague alike pervades The marble palaces, and rural shades; Hence, throng'd Augusta builds her rosy bowers, And decks in summer wreaths her smoky towers; And hence, in summer bow'rs, Art's costly hand Pours courtly splendours o'er the dazzled land: The manners melt--One undistinguish'd blaze O'erwhelms the sober pomp of elder days; Corruption follows with gigantic stride, And scarce vouchsafes his shameless front to hide: The spreading leprosy taints ev'ry part, Infects each limb, and sickens at the heart. Simplicity! most dear of rural maids, Weeping resigns her violated shades; Stern Independence from his glebe retires, And anxious Freedom eyes her drooping fires; By foreign wealth are British morals chang'd, And Afric's sons, and India's, smile aveng'd. For you, whose temper'd ardour long has borne Untir'd the labour, and unmov'd the scorn; In Virtue's fasti be inscrib'd your fame, And utter'd your's with Howard's honour'd name, Friends of the friendless--Hail, ye generous band! Whose efforts yet arrest Heaven's lifted hand, Around whose steady brows, in union bright, The civic wreath, and Christian's palm unite: Your merit stands, no greater and no less, Without, or with the varnish of success; But seek no more to break a Nation's fall, For ye have sav'd yourselves--and that is all. Succeeding times your struggles, and their fate, With mingled shame and triumph shall relate, While faithful History, in her various page, Marking the features of this motley age, To shed a glory, and to fix a stain, Tells how you strove, and that you strove in vain. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Anna Letitia Barbauld Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived The Non-Slaveholder 2:7, pp. 167-168 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 7.1.1847 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slave Labor Products---No. 2. Subject The topic of the resource Criticism of William Lloyd Garrison Description An account of the resource FRIENDS EDITORS:-- Before proceeding with this number of my series, permit me, with all deference to your veto power, respectfully to request that you will concede to me the right to judge whether what I write be "necessary to correct understanding" of my views. You will thus be saved the trouble of curtailing, mutilating or interpolating for me; I shall have some assurance that what I write will be published as I arrange and prepare it, and your readers will sometimes be favored with both sides of a subject on which they would otherwise have to decide from hearing one only.* GARRISON'S EDITORIAL This subject of slave labor produce, says Garrison, "must be left to the individual conscience." He quotes from Paul, "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind," &c. "To him that esteemeth any thing unclean to him it is unclean," &c.-- Can any one tell what peculiar relevancy there can be in such advice to the subject under consideration? How will the same precepts sound when applied to the pro-slavery church member, the Whig, the Democrat or the Slaveholder? Why not leave such to their individual conscience, also? Can any one find a reason satisfactory to his own mind for thus discriminating? Friend Garrison informs us that he is not willing to discuss this question! He is not now willing to assist in leading his friends out of an "error" as he terms it, although he was instrumental in involving them in it.--Many are indebted in part to the arguments he has used for their "conscientious scruples" on this subject. He once laid down, as a settled principle, the following declaration: "I hold this truth to be self-evident, that no transfer, or inheritance, or sale of stolen property, can convert it into just possession or destroy the claim of the original owner; the maxim being universally conceded to be just, that the receiver is as bad as the thief." This was heralded forth to the world through the Liberator, and who at that time would have believed that the editor would have ever abandoned that "self-evident truth," without showing conclusively that the position was false, or that he would deny the privilege to others either to prove or confute the proposition? He appears disposed to permit his friends to stray off into the same "error" from which he believes himself to have been so fortunately redeemed, pursuing after that bubble of a self-evident truth which he has put them on the track of! For such treatment I think we have just cause to complain of our once admired champion. If we have any thing from his pen to eradicate the conviction, that we cannot innocently use the proceeds of unrequited toil, and to upset the above axiom or prove it but a chimera, it must be found in his late editorial--in the declaration that there are "difficulties" in the question--that there are a "thousand others" of vital importance--in the assertion that the Abolitionists are "innocent" but others are "not innocent" in using those products--in a quotation from Paul that "to him that esteemeth anything unclean to him it is unclean," and in the comparison of other systems of oppression with that of slavery!! &c. Is it possible that W.L. Garrison has been convinced by such reasons that the "self-evident truth" that "no transfer, or inheritance, or sale of stolen property can convert it into just possession," and always was, an "error," or that "self-evident truths" are to be abandoned upon such evidence? The disunionist would, as I conceive, have less cause for surprise, and less for complaint, if Garrison would now reverse his course upon that question, and assign similar reasons for such change, and then decline a further investigation. The Free Produce question was a conspicuous item among the measures avowed by the parent society--Disunion was not. "No casuistry" has settled the disunion question "like a moral axiom." Garrison, although he seems to have forgotten it, has thus settled the free produce question. The use of the Union is claimed by a class of the anti-slavery people as a means of abolishing slavery. No such claim I presume will be seriously made upon the use of slave labor goods as a means of removing the evil.--The "difficulties" of withholding all support to the Union are much greater than those of refusing the use of slave labor products, and all the arguments used by Garrison in his editorial would, it appears to me, apply with more force to his case, were he to abandon the disunion ground, and present to his readers a similar defense for his course. After reading and re-reading that editorial, and seeking in vain for any logical argument in it, many of his friends will still be compelled to adhere to an old-fashioned idea, handed down by John Woolman and his contemporaries--thorougly examined and found true by the old school abolitionists of 1790, and re-endorsed by an equally devoted band in 1833, that the slaveholder and the consumer of his commodities, together with all the complex machinery pertaining to the process of their production, transfer, traffic and consumption, constitute one great "slaveholding firm," all acting in harmony--no part of which can be spared without detriment to the rest, and that the consumer is, especially, the main spring which gives to the whole, motion, energy and vitality. If, then, we are bound to be "rigidly consistent," should we not take down the motto, "No union with slaveholders," until we shall have become disenthralled from this vast "slaveholding firm"? The disunionist who cleaves to it holds in one hand the motto "no union with slaveholders," and in the other the tempting bribe to the slaveholder, "Give us your cotton, and your rice, and your sugar, and we will give you our money; but if you liberate your slave you cannot furnish it so cheap--we will then patronize him who wrests those articles from his victim without compensation; we are abolitionists, it is "innocent" for us to buy of him who can sell cheapest without regard to the mode by which he procures his goods." The Fosters, the Pillsburys, the Jacksons, and other non-abstaining abolitionists, says Garrison, says Garrison, need no certificate of their devotion to the cause of the slave. Those may all be good abolitionists, which is not saying they might not be better. Pulpit labor is often mistaken, however, for practical work. Politicians are often set down as true patriots and great champions of human liberty, when there is not perhaps a single act they have performed to merit the character imputed to them, save those of public speaking in behalf of freedom. This they have done with less pecuniary compnsation, and no more hope of acquiring distinction and eminence than has the anti-slavery lecturer. Such may, or they may not be the true friends of human freedom. What we want is practical work as well as preaching. If W.L.G. had been arguing the other side of the question, I doubt not it would have occurred to him to show that C.C. Burleigh, Lucretia Mott, and other free produce anti-slavery laborers possessed all the requisites of the above named with the additional evidence of their fidelity to the cause, that they make sacrifices to procure the unstained productions of free labor. As to those he speaks of as "needing no ceritificate" &c., those of them I have heard, would surely be entitled to a clear "certificate" from the slaveholder for their warm advocacy of a doctrine most essential to the existence of his "peculiar institution," which may be properly termed, "COMMERCIAL UNION WITH SLAVEHOLDERS." B.B. DAVIS. *This insinuation that we would exclude one side of a question while we admitted the other, is entirely destitute of foundation. It has not the least semblance of truth, and we are unable to conceive how it was possible for the writer to think otherwise when he penned it.--EDRS.] Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource B.B. Davis Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Anti-slavery Bugle 2:51, p. 2 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 7.23.1847 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slave Labor Products--No. 1. Description An account of the resource INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. FRIENDS EDITORS:-- Having, as your readers may infer from your editorials of the last two weeks, had some difficulty in getting access to your readers through the columns of the Bugle, and I suppose entirely debarred from a hearing through the Liberator, I must ask for a little more space than would otherwise be necessary, for prefatory remarks. [We omit here a portion of our correspondent's preface, inasmuch as it relates to a matter which he was told in a private interview we thought would be out of place in our columns--nor is the part omitted needed to give a correct understanding of his Free Produce views.--EDRS.] I consider the American Anti-Slavery Society under obligations, not only to admit, but to encourage the discussion of, and to advocate, the Free Labor question. And especially is the Western A.S. Society bound to do this. When this Society received its impulse by the visit of Abby Kelley in 1845, the Declaration of Sentiment and Constitution of the present Society formed in 1833, was read in the Convention held in New Lisbon, and re-adopted by the same, as the acknowledged embodiment of the principles, doctrines and measures of this Society.--Among the measures which stand prominent in that declaraction of sentiment, is the following, "We shall encourage the labor of freemen rather than that of slaves, by giving a preference to their productions." At the Convention of the Western Society held at New Garden last year, the following resolution was adopted: Resolved, That we believe it our duty to abstain as far as practicable from the fruits of slaves' labor, and encourage the labor of freemen." By the published proceedings of this Convention in the Bugle of June 26, 1816, it will be seen that this resolution "passed with scarcely a dissenting voice"! An editorial in the same paper says it passed "with much unanimity." [A few lines also omitted here.--EDRS.] THE DECLENSION. Whenever the Am. A.S. Society has added to its policy any new measure, or modified any of its old ones, the subject of such change has always been a theme of much discussion; sometimes almost to the exclusion of the direct question. The change now attempted to be effected in relation to the free produce question, constitutes a remarkable exception to this rule. Even W.L. Garrison, who once maintained that the doctrine of abstinence from slave labor produce was a duty as clear as that of abstinence from slaveholding--"a self-evident truth," now takes a contrary position, and in doing so, declares in plain terms, his unwillingness either to discuss the subject or grant the use of his paper for the privilege of such discussion!! Is it thus that "self-evident truths are to be disposed of by abolitionists? If this be so, and the evidence that it is need not now be disputed, we may not only hear of the Disunion doctrine being abandoned to-morrow, (for it never has, nor never will be claimed to be based on a self-evident truth,) but the abandonment of the idea of the slave's inalienable right to liberty, may with equal propriety be surrendered, for that is nothing more than a "self-evident truth." But strange as it may seem, soon after W.L. Garrison's views became changed, we discovered one by one, without a public discussion of the question, with no circulation of anti-free labor tracts, the anti-slavery men and women dropping off! The Am. Free Produce Society lost several of their active members, their names and their arguments, the latter unanswered and unanswerable, and both as monuments of their apostacy from the doctrine so triumphantly maintained by many of our ablest anti-slavery writers, are yet to be seen upon the records. The few reasons which have been advanced against the free labor subject, being evidently the best that can be advanced, it is my purpose in these essays to review, not so much because of the sources from which they emanate, as for the purpose which they are intended to subserve, and the use made of them. Whatever goes to discourage the manufacture of free produce, goes so far to encourage that of slave labor, and to encourage the latter, is to aid oppression. WM. LLOYD GARRISON. The editor of the Liberator, W.L. Garrison, in his remarks on the free produce question, in the Liberator of the 5th of 3rd mo. last, I perceive, takes the ground, that the fruits of the unnpaid toil of the slave, may be innocently used by those who are earnestly laboring to overthrow slavery, but "not innocently by any other person"! Strange as it appears to me to see such a position as this taken by one who in time past, occupied so firm a stand upon the other side of the question, I was still more surprised to read in the same editorial, other positions so palpably conflicting with parts of the above. I have perused subsequent numbers of the Liberator with much expectation of seeing his late position on the above question, supported by a chain of argument, consistent with itself at least, and could not for a time believe his readers would be obliged to accept that article as the best and only defence that cause would afford. But the very fact that it has been sustained no better, by one whose ability to do justice to a worthy subject cannot be disputed, affords strong evidence to the friends of the free labor enterprise, that their cause stands upon a permanent basis. He not only alleges that "nothing would be gained" be pressing the free labor subject upon public attention; that it would be "a waste of time," &c., but sets down as "preposterous and unjust," those who "attempt to seek the subversion of slavery" by refusing the use of its products, or "attach moral guilt to the consumer." Yet I understand him to "attach moral guilt to the consumer" by saying that other persons than good abolitionists cannot innocently use those products! We are told by his editorial, that to regard the consumer of slave labor products, as a supporter of the system, is an 'error,' yet the same editorial tells us that these consumers (good abolitionists excepted) are guilty for using them! He imputes great credit to "the truly conscientious" who abstain, but must have forgotten that those are the individuals who "attach moral guilt to the consumer," and who therefore lie under this charge of preposterous injustice! He considers it not susceptible of "clear demonstration" that it is wrong to use the productions of slave labor, that it should be "left to the individual conscience," and that "no man" could reduce the question to practice. Yet after laying down these conscience-soothers for abolitionists, he has arraigned the anti-abolitionists, as guilty for leaving the subject to "individual conscience," for not reducing to practice this "impracticability." He says the free labor abolitionists "are bound to be rigidly consistent." Does he mean thy only should be so? Are we to ask others to do what we call "impracticable"? But why are anti-abolitionists "not innocent" in using these products? The answer must be that it is a pro-slavery (slavery sustaining) act. From this conclusion there appears to be no escape. Then we find the ground taken by W.L. Garrison and others to be this; that pro-slavery acts by those who labor in the slave's cause, are justifiable!--The pro-slavery church-member nor the voter for the veriest slave-holder, need ask for no broader license than this. If anti-slavery labor will atone for the support I render to the slave system, by purchasing of the slaveholder his ill-gotten gains, the same labor will exonerate me from guilt when for a similar reason (pecuniary gain) I vote for Henry Clay and a high tariff. And why may I not with as good a plea purchase John C. Calhoun's slaves and with their (the slaves') 'consent,' set them to work for me while I go forth to advocate the cause of human rights? It need not be replied that the slave would not in this case have a right to give his consent, if he can, as Stephen S. Foster asserts, and as Garrison implies, give his consent to the anti-slavery lecturer to use the proceeds of his unpaid toil after they had passed thro' the hands of his master. Or in other words, he can consent to be a slave that by virtue of the robberies committed upon him, the advocate of his rights may obtain his food and clothing cheaper, and be thus enabled to devote the more time to the cause of human liberty!! But who gave the slave a right to 'consent' to a moral wrong? To build up an Anti-Slavery Society upon the alleged justice of using the products of the labor or the slave, as one of its pillars, will be about as wise, as just, as consistent, us to establish a "Free Republic" with slavery for one of its "corner stones." The obvious intent of Garrison's argument is to show the difficulties of abstinence. Why not give the non-abstaining anti-abolitionist, the advantage of these difficulties, and not charge guilt upon individuals in an inverse ratio to the light they possess? To the church-member or the voter who talks about "the difficulties" of Comeoutism, he has shown no quarters; yet it has not been conceded nor is it to be taken for granted, that belonging to any church or voting under the United States Constitution, does more to sustain slavery than the use of the products of slave labor. By abstinence from the latter no majority is required to produce an effect, nor is age or sex excluded from the privilege of a vote at the merchant's counter. It requires but little argument to show that the consumers of any commodity have the entire control over its production and manufacture, and that at their edict the same shall live and prosper, or die. I understand his position, however, to require of all persons to abstain till they become good abolitionists, then all may with impunity participate with the slaveholder in his plunder! If it is not a case "admitting of clear demonstration," that we have no just claim on the fruits of the bondman's toil, will it not be difficult also, to show that the slaveholder has no just right to those products, or at what stage of the process of production, manufacture and transfer, the title becomes clear and valid, so as to warrant their use by those who disclaim all connection with, or support of, the slave system? B.B. Davis. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Anti-Slavery Bugle 2:49, p. 2 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 7.9.1847 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource B.B. Davis Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slave Labor Products---No. 3. Description An account of the resource FRIENDS EDITORS:-- The exclusion of a discussion of the merits of this important question from the columns of the Liberator, seems to me to call for a more extended review of Garrison's editorial, which will therefore also constitute the principal part of this Essay. He considers it "singular" that this zeal for abstinence is almost exclusively confined to a particular locality, and to members of the Society of Friends. With respect to the extent of this "locality" I am inclined to believe he is entirely misinformed. His editorial proceeds, "for the consciences of some of these we entertain very little respect. They are those who strain at a gnat and swallow a camel." This character he ascribes to them for being scrupulous about slave labor produce while they vote under the U.S. Constitution, for Whigs and Democrats, &c. He terms them "of the race of Pharisees and hypocrites" &c., "thanking God that they are not like these Anti-Slavery publicans and sinners." Do not non-abstaining discunionists claim as much purity for their alleged exemption from all support of slavery, and manifest toward the free-labor voter equally as much of this self-righteous spirit? Free labor men do not, so far as I am acquainted with them, lay claim to be entirely clear of the use of slave labor produce, and instead of being liable to this charge of self-righteousness, are violently denounced for self-condemnation.--While Garrison accuses them of self-righteousness, Pillsbury and Foster censure them for possessing quite an opposite character. The doctrine of self-righteousness belongs to that school of abolitionists which would make the world believe they are living in this government without contributing an item to its support; that by some mysterious sanctification of the money they pay, voluntarily, in a score of ways, into the U.S. treasury, absolves them from any implication in the sin of upholding it! and that by an equally mysterious process, the hire which the slaveholder receives from their hands for carrying on his business affords no incentive to the act! that it partakes of an entirely different character from that paid him by the anti-abolitionist, so that they neither support slavery nor the Government, though they afford to each that sustenance, without which neither could exist!! But Garrison complains of the "unkind" expressions and "criminations" in certain free labor essays, &c. Are they more so than these criminations of Free labor Friends? There must be more acrimony among the free labor friends than I was aware of, if they have outstripped in severity his own animadversions upon what he considers pro-slavery conduct among others, and he is the last man from whom I expected to hear such a complaint. But what was the practice of the leading anti-slavery men of 1838--Did they not support this same pro-slavery Government?--Some of them also "strained at gnats," (were free labor men) but they nearly all "swallowed camels," (voted.) Where they hypocrites? That which constitutes hypocrisy now must have been hypocrisy then. Were those pioneers (W.L. Garrison and others,) "hypocrites," who at the same time advocated voting under the United States constitution, and abstinence from slave labor produce? The course of conduct Garrison prescribes as proper to pursue toward the free labor abolitionist, contrasts strangely in several particulars, with that which he deems it proper to take in reference to others who are in "error." Although they are "wasting their time," attempting that which is "preposterous and unjust," &c., he will not try to prevent their labors from making "as many proselytes as possible!" For some cause he speaks entirely different to the political abolitionist. It would sound strange truly, to hear him talking of "not waging any opposition" against the latter! Again he cherishes toward them (these "preposterous" free labor men and women) "the highest personal esteem and honor for their stern fidelity to their convictions of duty." And while he regards their position as a most erroneous on, he will not consent to reason with them, or try to prevent their making proselytes! Altogether, it seems to me an unusual course to pursue toward those in error, for which I can conceive of no good reason. The classing of the products of the labor of the free operative of the North, or of Europe with that of slaves, to aid the cause of non-abstinence, is like the stale argument against the Anti-Slavery movement, still ringing in our ears, that the free operatives have a higher claim on our sympathies than the slaves: For the use of free labor produce creates a demand for laborers, increases wages and relieves the poor; whereas the consumption of slave labor produce increases the task of the bondman, augments the demand for slaves, and extends and increases the power and dominion of the oppresors. The one assists the poor, the other oppresses him. To answer some other objections, such as the contamination of the currency, &c., &c., which have been met and refuted times innumerable by writers on the subject, W.L. Garrison among the rest, would seem too much like preaching to an anti-slavery veteran, grown gray in the cause, the doctrine of inalienable rights, or the competency of the slave to take care of himself. But what more need be said to destroy the whole force of the objections to the free labor cause raised in that editorial, than a sentence from the same article where he admits that "other persons" than good abolitionists, "cannot innocently use" those products? Who can regard this as any thing short of a complete refutation of all his preceding objections! I had before heard S.S. Foster allege that those who used slave labor goods, not being abolitionists, were "thieves and robbers," but I was not prepared to hear such declaration from friend Garrison. It appears to be the fate of all who attempt to defend the principle of buying stolen goods, to get involved in absurdities. For example--Stephen S. foster at the late anniversaries at New York and Boston, says Henry Grew in the A.S. Standard, declared that the use of slave labor products rendered no aid to the slaveholder. Compare this with his declaration at New Garden, that those who use these products (abolitionists excepted) were thieves and robbers! Again at the latter convention, after declaring abstinence to be "just what the slaveholder desired of us," he avowed himself in favor of a free produc resolution and said he would vote for it. If the argument of the friends of this cause are not sufficient to convince such persons, I should suppose their own blunders in attempting to sustain the opposite ground would do it. Garrison concludes that it is "much easier to pursue this course" (be free labor abolitionists, such as many members of the Society of Friends &c. are,) than to engage in these "fanatical agitations." Most of his article however is devoted to the purpose of showing the extreme difficulty and trouble pertaining to this part of the anti-slavery enterprise! But taking it as his opinion that the free labor question is "easy" and involves less sacrifice of ease and popularity than other branches of the subject, I must beg leave to entertain an entirely opposite opinion. I can conceive of no branch of the anti-slavery enterprise more arduous, more self-sacrificing, and more thankless than this. None that affords as little facility for the demagogue who wishes to palm himself upon the public as an abolitionists. It is easier to lecture under pay ,or for a time without pay--easier to withhold a vote, or to leave old parties and friends and vote a third party ticket--easier to print and circulate papers--to petition legislative bodies--to carry the fugitive in coaches by star light--to combat pro-slavery churches or organization--all are easier than to carry out, to the extent that many do, the free labor cause. So it seems to me; so I hear others, speaking from experiences also assert. But is the free labor subject popular?--Nay. Even among abolitionists it is unpopular, (and where else could it be popular?)--The article under review is evidence enough of this. The course of most of the other anti-slavery papers go to confirm it. Introduce a free labor resolution into an anti-slavery convention, or make a speech upon the subject, and you have in the dissastisfied look of the audience, and the frown of the leading spirits and orators of the day, a strong confirmation of the truth. If there be any part of the anti-slavery enterprise that is not "easy;" if there is any branch of it that is not popular, it is this; and let him who doubts, try it. Let him attempt to get up congregations to listen to a lecture upon it; let him meet the sneer of the pro-slavery merchant, when he asks for free labor goods, and see the jealousy of the anti-slavery man who thinks "no union with slaveholders" consists in not voting nor fellowshipping the existing churches, while he riots upon the unpaid toil of the bondman. Let him make a daily sacrifice, not only of popularity and ease, but of money. and then be accused by those professing to avoid "waging any opposition" against him, and "preposterous injustice"--and by leading anti-slavery men with "opposing the slave's cause," "doing what the slaveholder desires," "being no abolitionist and not worthy of the name," and advised to leave the A.S. Society "the sooner the better," &c. [vide S.S. Foster's speech at the Ohio State Convention 1846.] These obstacles from friends and foes will I trust, convince any one acquainted with them that of all branches of the A.S. cause, this measure has the least to do with the science of Anti-Slavery made easy. B.B. DAVIS. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource B.B. Davis Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Anti-Slavery Bugle 3:1, p. 2 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 8.6.1847 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slave Labor Products---No. 4 Description An account of the resource FRIENDS EDITIORS:-- For reasons already briefly stated, a considerable portion of my previous numbers have been directed to a review of an editorial in the Liberator, not, as you suppose, to the "annihilation" of the editor, unless his existence depends upon the triumph of his anti-free labor views, in which case it would perhaps be fortunate for the cause of humanity, that your idea should prove correct. I think I do not underrate the many good properties of friend Garrison, and as to any feelings of ill will or malignity, I entertain none whatever towards him or any other man; but those who can see nothing but perfect consistency in all his ways, and conceive their pens best employed in lauding his excellencies, may do it; I consider it doing him and the cause of truth greater kindness, to endeavor to correct his errors. In doing this, my remarks have necessarily gone to "the establishment of abstinence views." I should be understood, that to refute the objections to a question is no unusual, nor is it an unreasonable, method of establishing its truth; and the continuance of the review of the said editorial, up to the near approach of Garrison's visit to Ohio, as the reader will have perceived, was not a matter of choice with me. I would much prefer the reader would draw his conclusion of the purport and character of my articles on this subject, and also on the collateral question at issue between us, from my communications themselves, than to take your extraordinary version of them as contained in your last. What has already been written is sufficient to a correct undrstanding of the latter, if our very "unfortunate use of language" and of ideas do not mislead the reader. The importance of giving especial attention to such arguments, even as those of S.S. Foster, or his "reckless assertions," as Henry Grew calls them, will appear obvious when we read in the editorial columns of the Anti-Slavery Bugle of Wendell Phillips at the late anniversary at New York, "fully endorsing the anti-free produce sentiments which have made the former [Foster] so odious in the estimation of some of the friends of the slave." And what are the sentiments which have rendered Foster or his doctrines "so odious," and which are thus "fully endorsed"?--They are the declarations that the anti-slavery laborer "has the consent of the slave" to purchase of the master the fruits of his robberies upon the former!--that those who are not abolitionists, but purchase thereof are "thieves and robbers"!--but that such purchasers "do not aid the slaveholder"!--that those who advocate the free labor question are "not abolitionists," and should "leave the Society, the sooner the better," and some others equally "odious"!! Notwithstanding the Declaration of Sentiment, the acknowledged exponent of the principles of the A.S. Society, clearly and expressly recognizes the Free Labor question as a legitimate measure, yet it seems to be the opinion of some, that the uttering of such sentiments as the above, by leading abolitionists, and their sanction and endorsement, in whole or in part, by Anti-Slavery papers, as real orthodox abolitionism, afford no justification for public criticism, but that those who still adhere to the A.S. Declaration of Sentiments and to the discarded axiom once laid down by W.L. Garrison, that "no transfer of stolen property can confer just possession," &c., may be denied a hearing through smoe of the A.S. papers and spurned from the Anti-Slavery platform, as I have already shown to have been the case. None of these things, however, will deter those who, under a sense of duty, have, for fifteen to fifty years past, been laboring in this cause against ignorance, interestedness, and sophistry. They need not despair--the grounds occupied by the National A.S. Standard, to give a "preference" to free labor or goods, and otherwise assist the cause--the well known position of the Pennsylvania Freeman, the Non-Slaveholder and the Free Labor Advocate, &c.,--the establishment of a wholesale free labor store in Cincinnati, and the increasing interest manifested upon this subject in all parts of the country, are cheering evidence of its ultimate success. It is confidently believed that if the attention of the Anti-Slavery people generally, was turned to this branch of the enterprise, that, in a very short time, the manufacture of the free, would be made to compete fully with that of slave labor goods, and from that moment the slave system must begin to wane. I believe that many abolitionists are, by their efforts in behalf of the slave, through this means alone, doing their full share towards the abolition of slavery in the United States, and that if each person would do as much, slavery would be starved out, and in a very few years be supplanted by a system of free labor. The free labor system is so clearly consistent, economical, right and just, as soon to commend itself to all candid men, and the feasibility of a project for putting in operation a plan for cultivating and manufacturing all tropical productions, upon the free principle, is such as would require but half the effort now bestowed upon other branches of enterprise, to ensure it success. Upon this disuion measure the Liberty party and all other anti-slavery people--the Friends--the Whig and Democratic abolitionists, &c. could unite. None, that I am aware of, deny the efficacy of this measure. Those Disunionists even, who justify their own use of slave labor goods, deny the rightfulness of others to use them. Why can they not be enlisted also? They say other persons "cannot innocently" use any other than free labor goods. Why then cannot they assist in bringing the free article within the reach of such whom they say are guilty for using the other? It is true they would, by recommending the subject to the attention of others, be preaching one doctrine and practising another, but this they do now, and their inconsistency would not therefore be increased, while they would be aiding a cause which they acknowledge to be just and righteous. To say the anti-abolitionist cannot innocently use slave grown products, is to say he is bound to use the free. It is attaching guilt to non-abstinence, so far as relates to the common people at least, and consequent importance to the subject, as a just and righteous cause. They are bound then, by their own avowed principles, and those of the parent Society, to aid in this work. To a question like this, where pecuniary interest is to be overcome, it seems to me there are objections urged which the object or would never think of applying to other cases to which they would be equally applicable. In a discourse upon general principles of moral and religious duty, delivered by S.S. Foster in Salem a year or two since, among other positions which he laid down, was this; that no appropriation to a righteous purpose, of property obtained through unjust means, could be made without crime. He supposed for an illustration, that a clerk in the employ of John Jacob Astor, should, without the knowledge of the owner or the possibility of his missing the property, embezzle a few thousand dollars--that he should appropriate the whole of it to the relief of the starving poor, thus accomplishing much good without inflicting any perceptible injury upon any. This, Foster said, would be as certainly a crime as any other act of theft, because it was predicated upon a wrong. Now what anti-slavery man or woman will dissent from this principle? Yet S.S. Foster, and W.L. Garrison have distinctly declared, and I believe all anti-free labor abolitionists understake to defend the doctrine, that it is wrong for any person to purchase the products of the unpaid toil of the slave unless they make good use of it! They must be used to clothe and feed good abolitionists, otherwise those who purchase or use them are guilty! That which they declare to be basely wicked, is changed to a laudable virtue, or at least an "innocent" act, byt the mere circumstances of being perpetrated by an abolitionist, instead of by an apologist for slavery! An editorial in the last No. of the Bugle, and the speeches of Phillips, Foster, &c. at the late Anniversary, charge free labor abolitionists with laying down a principle and violating it themselves, which they say anti-free labor abolitionists do not!! If there be more merit in laying down a principle and disregarding it entirely, than in carrying it out to the extent that it and many other principles can be reasonably done, or if it be more meritorious to violate an acknowledged principle and deny it, than to do so to a less extent and confess it, I am not envious of such merit. That anti-free labor abolitionists do recognize in various ways a principle involved in the free labor question--that we are supporting slavery by our commercial connection with the South--that they regard even the reception of money from slaveholders for benevolent purposes, as a violation of the principle involved in this question, is abundantly evident from innumerable documents and speeches official and unofficial put forth by the Society. B.B. Davis Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource B.B. Davis Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Anti-Slavery Bugle 3:4, p. 2 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 9.3.1847 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Free Produce Description An account of the resource Free Produce. P<sc>HILADELPHIA</sc>, 4th mo. 8, 1841. F<sc>RIEND</sc> R<sc>OGERS</sc>:—I had hoped that the anti-slavery papers would generally have complied with the request of our Free Produce Committee, to copy their “Address to Abolitionists,” without each being furnished with a special invitation; but it seems I was mistaken, for I am not avare of more than two or three having copied it. I will, therefore, issue a special invitation to the Standard, to conply with the request contained in the resolution of our commitee; and do hereby particularly invite all papers claining to be anti-slavery, to do likewise, unless they think the subject on which it treats is of too little importance to occupy the space of three columns in their papers. I know not why it is, that the subject of abstinence from slave labor produce receives so small a share of the attention of the anti-slavery press. The addresses, annual reports and resolutions of our associations rarely get beyond the columns of the Freeman. Take, for instance, the proceedings of our last annual meeting; ‘tis true, a few papers copied a portion of the report, and a few of the resolutions we adopted; but the extract from the report was that portion which referred to the exclusion of our delegates from the so-called-by-some World's Convention, and there. solutions were those condemnatory of the proceedings (in that particular instance) of that body, together with those approving of the formation of the British India Society.—But that part of the report in which we endeavored to show that duty required abolitionists to abstain from the use of slave labor productions, and the resolutions relating to our principles, have been passed by as of no moment. From the notice the anti-slavery press has generally taken of our last meeting, strangers to our object would not dream of our being a “Free Produce Association,” but would set us down as a “Society for condemning the exclusion of female delegates from the World's Convention, and for the approving of the British India Society,” or some similar association. B. S. J. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource B.S.J. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived National Anti-Slavery Standard Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 4.22.1841 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MR. GARRISON--I have a little incident Description An account of the resource (For the Liberator.) MR. GARRISON—I have a little incident which I must beg you to make public through the medium of your paper, particularly for the benefit of the ladies, who may perhaps wish to imitate such an excellent and laudable example.—I was present, a few weeks since, at a wedding, where the cake used on the occasion was not only made with free sugar, but on its pure white icing were mottoes written in delicate letters of green—'<xsl-text></xsl-text>Remember the slave,<xsl-text></xsl-text>' '<xsl-text></xsl-text>May oppression cease<xsl-text></xsl-text>,' <xsl-text></xsl-text>&c <xsl-text></xsl-text>. I assure you, this allusion to the subject in a way so novel, yet so impressive, was a cause of pleasant surprise. There were, at the same time, secret papers or mottoes handed round to the company, being couplets on the subject of slavery, abolition, &c. Here are specimens— 'Eat this candy without fear, No blood of slaves is mingled here.' 'If slavery comes by colors, as we see, Fashions may change, and you the slave may be.' With many others of like import. I hope this example may be imitated not only by my fair friends in Boston, but by my countrywomen every where. Hereafter parties may be made interesting and instructive by the means above alluded to. The subject may be brought before us in a thousand different ways—all tending to arouse our sleeping energies, and create a feeling of sympathy for the oppressed. B.W. Philadelphia, 28th Feb.1834. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived The Liberator Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 3.15.1834 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource B.W. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Meetings and Events Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Philadelphia; 10.19.1842 (Meeting) Description An account of the resource AMERICAN FREE PRODUCE ASSOCIATION The Fourth Annual Meeting of the American Free Produce Association, will be held at Clarkson Hall, Philadelphia, on Third day, the 19th of Tenth month, 1842. BENJ. S. JONES, Secretary Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Benj. S. Jones Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived National Anti-Slavery Standard 2:18, p. 3 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 10.07.1841 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Miscellaneous. Mexican Colonization: And Sugar, Cotton, and Rice Cultivation, By Free Labor. Description An account of the resource MISCELLANEOUS. MEXICAN COLONIZATION; AND SUGAR, COTTON, AND RICE CULTIVATION, BY FREE LABOR. <xsl-text></xsl-text>To American Philanthropists, and Men of Capital, Industry, and Enterprize, generally<xsl-text></xsl-text>. Having recently explored the eastern parts of the Republic of Mexico, and obtained an extensive grant of land, in the State of Tamaulipas, for the purpose of establishing a Colony, I am desirous to invite the public attention to it, particularly that of enterprizing planters, agriculturalists, manufacturers, mechanics, and laborers. The State of Tamaulipas borders on the Gulph of Mexico, and adjoins the south-western boundary of Texas. The great River, '<xsl-text></xsl-text>Rio Bravo del Norte<xsl-text></xsl-text>,' runs through the north-eastern part of this state, watering one of the most beautiful, fertile, and healthy regions, on the continent of America. Its climate is the most pleasant, through the year, that can well be imagined. Situate between the degrees of 23 deg. and 28 deg. north latitude, the heat of summer is agreeably tempered by the sea breezes, and the rigors of winter are entirely unknown. This section of country is adapted to the culture of sugar, rice, corn, indigo, tobacco, and cotton; also the various culinary vegetables, generally produced in our middle and southern states. Fifty or sixty miles in the interior, wheat, rye, oats, barley, &c. may also be raised to advantage. The soil is, invariably, a dark rich loam. The face of the country is, in general, level near the sea coast, and more and more rolling as we proceed from it. Limestone abounds in the elevations, over the whole country. Many parts are timbered, sufficiently to answer general purposes, and others exhibit dense forests. A large portion, however, is open plain, clear, and ready for the plough. Nearly the whole produces a most luxuriant, perpetual pasturage, for horses, cattle, sheep, &c. &c. By a treaty, concluded and ratified between the Governor of the State and myself, the grant of land, above mentioned, is to be secured to me, in <xsl-text></xsl-text>fee simple<xsl-text></xsl-text>, on condition of my introducing a certain number of settlers, within a stated period. The contract stipulates for the introduction of <xsl-text></xsl-text>Two Hundred and Fifty<xsl-text></xsl-text>; but the terms are such, that, the settlement of one fifth part of that number will secure a large tract (in <xsl-text></xsl-text>fee simple<xsl-text></xsl-text>, as aforesaid,) fully adequate to their liberal accommodation:—and, on the other hand, when the full complement shall be settled, any number more, who may choose to locate themselves in places adjoining, will be furnished with lands, gratis, on application to the local state authorities. The government is, also, under an obligation to lay out a Town, at its own expense, in such place as I shall direct, and furnish every settler with one lot, <xsl-text></xsl-text>gratis<xsl-text></xsl-text>. In addition to this, I will give each one, on condition of settlement, a quantity of land sufficient for a good farm, be his occupation what it may. To a few capitalists, however, who will give employment to such of the settlers as may not be able to enter immediately into business on their own account, I will furnish as much land as they can occupy to any degree of advantage, in proportion to the amount of capital they will invest, and the number of persons they will thus employ. Should they, at any time, experience difficulty, in procuring laborers among the colonists, they can obtain them from the Mexican settlements, at fair wages. The colony will be located in a beautiful, healthy part of the country, contiguous to other settlements; and, of course, where no fears will be entertained, either of Indian depredations, or difficulty in obtaining provisions in its commencement. Good markets will, also, be near at hand, for all kinds of produce, when the colonists may have it to spare; and excellent roads may be made, with little or no expense of manual labor, for the transportation to those markets, or to places where there is every facility for steam boat navigation thither. The government of the country is, strictly, republican.—It is modelled very much after the plan of our own. The people are, emphatically, republican in sentiment:—and although they have but recently thrown off the shackles of a crushing despotism, they are rapidly advancing in knowledge, liberality, and retinement. By the laws of the State of Tamaulipas, the freedom of religious opinion is guarantied to all strangers, who may settle therein. And one article of my treaty with the government, is couched in these words:— 'ARTICLE 8TH.—<xsl-text></xsl-text>The colonists shall not be molested for their opinions, either political or religious; and the government obliges itself to respect and protect them, in the enjoyment of those opinions, provided they do not disturb the public order<xsl-text></xsl-text>.' Colonists are exempt from the payment of taxes, either to the State, or General Government, for the term of five years:—and they may take in with them, <xsl-text></xsl-text>for their own use<xsl-text></xsl-text>, articles for provisions, clothing, building materials, household furniture, implements of industry, and all kinds of machinery, for milling, manufacturing, &c. &c. <xsl-text></xsl-text>free of duty<xsl-text></xsl-text>. My principal object, in procuring the grant of land, and attempting the establishment of a colony, as aforesaid, has been, from the first, to afford an opportunity for the advocates of Universal Emancipation to <xsl-text></xsl-text>test the advantage of FREE LABOR, <xsl-text></xsl-text>on this continent<xsl-text></xsl-text>, in the culture of sugar, rice, cotton, &c. It is important that such experiments be made as near as possible to our slaveholding states, where those articles are produced; (both the laws, and the prejudices of the white inhabitants, forbid its being done, effectually, therein;) and the section of country that I have chosen, is the most suitable, for this purpose, of any that I have yet become acquainted with. Among several very respectable persons, who have already signified their willingness to embark in this very important and philanthropic enterprize, is a gentleman formerly of New-England, but now resident in the Mexican Republic. He is a man of excellent talents, very general intelligence, and strict integrity. He has been, himself, a sugar-planter, for many years, first in the State of Mississippi, and afterwards in Mexico. In the former place be employed slaves—in the latter free laborers:—and he states that, from his <xsl-text></xsl-text>personal knowledge<xsl-text></xsl-text>, the labor of free men, in the cultivation of the cane, is the <xsl-text></xsl-text>most profitable<xsl-text></xsl-text>. He further assures me, that there can be no rational doubt of the perfect success of the experiments, which I propose, if the business is properly conducted. This gentleman appears to take a deep interest in the cause of the abolition of slavery; and will join one or more of its friends, should it be desirable on their part, in cultivating and manufacturing sugar, in my colony, upon an extensive scale: The cotton, grown in this region, is of the finest quality; and the land is exceedingly well adapted to its cultivation. Rice, also, may be produced with the greatest ease, by any one acquainted with the proper mode of culture. There are, annually, two rainy seasons, and two dry. Two crops of corn, &c. are produced, within the year, on the same ground, if planted at the proper times. When the land can be irrigated, it will produce a regular succession of crops, without reference to seasons, as fast as they can be grown and harvested. The great advantages, therefore, to be derived from the amenity of the climate, &c. in amassing wealth, by the cultivation of the soil, (to say nothing of the breeding of stock, which requires no care, neither winter nor summer, further than to keep it domesticated,) must be obvious to every man of reason and reflection. And to this I may add, that the mildness and salubrity of the climate, in conjunction with the purity of the atmosphere, in the particular region alluded to, has restored the boon of health to many a northern invalid, who has placed himself within the pale of its renovating influence. In the admission of settlers, no distinction will be made on account of national ancestry, or color. Morality, industry, and general respectability, are the only requisites. As the great mass of the Mexican people are, themselves, a mixture of the native Indian, European, and African races, (an immense majority as dark colored as our mulattoes,) they freely admit <xsl-text></xsl-text>all <xsl-text></xsl-text>'strangers' to the rights of citizenship, and the full enjoyment of perfectly ' <xsl-text></xsl-text>equal<xsl-text></xsl-text>' privileges, immunities, &c. The establishment of such a colony, as I propose, will, therefore, in addition to the accomplishment of the primary object, above mentioned, probably pave the way for the emigration of many of our colored people, in the United States, who are unhappy in their present situation, and desirous to exchange it, for one where they may in <xsl-text></xsl-text>fact<xsl-text></xsl-text>, as well as in <xsl-text></xsl-text>name<xsl-text></xsl-text>, enjoy the rights of freemen; where the door of improvement is fairly open to them, and where every obstacle to the success of an honest emulation and an honorable ambition is entirely out of their way. The whole country will be open for their reception; and they may fix their residence in whatever part they choose. It will, also, be obvious to every man of intelligence, that the facility of emigration to Mexico, gives it the decided advantage over every other place, where the climate is suitable for those at the South, and to which their attention has yet been invited. Indeed, considerable numbers of them have already settled there, and are doing well. The journey may be wholly performed by land; or they can go part of the way by land, and part by the rivers, or the sea at their option. The colonists will be subject to the laws of the country, from the moment they enter it;—and no special regulations, for their government, are contemplated, further than what those laws prescribe, or what they shall, themselves, assist in making,—except, that perfect equality, political and social, will be enjoined on all, and the vending of ardent spirits will be totally prohibited. In concluding this address, I repeat, that the principal motive which has led me to engage in this enterprize, has been to furnish a convenient opportunity to test the value of free labor, in the production of sugar, &c. For more than sixteen years, I have used my humble endeavors to advocate the cause of Universal Emancipation, in general terms. Though I labored a long time, almost single-handed, a <xsl-text></xsl-text>host <xsl-text></xsl-text>of the talented and philanthropic of the land have, at length, stepped forth, and are now 'pleading,' manfully, in behalf of the suffering slave. Our opponents have so far abandoned the field of <xsl-text></xsl-text>argument<xsl-text></xsl-text>, as to admit the correctness of our reasoning, 'upon abstract principles.' But they stoutly deny that we have the ability to carry our maxims into <xsl-text></xsl-text>practical operation<xsl-text></xsl-text>. After a laborious, painful, and tedious exercise, in exploring a vast extent of country, and in negotiating with the constituted authorities thereof, I have succeeded in making the necessary preliminary arrangements, for a resort to the 'practical,' final, and hitherto <xsl-text></xsl-text>incontrovertible <xsl-text></xsl-text>argument, against the perpetuation of slavery. This kind of 'argument' has overthrown that horrible system in the British dominions, and <xsl-text></xsl-text>will, eventually, do it here<xsl-text></xsl-text>, if promptly applied. I, therefore, appeal to philanthropists, generally,—both men of wealth, and others who are enterprizing and industrious,—to come forward, and assist in <xsl-text></xsl-text>proving <xsl-text></xsl-text>the truth of the doctrines we have long maintained. Though other <xsl-text></xsl-text>means <xsl-text></xsl-text>to carry on operations are wanting, I have, now, <xsl-text></xsl-text>land <xsl-text></xsl-text>enough, <xsl-text></xsl-text>at their service<xsl-text></xsl-text>,—and I hope this appeal will not be made in vain. It is my intention to return to Mexico again, as soon as my business can be arranged for the purpose, and forthwith commence the establishment of my colony. I wish to engage from fifty to an hundred settlers, immediately, to accompany me thither, or to join me at Metamoras, a seaport town, on the Rio Bravo del Norte. A lively commercial business is carried on between that port and those of New-York and New-Orleans. Vessels are constantly going to and fro, and opportunities to obtain passage, by sea, are frequent. Should emigrants prefer going by land, they will proceed by way of Red River, in Louisiana, and through the Texas country. The proper seasons for their arrival in Mexico, are, the latter part of August, and the early part of January. To such as I can see, before going out, the particulars, relative to terms of settlement, &c. &c. will be fully communicated, and contracts will be made with them; which contracts will be guarantied by the State, when they enter it. Should any arrive in my absence, they can obtain information relative to my arrangements, by applying to <xsl-text></xsl-text>Richard Pearce<xsl-text></xsl-text>, Esq. my agent, at Matamoras, aforesaid. In the meantime, (until the first of August, ensuing,) Letters addressed to me at Philadelphia, <xsl-text></xsl-text>free of the expense of postage<xsl-text></xsl-text>, will be promptly attended to. Agencies will also soon be established in various parts of the United States, in order to facilitate the emigration; and the public will be notified thereof, from time to time, through the medium of newspapers to which I can have access. BENJAMIN LUNDY. <xsl-text></xsl-text>Nashville, <xsl-text></xsl-text>5 <xsl-text></xsl-text>th mo. (May) <xsl-text></xsl-text>11<xsl-text></xsl-text>th<xsl-text></xsl-text>, 1835. N.B. Editors of newspapers, and other periodicals, are generally and respectfully requested to give the above an insertion. B.L. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Benjamin Lundy Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived The Liberator Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 6.13.1835 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ladies' Department. DIALOGUE. No. II Description An account of the resource LADIES' DEPARTMENT. For the Liberator. <xsl-text></xsl-text>DIALOGUE. No. II. <xsl-text></xsl-text>Ella. <xsl-text></xsl-text>It would have reflected greater creditors Pennsylvania, if, instead of countenancing a bill introduced into the State Legislature, for the removal of free persons of color, a liberal appropriation had been made for procuring raw cotton, cultivated by freemen; and establishing a manufactory for that description of cotton, to the exclusion of all other;—also for the offering of premiums for free rice, sugar, &c.; this would have been going forward and foremost, as Pennsylvania always should. <xsl-text></xsl-text>Anna. <xsl-text></xsl-text>How patriotic! Surely the forests of Pennsylvania must be congenial to the growth of female lawgivers. As for the appropriation, men may settle that; I meddle not with legislation; but seriously, does Ella really think, that her self-denial will effect the emancipation of one slave? will cause less sugar to be made, less cotton and rice grown? I admit, that if the whole United States were to adopt the plan, some good might be done; but what beneficial effect can be produced by the efforts of a few in Philadelphia, in Chester County, and New-York, is I confess beyond my comprehension. <xsl-text></xsl-text>E. <xsl-text></xsl-text>I am in a mood too serious, Anna, to feel sarcasm, much less return it. Were I possessed of the positive knowledge that my abstinence would not cause the least diminution is the toil of the slave, nor hasten his liberation; that would not justify me in evil doing. If slavery in the abstract is wrong, (and that we none deny,) it is certainly wrong in any way to countenance, or support the system. Which of us would tell the drunkard that ardent spirits will debase his mind, and destroy his constitution, but his becoming temperate cannot cause the distillation of one gallon less of spirits, and therefore, unless the whole community would at once refrain from using it, he may as well indulge his love of strong drink; the one that would hold such language to a drunkard, may with impunity advance similar to an abolitionist:—every thing must have a commencement my dear Anna, look back only a few years when abstinence was counted a strange thing, when a proposition to have formed a 'Free Produce Society' would have been regarded as the fantasy of a disordered imagination. We do not know but that the little leaven hid in Philadelphia, may continue to increase, until public opinion be completely revolutionized, and not a defendant of the atrocious system be found in the Union. <xsl-text></xsl-text>A. <xsl-text></xsl-text>I should rejoice at the annihilation of slavery, provided the lives of the white inhabitants might not he endangered thereby—but if the slaves ever are emancipated it must be through legislative interference, and that should not concern us, as the enactment of laws belong only to men. I would not endeavor to dissuade my friend from attending to apprehended duty, but would have her guard against cherishing an enthusiastic zeal that may cause her to forget the sphere in which we move, is circumscribed, 'Or deviate from the course decreed, That woman should pursue.' <xsl-text></xsl-text>M. <xsl-text></xsl-text>On my brother's plantation I know the slaves are better off than the free colored population of this state. The life of a slave is not so wretched, his wants are provided for, and he is contented. <xsl-text></xsl-text>E. <xsl-text></xsl-text>Oh! Mary, say not so! tell me not that a man deprived of his liberty can be contented, can be other than miserably wretched. I doubt not but G----- uses his slaves more humanely than many Virginia planters, but while he refuses to restore to them their just rights, (excuse me Mary,) he stands on a level with W-----k the notorious dealer in live stock in a neighboring city. And while we contend for the manumission of the slave, we forget not that the free man of color is disfranchised of his right as an American citizen, without even the imputation of a fault. Thanks, Anna, for the caution,—far from me be fanaticism, but further still, a callous indifference to the misery that surrounds me, to scenes of woe, though distant, always near. <xsl-text></xsl-text>Elizabeth. <xsl-text></xsl-text>Though silent, I have not been inattentive to your conversation; it is therefore with reluctance that I interrupt by reminding you of the hour, perhaps I may have the pleasure of meeting you again. BERA. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived The Liberator Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 9.15.1832 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Bera