The Collected Works of Theodore Parker/Volume 07/Discourse 9
IX.
My Friends,—This is a day of public humiliation and prayer. We have one every year. It is commonly in the city churches only a farce, because there is no special occasion for it, and the general need is not felt. But such is the state of things in the Union at this moment, and particularly in Boston, that, if it were not a custom, it would be a good thing, even if it were for the first time in the history of our country, to have such a day for humiliation and prayer, that we consider the state of the nation, and look at our conduct in reference to the great principles of religion, and see how we stand before God; for these are times that try men's souls.
Last Sunday, I purposely disappointed you, and turned off from what was nearest to your heart and was nearest to mine,—a subject that would have been easy to preach on without any preparation. Then I asked you to go to the Fountain of all strength, and there prepare yourselves for the evils that we know not of. To-day, the governor has asked us to come together, and consider, in the spirit of Christianity, the public sins of the community, to contemplate the value of our institutions, and to ask the blessing of God on the poor, the afflicted, and the oppressed. I am glad of this occasion; and I will improve it, and ask your attention to "A Sermon of the Chief Sins of this People."
I have said that these are times that try men's souls. This is such an occasion as never came before, and, I trust, never will again. I have much to say to you, much more than I intend to say to-day, much more than there are hours enough in this day to speak. Many things I shall pass by. I shall detain you to-day somewhat longer than is my wont; but do not fear, I will look out for your attention. I simply ask you to be calm, to be composed, and to hear with silence what I have to say.
To understand these things, we must begin somewhat far off.
The purpose of human life is to form a manly character, to get the cost development of body and of spirit,—of mind, conscience, heart, soul. This is the end: all else is the means. Accordingly, that is not the most successful life in which a man gets the most pleasure, the most money or ease, the most power of place, honour, and fame; but that in which a man gets the most manhood, performs the greatest amount of human duty, enjoys the greatest amount of human right, and acquires the greatest amount of manly character. It is of no importance whether he win this by wearing a hod upon his shoulders, or a crown upon his head. It is the character, and not the crown, I value. The crown perishes with the head that wore it; but the character lives with the immortal man who achieved it; and it is of no consequence whether that immortal man goes up to God from a throne or from a gallows.
Every man has some one preponderating object in life,—an object that he aims at and holds supreme. Perhaps he does not know it; but he thinks of this in his day-dreams, and his dreams by night. It colours his waking hours, and is with him in his sleep. Sometimes it is sensual pleasure that he wants; sometimes money; sometimes office, fame, social distinction; sometimes it is the quiet of a happy home, with wife and children, all comfortable and blessed; sometimes it is excellence in a special science or art, or department of literature; sometimes it is a special form of philanthropy; and sometimes it is the attainment of great, manly character.
This supreme object of desire is sometimes different at different times in a man's life, but in general is mainly the same all through. For "the child if father of the man," and his days bound each to each, if not by natural piety, then by unnatural profaneness. This desire may act with different intensity in the active and passive periods, in manhood and in ago. It is somewhat modified by the season of passion, and by the season of ambition. If this object of special desire be worthy, be is the character in general; if base, so is the man. For thin special desire becomes the master motive in tho man; and, if strong, establishes a unity in his consciousness, and calls out certain passions, appetites, powers of mind and conscience, heart and soul; and in a long life, the man creates himself anew in the image of his ideal, desire. This desire, good or bad, which sways the man, is writ on his character, and thence copied into the countenance; and lust or love, frivolity or science, interest or principle, mammon or God, is writ on the man. Still this unify is seldom whole and complete. With most men there are exceptional times, when they turn off a little from their great general pursuit. Simeon the Stylite comes down from his pillar-top, and chaffers in the market-place with common folks. Jeffries is even just once or twice in his life, and Wilkes is honourable two or three times. Even when, the chief desire is a high and holy one, I should not expect a man to go through life without ever committing an error or a sin. When I was a youngster, just let loose from the theological school, I thought differently; but at this day, when I have felt the passions of life, and been stirred by the ambitions of life, I know it must be expected that a man will stumble now and then. I make allowances for that in myself, as I do in others. These are the exceptional periods in a man's life,—the eddies in the stream. Tho stream runs down hill all the time, though the eddy may for a time apparently run up.
Now as with men, so it is with nations. The purpose of national life is to bring forth and bring up manly men, who do the most of human duty, have the most of human rights; and enjoy the most of human welfare. So that is not the most successful nation which fills the largest space, which occupies the longest time, which produces the most cattle, corn, cotton, or cloth, but that which produces the most men. And, in reference to men, you must count not numbers barely, but character quite as much. That is not tho most successful nation which has an exceptional class of men, highly cultured, well-bodied, well-minded, well-born, well-bred, at the one end of society; and at the other a mighty multitude, an instantial class, poor, ill-born, ill-bred, ill-bodied, and ill-minded, too, as in England; but that is the most successful nation which has tho whole body of its people well-born, well-bred, well-bodied, and well-minded, too; and those are the best institutions which accomplish this best; those worst, which accomplish it least. The government, the society, the school, or the church, which does this work, is a good government, society, school, or church; that which does it not, is good for nothing.
As with men, so with nations. Each has a certain object of chief desire, which object prevails over others. The nation is not conscious of it,—less so, indeed, than the individual; but, silently, it governs the nation's life. Sometimes this chief desire is the aggrandizement of the central power,—the monarchy; it was so once in France; but, God be praised! is not so now. Then devotion to the king's person was held as the greatest national excellence, and disrespect for the king was treason, the greatest national crime. The people must not dare to whisper against their king. Sometimes it is the desire to build up an aristocracy. It was once so in Yenice. It may be an aristocracy of priests, of soldiers, of nobles, or an aristocracy of merchants. Sometimes it is to build up a middle class of gentry, as in Basel and Berne. It may be a military desire, as in ancient Rome; it may be ecclesiastical ambition, as in modern Rome; or commercial ambition, as in London and many other places.
The chief object of desire is not always the same in the course of a nation's history. A nation now greatens the centripetal power, strengthening the king and weakening the people; now it greatens the centrifugal power, weakening the king and strengthening; the people. But, commonly, you see some one desire runs through all the nation's history, only modified by its youth, or manhood, or old age, and by circumstances which re-act upon the nation as the nation acts upon them.
This chief object of desire may be permanent, and so govern the whole nation tor all its history. Or it may be, on the other hand, a transient desire, which is to govern it for a time. In either case, it will appear prominently in the controlling classes; either in the classes which control all through, or in such as last only for a time. Thus the military desire appeared chiefly in the patricians of old Rome, and not much in the plebeians; the commercial ambition appeared in the nobles of Venice; the ecclesiastical in the priests of modern Rome, where the people care little for the church, though quite as much, perhaps, as it deserves.
As the chief desire of the individual calls out appetites and passions, which are the machinery of that desire, and reconstructs the man in its image; so the desire of a nation, transient or permanent, becoming the master motive of the people, calls out certain classes of men, who become its exponents, its machinery, and they make the constitution, institutions, and laws to correspond thereto.
As with one man, so with the millions, there may be fluctuations of purpose for a time. I cannot expect that one man, or many men, will always pursue an object without at some time violating fundamental principles. I might have thought so once. But as I live longer, and see the passion and the ambition of men, see the force of circumstances, I know better. No ship sails across the ocean with a straight course, without changing a sail; it frequently leaves its direct line, now "standing" this way, now that; and the course is a very crooked one, although, as a whole, it is towards the mark.
America is a young nation, composite, not yet unified; and it is, therefore, not quite so easy to say what is the chief desire of the people; but, if I understand American history, this desire is the love of individual liberty. Nothing has been so marked in our history as this. We are consciously, in part, yet still more unconsciously, aiming at democracy,—at a government of all the people, by all the people, and for the sake of all the people. Of course that must be a government by the higher law of God, by the Eternal Justice to which you and I and all of us owe reverence. We all love freedom for ourselves; one day we shall love it for every man,—for the tawny Indian and the sable negro, as much as for you and me. This love of freedom has appeared in the ideas of New England and New England, was once America; it was once the soul, although not tho body of America. It appeared in in political action and its ecclesiastical action, in the State and in the church, and in all tho little towns. In general, every change in the constitution of a free State makes it more democratic; every change in local law is for democracy, not against it. We have broken with tho old feudal tradition,—broken for over with that. I think this love of individual liberty is tho specific desire of the people. If we are proud or anything, it is of our free institutions. I know there are men who are prouder of wealth than of anything else: by and by I shall have a word to say of thorn. But in Massachusetts, New England, in the North, if we should appeal to the great body of the people, and "poll the house," and ask of all what they were proudest of, they would not say, of our cattle, or cotton, or corn, or cloth; but it is of our freedom, of our men and women. Leaving out of the calculation the abounding class, which is corrupt everywhere, and the perishing class, which is the vassal as it is the creature of the abounding class, and as corrupt and selfish here as everywhere, we shall find that seven-eighths of the people of New England are eminently desirous of this one thing. This desire will carry the day in any fifty years to come, as it has done in two hundred and fifty years past. The great political names of our history are all on its side: Washington, the Adamses—both or them, God bless them!—Jefferson, Madison, Jackson, these were all friends of liberty. I know the exceptions in the history of some of these men, and do not deny them. Other American names, dear to the people, are of the same stamp. The national literature, so far as we have any national literature, is democratic. I know there is what passes for American literature, because it grows on American soil, but which is just as far from being indigenous to America as the orange is from being indigenous" to Cape Cod. This literature is a poor, miserable imitation of the feudal literature of old Europe. Perhaps it is now the prominent literature of the time. One day America will take it and cast it out from her. The true American literature is very poor, is very weak, is almost miserable now ; but it has one redeeming quality,—it is true to freedom, it is true to democracy. In the Revolution this desire of the nation was prominent, and same to consciousness. It was the desire of the most eminent champions of liberty. At one time in the history of tho nation, tho platform of speakers was in. advance of the floor that was covered by the people at large, because at that time the speakers became conscious of the idea which possessed tho hearts of tho people. That is tho reason why John Hancock, tho two Adamses, and Jefferson, came into great prominence before the people. They wore more tho people than the people themselves; more democratic than the Democrats. I know, and I think it must be quite plain in our history, that this has been tho chief desire of the people. If so, it determines our political destination.
However, with nations as with men, there are exceptional desires; one of which, with, the American nation at present, is the desire for wealth. Just now, that is the most obvious and preponderate desire in the consciousness of the people. It has increased surprisingly in fifty years. It is the special, the chief desire of the controlling class,—by the controlling class, I mean what are commonly called "our first men." I admit exceptions, and state the general rule. With them everything gives way to money, and money gives way to nothing, neither to man nor to God.
See some proofs of this. There are two ways of getting money; one is by trade, the other is by political office. The pursuit of money, in one or the other of these ways, is the only business reckoned entirely "commendable" and "respectable." There are other callings which are very noble in themselves, and deemed so by mankind ; but here they are not thought "commendable" and "respectable," and accordingly you very seldom see young men, born in what is called the most respectable class of society," engaged in anything except the pursuit of money by trade or by office. There are exceptions; but the sons of "respectable men," so called, seldom engage in the pursuit of anything but money by trade or office. This is the chief desire of a majority of the young men of talent, ambition, and education. Even in colleges more respect is paid to money than to genius. The purse is put before the pen. In the churches, wealth is deemed better than goodness or piety. It names towns and colleges; and he is thought the greatest benefactor of a university who endows it with money, not with mind. In giving name to a street in Boston, you call the wealthy end after a rich man, and only the poor end after a man that was good and famous. Money controls the churches. It draws veils of cotton over the pulpit window, to colour "the light that cometh from above. As yet the churches are not named after men whose only virtue is metallic, but the recognised pillars of the churches are all pillars of gold. Festus does not tremble before Paul, but Paul before Festus. The pulpit looks down to the pews for its gospel, not up to the eternal God. Is there a rich pro-Slavery man in the parish? The minister does not dare read a petition from an oppressed slave, asking God that his "unalienable rights" be given him. He does not dare to ask alms for a fugitive. St. Peter is the old patron saint of the Holy Catholic Church. St. Hunker is the new patron saint of the churches of commerce, Catholic and Protestant.
Money controls the law as well as the gospel. The son of a great man and noble is forgotten if the father dies poor; but the mantle of the rich man falls on the son's shoulders. If the son be only half so manly as his sire, and twice as rich, he is sure to be doubly honoured. Money supplies defects of character, defects of culture. It is deemed better than education, talent, genius, and character, all put together. Was it not written two thousand years ago, in the Proverbs, it "answereth all things?" Look round and see. It does not matter how you get or keep it. "The end justifies the means." Edmund Burke, or somebody else, said "Something must be pardoned to the spirit of liberty." Now it is "Something must be pardoned" to the love of money, nothing "to the spirit of liberty." We find that rich men will move out of town on the last day of April, to avoid taxation on the first day of May. That is nothing. It is very "respectable," very "honourable," indeed! I do not believe that there is any master-carpenter or master-blacksmith in Boston who would not be ashamed to do so. But men of the controlling classes do not hesitate! No matter how you get money. You may rent houses for rum-shops and for brothels; you may make rum, import rum, sell rum to the ruin of the thousands whom you thereby bring down to the kennel and the almshouse and the gaol. If you get money by that, no matter: it is "clean money," however dirtily got.
A merchant can send his ships to sea, and in the slave-trade acquire gold, and live here in Boston, New York, or Philadelphia; and his gold will be good sterling gold, no matter how he got it! In political office, if you are a senator from California or Oregon, you may draw "constructive mileage," and pay yourself two or three thousand dollars for a journey never made from home, and two or three thousand more back to your home. So you filch thousands of dollars out of tho public purse, and you are the "Honourable Senator," just as before. You have got the money, no matter how. You may be a senator from Massachusetts, and you may take the "trust fund," offered you by the manufacturers of cotton, and be bound as their "retained attorney," by your "retaining fee," and you are still the "Honourable Senator from Massachusetts," not hurt one jot in the eyes of the controlling classes. If you are Secretary of State, you may take forty or fifty thousand dollars from State Street and Wall Street, and suffer no discredit at all. At one end of the Union they will deny the fact as " too atrocious to be believed;" at this end they admit it, and say it was "honourable in the people to give it," and "honourable in the Secretary to take it."
"Alas! the small discredit of a bribe
Scarce hurts the master, but undoes the scribe."
It would sound a little strange to some people, if we should find that the judges of a court had received forty or fifty thousand dollars from men who were plaintiffs in that court. You and I would remember that a gift blindeth the eyes of the prudent, how much more of the profligate! But it would be "honourable" in the plaintiffs to give it; "honourable" in the judges to take it!
Hitherto I have called your attention to the proofs of the preponderance of money. I will now point you to signs, which are not exactly proofs of this immediate worship of money. See these signs in Boston. When the old South Church was built, when Christ's Church in Salem Street, when King's Chapel, when Brattle Square Church, they were respectively the costliest buildings in town. They were symbols of religion, as churches always are; symbols of tho popular esteem for religion. Out of the poverty of tho people, great Burns of money were given for these "Houses of God." They said, like David of old, "It is a shame that we dwell in a palace of cedars, and the ark of the Most High remains under the curtains of a tent." How is it now P A crockery shop overlooks the roof-tree of tho church where onco the eloquence of a Channing enchanted to heaven tho worldly hearts of worldly men. Now an hotel looks down on tho church which was once all radiant with the sweet piety of a Buckminster. A haberdasher's warehouse overtops the church of the Blessed Trinity; the roof of the shop is almost as tall as the very tower of the church. These things are only symbols. Let us compare Boston, in this respect, with any European city that you can name; let us compare it with gay and frivolous Vienna, the gayest and most frivolous city of all Europe, not setting Pans aside. For though the surface of life in Paris sparkles and glitters all over with radiant and iridescent and dazzling bubbles, .empty and ephemeral, yet underneath there flows a stream which comes from the great fountain of nature, and tends <pn to the ocean of human welfare. No city is more full of deep thought and earnest life. But in Vienna it is not so. Yet even there, above the magnifience of the Herrengasse, above the proud mansions of the Esterhazys and the Schwartzenbergs and the Lichtensteins, above the costly elegance of the imperial palace, St. Stephen's Church lifts its tall spire, and points to God all day long and all the night, a still and silent emolem of a power higher than any mandate of the kings of earth; ay, to the infinite God. Men look up to its cross overtowering the frivolous city, and take a lesson! Here trade looks down to find the church.
I am glad that the churches are lower than the shops. I have said it many times, and I say it now. I am glad they are less magnificent than our banks and hotels. I am glad that haberdashers' shops look down on them. Let the outward show correspond to the inward fact. If I am pinched and withered by disease, I will not disguise it from you by wrappages of cloth; but I will let you see that I am shrunken and shrivelled to the bone. If the pulpit is no nearer heaven than the tavern-bar, let that fact appear. If tho desk in the counting-room is to give law to tho desk in the church, do not commit tho hypocrisy of putting tho pulpit-desk above the counting-room. Let us see where we are.
The consequence of such causes as are symbolized by these facts must needs appear in our civilization. Men tell us there is no law higher than mercantile! Do yon wonder at it? It was said in deeds before words; the architecture of Boston told it before the politicians. Money is tho god of our idolatry. Let the fact appear in his temples. Money is master now, all must give way to it,—that to nothing: the church, the State, the law, is not for man, but money.
Let the son of a distinguished man beat a watchman, knowing him to be such, and be brought before a justice (it would be "levying war" if a mulatto had done so to the marshal); he is bailed off for two hundred dollars. But let a black man have in his pockets a weapon, which the Constitution and laws of Massachusetts provide that any man may have, if he please, he is brought to trial and bound over for—two hundred dollars, think you? No! but for six hundred dollars! three times as much as is required of the son of the Secretary of State for assaulting a magistrate![1]
The Secretary of State publicly declared, a short time since, that "The great object of government is the protection of property at home, and respect and renown abroad." I thank him for teaching us that word! That is the actual principle of the American government.
In all countries of the world, struggles take place for human rights. But in all countries there is a class who desire a privilege for themselves adverse to the rights of mankind: they are commonly richer and abler-minded than the majority of men; they can act in concert. Between them and mankind there is a struggle. The quarrel takes various forms. The contest has been going on for a long time in Europe, There, it is between the aristocracy of birth, and the aristocracy of wealth; for there it is not money, but birth, that makes noble. In this struggle the aristocracy of birth is gradually giving way to the aristocracy of gold. A long and brilliant rent-roll makes up for a snort and obscure pedigree.
In that great movement for human freedom which has lasted a thousand years, the city has generally represented right in its conflict with might. So, in the Middle Ages, the city, the home of tho trader, of the mechanic, of the intelligent man, was democratic. There freedom got organized in guilds of craftsmen. But the country was the home of the noble and his vassals, the haughty, the ignorant, and the servile. Then the country was aristocratic. It was so in tho great struggles between the king and tho people in England and France, in Italy and Holland.
In America there is no nobility of birth—it was the people that camo over, not monarchy, not aristocracy; son of Charlemagne are on the same level. I know in Boston some of the descendants of Henri Quatre, the greatest king of France. I know also descendants of Thomas Wentworth, "the great Earl of Strafford;" and yet they are now obscure and humble men, although of famous birth. I do not say it should not be so; but such is the fact. Here the controversy is not between distinguished birth and money; it is between money on the one hand, and men on the other; between capital and labour; between usurped privilege and natural right. Here, the cities, as the seat of wealth, are aristocratic; the country, as the seat of labour, is democratic. We may see this in Boston. Almost all the journals in the city are opposed to a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people. Take an example from the free soil movement, which, so far as it goes, is democratic. I am told that of the twenty-one journals in Massachusetts that call themselves "democratic," eighteen favour the free soil movement, more or less; and that the three which do not are all in the cities. The country favours the temperance movement, one of the most democratic of all; for rum is to the aristocracy of gold what the sword once was to the aristocracy of blood; the castles of the baron, and the rum shops of the capitalist, are alike fortresses adverse to the welfare of mankind. The temperance movement finds little favour in the cities.
In tho country ho who works with manly hands is held in esteem; in the city, in contempt. Here labouring men have no political influence, and little confidence in themselves. They have been accustomed to do as they were told,—to do as their "masters" bid.
I call a man a Tory who, for himself or for others, socks a privilege adverse to tho rights of mankind; who puts the accidents of men before the substance of manhood. I may safely say tho cities, in tho main, are Tory towns; that Boston, in this sense, is a Tory town. They are so, just as in tho Middle Ages the cities were on tho other side. This is unavoidable in our form of civilization just now. Accordingly, in all tho great cities of the North, slavery is in tho ascendant ; but, as soon as we get off tho pavement, we come upon different ideas; freedom culminates and rises to the meridian.
In America tho controlling class in general are superior to the majority in money, in consequent social standing, in energy, in practical political skill, and in intellectual development; in virtue of these qualities, they are the controlling class. But in general they are inferior to the majority of men in justice, in general humanity; and in religion—in piety and goodness. Respectability is put before right; law before justice; money before God. With them religion is compliance with a public hearsay and public custom; it is all of religion, but piety and goodness; its chief sacrament is bodily presence in a meetinghouse; its only sacrifice, a pew-tax. I know there are exceptions, and honour them all the more for being so very exceptional: they are only enough, to show the rule.
In the main, this controlling class governs the land by two instruments: the first is the public law; the next is public opinion. The law is what was once public opinion, or thought to be; is fixed, written, and supposed to be understood by somebody. Public opinion m not written, and not fixed ; but the opinion of the controlling class overrides and interprets the law,—bids or forbids its execution. Public opinion can make or unmake a law; interpret as it chooses, and enforce or forbid its execution as it pleases.
Such being the case, and such being the chief transient national desire just now, the controlling class consider tho State as a machine to help them make money. A great politician, it is said, once laid down this rule,—"Take care of the rich, and the rich will take care of the poor" Perhaps he did not say that, though he did say that "The great object of government is the protection of property at home, and respect and renown abroad." Such being the case, laws are made accordingly, and institutions are modified accordingly. Let me give an example. In all the towns of New England, town-money is raised by taxes on all the people, and on all the property. The rich man is taxed according to his riches, and the poor man according to his poverty. But the national money is raised by taxation not in proportion to a man's wealth. A bachelor in New England, with f* million dollars, pays a much smaller national tax than a carpenter who has no money at all, but only ten children, the poor man's blessing. The mechanic, with a family of twelve, pays more taxes than the Southern planter owning a tract of land as wide as the town of Worcester, with fifteen hundred slaves to till it. This, I say, is not an accident. It is the work of politicians, who know what they are about, and think a blunder is worse than a sin ; and, sin; as they may, they do not commit such blunders as that.
This controlling class, with their dependents, their vassals, lay and clerical—and they hate lay as well as clerical vassals, and more numerous, if less subservient—keep up the institution of Slavery; Two hundred years ago, that was the worst institution of Europe. Our fathers, breaking with feudal institutions in general, did not break with this; they brought it over here; But when the nation, aroused for its hour of trial, rose up to its great Act of Prayer, and prayed the Declaration of Independence, all the nation said "Amen" to the great American idea therein set forth* Every Northern State reaffirms the doctrine that "All men are created equal, and endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." But in spite of this, and of the consciousness that it is true, while the Northern States have cast out this institution, tho Southern States have kept it. The nation has adopted, extended, and fostered it. This has been done, notwithstanding the expectation of the people, in 1787, that it would soon end. It has been done against the design of the Constitution, which was "to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty against the idea of America, that "All men have an equal and unalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;" against all religion, all humanity, all right,—ay, and against the conscience of a majority of the people; Well, a law was passed last September, that would have been atrocious two hundred years ago; you all know it. I have no words to describe it by. For the last two hundred years, the English race has not invented an adjective adequate to describe it. The English language is used up and broken down by any attempt to describe it. That law was not the desire of the people: and, could the nation have been polled North and South, three-fourths would have said "No!" to the passage of that law. It was not passed to obtain the value of the slaved escaped, for in seven months twenty slaves have not been returned! It was not a measure looking to legal results, but it wad a political measure* looking to political results: what those results will be, we shall see in due time.
In America the controlling class is divided into two great parties: one is the slave power in the States of the South; the Other is. the money power in the cities of the North. There are exceptional men in both divsions—men that own slaves, and yet love freedom and hate slavery. There are rich men in Northern cities who do the same; quite otherwise. They are hostile to the great idea of America. Let me speak with the nicety of theological speech. These two divisions are two "persons" in One "power there is only one "nature" in both, one "will," If not the same nature, it is a like nature : Homoi-ousia, if not Homo-ousia! The Fugitive Slave Law was the act of all tho two "persons," representing the same "nature," and the same "will." It was the result of a union of the slave power of tho South with the money power of the North: the Philistines and the Hebrews ploughed with tho same heifer.
There is sometimes an excuse or a palliation for a wicked deed. There was something like one for tho "Gag Law," the "Alien and Sedition Law," although there is no valid excuse for either of these laws, none to screen their author from deserved reproach. There is no excuse for the Fugitive Slave Law; there was no occasion for it.
You all know how it was brought about; you remember the speech of Mr. Webster on the 7th of March, 1850, a day set apart for the blessed martyrs, Saints Perpetua and Felicitas. We all know who was the author of that law. It is Mr. Webster's Fugitive Slave Law! It was his "thunder," unquestioned and unquestionable. You know what a rapid change was wrought in the public opinion of the controlling classes, soon after its passage. First the leading Whigs went over. I will not say they changed their Principles,—God knows, net I, what principles they have; will only say, they altered their "resolutions," and ate their own words. True, the Whigs have not all gone over. There are a few who still cling to the old Whig-tree, after it has been shaken and shaken, and thrashed and thrashed, and brushed and brushed, by politicians, as apple-trees in autumn. There are still a few little apples left, small and withered, no doubt, and not daring to show their dishonoured heads just now, but still containing some precious seeds that may do service by and by. Whig journal after journal went over; politician after politician "caved in" and collapsed. At the sounding of the rams' horns of Slavery, how quick the Whig Jericho went down! Its fortresses of paper resolutions rolled up and blew away. Of course, men changed only after "logical conviction." Of course, nobody expected a "reward" for the change, at least only in the world to come. Were they not all Christians? True, on the 17th of June last, seventy-five years after the battle of Bunker Hill, Mr. Webster said in the (Senate, that if the North should vote for the Fugitive Slave Bill, a tariff was expected. But that was of no moment, no more than worldly riches to; "the elect." Of course, a man has a right to change his opinions every ton minutes, if he has a good and sufficient reason. Of course, these men expected no offices under this or any future president! But presently the Fugitive Slave Law became a Whig doctrine, a test of party fidelity and fitness for office!
You all remember the "Union" meeting in Boston. On that occasion, Democrats "of the worst kind" suddenly became "respectable." The very democratic prince of devils was thought to be as good a "gentleman" as any in the city.
It was curious to see the effect of the Fugitive Slave Law on the democratic party. Democrat after democrat "caved in;" journal after journal went over; horse, foot, and dragoons, they went over. The democratic party North, and American Slavery South, have long been accustomed to accommodate themselves with the same nag after the old fashion of "ride and tye." In the cities, Democrats went over in tribes; entire Democratic Zabulons and Nephthalims, whole Galilees of Democratic Gentiles, all at once saw great Whig light; and to them that sat in the shadow of Freedom, Slavery sprung up.
That portion of the Whig party which did not submit, became as meek, ay, became meeker even than the beast which the old prophet in the fable is alleged to have ridden: for, though beaten again and again—because alarmed at seeing the angel of freedom that bars the way before the great Whig Balaam, who has been bidden by his master to go forth and curse the people of the Lord,—it dares not open its mouth and say, "What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?"
But when such a law is hostile to the feelings of a majority of the people, to their conscience and their religion, how shall we get the law executed? That is a hard matter. In Russia and in Austria it would be very easy. Russia has an army five hundred or eight hundred thousand strong; and that army is ready. But here there is no such army. True, the president asked Congress to give him greater power, and the answer came from the slave party. South, not from the money party North, "No! you have more now than you know how to use." Failing in this attempt, what was to be done that tho law might be executed? Two things must be done: a fake idea must persuade the people to allow it to be done; base men must be found to do it. A word upon each point.
I. The false idea is set on foot, that the people are morally bound to obey any law which is made until it is repealed. General Haynau wrote a letter, not long ago, to the subalterns in the Austrian army, and thus quoth he:—"You are bound to obey the law. It is none of your business whether the law is constitutional or not; that is our affair." So went it with our officer* here. We are told that there is "no such thing as a higher law;" no rule of conduct better than that enacted by the law of the land." Conscience is only to tell you to keep the statutes. Religion consists in "fearing God and serving the king." You are told that religion bids you to "fear God and keep the commandments," no matter what these commandments may be. No matter whether it be King Ahab, or King Peter the Gruel: you are told,—"Mr. Republican, what right have you to question the constitutionality or justice of anything? Your business is to keep the law." Religion is a very, excellent thing, quotes Mr. Webster, except when it interferes in politics; then it makes men mad
It is instructive to see the different relations which religion has sustained to law, at different, periods of the world's history. At some other time I may dwell more at length upon this; now I will say but one word. At the beginning, religion takes precedence of law. Before there is any human government, man bows himself to the soured of law, and accepts his rule of conduct from his God, By and by, some more definite rule is needed, and wise men make human laws ; but they pretend to derive these from a Divine source. All the primitive lawgivers, Moses, Minos, Zaleuous, Numa, and the rest, speak in the name of God. For a long time, law comes up to religion for aid and counsel. At length law and religion, both imperfect, are well established in society, religion being the elder sister; both act as guardians of mankind. Institution after institution rises up, all of them baptized by religion and confirmed by law, taking the sacrament from the hands of each. At length it comes to pass that law seeks to turn religion out of doors. Politicians, intoxicated with ambition, giddy with power, and sometimes also drunk with strong drink, make a statute which outrages all the dictates of humanity, and then insist that it is the duty of sober men to renounce religion for the sake of keeping the wicked statute of the politicians. All tyrants have done so!
In the North, the majority of men think that the law of man is subordinate to religion—the statutes of man beneath the law of God; that as ethics, personal morals, are amenable to conscience, so politics, national morals, are amenable to the same conscience; and that religion has much to do with national as with individual life. Depend upon it, that idea is the safeguard of the State and of the law. It will preserve it, purify it, and keep it; but it will scourge every wicked law out of the temple of justice with iron whips, if need be. Depend, upon it, when we lose our hold of that idea, all hope of order is gone. But there is no danger; we are pretty well persuaded that the law of God is a little greater than the statute of an accidental president unintentionally chosen for four years. When we think otherwise, we may count our case hopeless, and give up all.
But with the controlling class of men it is not so. They tell us that we must keep any law, constitutional or not, legal or not, just or unjust: first, that we must submit passively, and let the government execute it; next, we must actively obey it, and with alacrity when called upon to execute it ourselves. This doctrine is the theory advanced in most of the newspapers of Boston. It is preached in some of the pulpits, though, thank God! not in all.
This doctrine appears in the charge of the judge of the Circuit Court to the grand jury.[2] I believe that judge to be a good, and excellent, and honourable man; I never heard a word to the contrary, and I am glad to think that it is so.[3] I have to deal only with his opinions, not with his theoretic doctrines of law, of which latter I profess to know nothing; but with the theoretic doctrines of morality he lays down. Of morality I do profess to know something.
He says some excellent things in his charge, which I am glad were said. He is modest in some places, and moderate in others. He does not think that a dozen black men taking a fugitive out of court are guilty of "levying war," and therefore should be hanged, drawn, and quartered, if you can catch them. All honour to his justice. He does not say, as the Secretary of State, that we must suppress discussion and stop agitation. He says we may agitate as much as we have a mind to; may not only speak against a law, but may declaim against it, which is to speak strongly. I thank the judge for this respect for the Constitution. But with regard to the higher and lower law, he has some peculiar opinions. He supposes a case: that the people ask him, "Which shall we obey, the law of man or the law of God?" He says, "I answer, obey both. The incompatibility which the question assumes does not exist."
So, then, here is a great general rule, that between the "law of man" and the "will of God" there is no incompatibility, and we must "obey both." Now let us see how this rule will work.
If I am rightly informed, King Ahab made a law that all the Hebrews should serve Baal, and it was the will of God that they should serve the Lord. According to this rule of the judge, they must "obey both." But if they served Baal, they could not serve the Lord. In such a case, "what is to be done?" We are told that Elijah gathered the prophets together; "and he came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye? If the Lord be God, follow Him; but if Baal, then follow him." Our modern prophet says, "Obey both. The incompatibility which the question assumes does not exist." Such is the difference between Judge Elijah and Judge Peleg.
Let us see how this rule will work in other cases; how you can make a compromise between two opposite doctrines. The king of Egypt commanded the Hebrew nurses, "When you do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, if it be a son ye shall kill him." I suppose it is plain to the judge of the Circuit Court that this kind of murder, killing the new-born infants, is against "the will of God;" but it is a matter of record that it was according to "the law of man." Suppose the Hebrew nurses had come to ask Judge Sprague for This advice. He must have said, "Obey both!" His rule is a universal one.
Another decree was once made, as it is said, in the Old Testament, that no man should ask any petition of any God for thirty days, save of the king, on penalty of being cast into the den of lions. Suppose Daniel—I mean the old Daniel, the prophet—should have asked him, "What is to be done?" Should he pray to Darius or pray to God? "Obey both!" would be the answer. But he cannot, for he is forbid to pray to God. We know what Daniel did do.
The elders and scribes of Jerusalem commanded the Christians not to speak or to teach at all in the name of Jesus; but Peter and John asked those functionaries, "Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye."
Our judge must have said, "There is no 'incompatibility;' obey both!" What "a comfortable Scripture" this would have been to poor John Bunyan! What a great ethical doctrine to St. Paul! He did not know such Christianity as that. Before this time a certain man had said "No man can serve two masters." But, there was one person who made the attempt, and he also is eminent in history. Here was "the will of God," to do to others as you would have others do to you: "Love thy neighbour as thyself." Here is the record of "the law of men:" "Now both the chief priests and the Pharisees had given a commandment, that, if any man knew where He [Jesus] were, he should show it, that they might take Him." Judas, it seems, determined to "obey both,"—"the law of man" and the "will of God." So he sat with Jesus at the Last Supper, dipped his hand in the same dish, and took a morsel from the hand of Christ, given him in token of love. All this he did to obey "the will of God." Then he went and informed the commissioner or marshal where Jesus was. This he did to obey "the law of man." Then he came back, and found Christ,—the agony all over, the bloody sweat wiped off from His brow, presently to bleed again,—the Angel of Strength there with Him to comfort Him. He was arousing His sleeping disciples for the last time, and was telling thorn, "Pray, lest ye enter into temptation." Judas came and gave Him a kiss. To the cloven it seemed the friendly kiss, obeying "the will of God." To the marshal it also seemed a friendly kiss.—obeying "the law of man." So, in the same act, he obeys "the law of God" and "the will of man," and there is no "incompatibility!"
Of old it was said, "Thou canst not, serve God and mammon." He that said it has been thought to know something of morals,—something of religion.
Till the Fugitive Slave Law was passed, we did not know what a great saint Iscariot was. I think there ought to be a chapel for him, ard a day set apart in the calendar. Let him have his chapel in the navy-yard at Washington. He has got a priest there already. And for a day in the calendar—set apart for all time the 7th of March!
Let us look at some other things in that judge's address to the grand jury. "Unjust and oppressive laws may indeed be passed by human government. But if infinite and inscrutable wisdom permits political society … to establish such laws, may not the same wisdom permit and require individuals … to obey them?" Ask the prophets, in such a case, if they would have felt themselves permitted and required to obey them! Ask the men who were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection; who had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment: who Were stoned and sawn asunder; who were slain with the sword; who wandered about in sheepskins and goat-skins, destitute, afflicted, and tormented, of Whom the world was not worthy! Ask the apostles, who thanked God they were count; A worthy to suffer shame in the name of Christ! Ask Paul, who was eight times publicly beaten, thrice shipwrecked; and in perils of waters, of robbers, of the heathen, of false brethren—that worst of all peril! Nay, ask Christ; let the Crucified reply,—whether, when a wicked law is made, and we are commanded to keep it, God means we should! Ask the men who, with their ocean-wearied feet, consecrated the rock of Plymouth for ever! Ask the patriots of the revolution! What do they say? I will not give the answer. Even the martyred Jesuits say "No." Who is it that says "Yes?" Judas and the judge. Let them go—each "to his own place." Let me say no more of them.
This attempt to keep tho people down by false doctrine is no now thing. But to say that there is no law higher than what the State can make, is practical atheism. It is not a denial of God in His person ; that is only speculative atheism. It is a denial of tho functions and attributes of God; that is real atheism. If there is no God to make a law for me, then there is no God for me.
The law of the land is so sacred, it must override the law of God, must it? Let us see if all the laws of the United States are kept everywhere. Let a black man go to South Carolina in a ship, and we shall see. Let the British minister complain that South Carolina puts British subjects in gaol, for tho colour of their skin. Mr. Secretary Clayton tells him, "We cannot execute the laws of the United States in South Carolina." Why not? Because the people of South Carolina will not allow it!
Are the laws of Massachusetts kept in Boston, then? The usury law says, "Thou shalt not take more than six per cent, on thy money." Is that kept? There are thirty-four millions of banking capital in Massachusetts, and I think that every dollar of this capital has broken this law within the past twelve months; and yet no complaint has been made. There are three or four hundred brothels in this city of Boston, and ten or twelve hundred shops for the sale of rum. All of them are illegal; some are as well known to the police as is this house; indeed, a great deal more frequented, by some of them, than any house of God. Does anybody disturb them? No! I have A letter from an alderman who furnishes me with facts of this nature, who says, that "Some of the low places are prosecuted, some broken up." Last Saturday night, the very men who guarded Mr. Sims, I am told, waft playing, cards in his prison-house, contrary to the laws of Massachusetts. In Court Square, in front of the Court House, is a rum shop, one of the most frequented in the city, open at all hours of the. day, and, for aught I know, of the night too. I never passed when its "fire was quenched," and its "worm" dead. Is its owner prosecuted? How many laws of Massachusetts have been violated this very week, in this very city, by the slave-hunters bore, by the very officers of the State? What is the meaning of this? Every law which favours the accumulation of money, must be kept; but those which prohibit the unjust accumulation of money by certain classes—they need not be kept.[4]
No doubt it would be a great pity to have the city government careful to keep the laws of the city,—to suppress rum-shops, and save the citizens from the almshouse, the gaol, and the gallows. Such laws may be executed at Truro and Wellfleet; but it is quite needless for the officers of "The Athens of America," to attend to the temperance laws.[5] What a pity for the magistrates of Boston to heed the laws of the State! No; it is the Fugitive Slave Law that they must keep.
II. A great deal of pains has been taken to impress the people with their "moral duty to obey the Fugitive Slave Law." To carry it out, government needs base men; and that, my brothers, is a crop which never fails. Rye and wheat may get blasted many times in the course of years; the potato may rot; apples and peaches fail. But base men never fail. Put up your black pirate-flag in the market-place, offer "money and office," and they will come as other carrion-vultures to their prey. The olive, the fig, and the orange are limited in their range; even Indian corn and oats will not grow everywhere; but base men are indigenous all the world over, between the tropics and under a polar sky. No bad scheme ever failed for lack of bad men to carry it out. Do you want to kill Baptists and Quakers in Boston? There are the men for you. To hang "witches" at Salem? There are hangmen in plenty on Gallows Hill. Would James the Second butcher his subjects? He found his "human" tools ready. Would Elizabeth murder the Puritans and Catholics? There was no lack of ruffians. Would bloody Mary burn the Protestants? There were more executioners than victims. Would the Spanish Inquisition torture and put to death the men for whom Christ died? She found priests and "gentlemen," ready for their office. Would Nero murder the Christians, and make a spectacle of their sufferings? Rome is full of scoundrels to do the deed, and teems with spectators rushing to the amphitheatre at the cry of "Christians to the lions!" all finding a holiday in their brothers' agony. Would the high priests crucify the Son of man? They found a commissioner to issue the mandate, a marshal to enforce it, a commissioner to try him by illegal process,—for the process against Christ was almost as unconstitutional as that against Sims,—they found a commissioner ready to condemn Christ, against his own conscience, soldiers ready to crucify Him. Ay! and there was a Peter to deny Him, and a Judas to betray; and now there is a judge, with his legal ethics, to justify the betrayal! I promised not to speak of Judas or the judge again, but they will come up before me! It is true that, if in Boston some judicial monster should wish to seethe a man in a pot of scalding water, he would find another John Boilman in Boston, as Judge Jeffries found one in England, in 1686.
Th« churches of New England, and the North, have had their trials. In my time they have bees tried in various ways. Tho temperance reformation tried them. They have had perils on account of Slavery. The Mexican war tried them; the Fugitive Slave Law has put them to the rack. But never, in my day, have the churches been so sorely tried, nor done be well as now. The very letter of the New Testament on the one aide, and of the Old Testament on the other, both condemned the law; the spirit of thorn both was against all Slavery.
There are two great sects in Christendom,—the churches of Christianity, and the churches of commerce. The churches of Christianity always do well: they think that religion is love to God, and love to man. But the churches of commerce, which know no higher law, what should they do? Some of the ministers of the churches of commerce were wholly silent. Why so? The poor ministers were very modest all at once. Now, modesty is a commendable virtue; but see how it works. Here is a man who has given his mind ten, twenty, or thirty years to the study of theology, and knows every Hebrew particle of the Old Testament, and every Greek particle of the New Testament, as well as he knows the Lord's Prayer; every great work on the subject of Christianity, from Nicodemus down to Norton. Let him come out and say that the Old Testament was written like other books ; let him say that the miracles of the Old and New Testament are like the miracles of the Popish legends; then, ministers in their pulpits, who never study theology or philosophy, or pretended to study, only to know, the historical development of religion in the world,—they will come down instantly upon our poor man, call his doctrines "false," at id call him an "infidel" an "atheist." But let a rich parishioner, or a majority of the rich parishioners, be in favour of the Fugitive Slave Law, and all at once the minister is very modest indeed. He says to his people, by silence or by speech, "I do not understand these things; but you, my people, who all your lives are engaged in making money and nothing else, and worship mammon and nothing else, you understand them a great deal better than I do, My modesty forbids me to speak, Let us pray!"[6] Some ministers have been silent; others have spoken out in favour of the lower law, and in derision of the higher law. Here is a famous minister* the very chief of his denomination, reported in the newspapers to have said that he would surrender his own mother to Slavery rather than have the Union dissolved! I believe him this time. A few years ago that minister printed, in the organ of his sect, that the existence of God was "not a certainty!" He did not mean to say that he doubted or disbelieved it, only that it was "not a certainty!" I should suppose that ho had gone further in that direction, and thought the non-existence of God was "a certainty." But he is not quite original in this proposed sacrifice. He has been preceded and outbid by a Spanish Catholic; Here is the story, in Señor de Castro's History of the Spanish Protestants, written this very year. I can tell the story shorter than it is there related. In 1581, there lived a man in Yalladolid, who had two Protestant daughters, being himself a Catholic. The Inquisition was in full blast, and its fiery furnace heated seven times hotter than before. This man, according to the commandment of the priests and Pope, complained to the inquisitors against his daughters, who were summoned to appear before them. They Were tried, and condemned to be mimed alive, at his suggestion. He furnished the accusation, brought forward the evidence, and was the only witness in the case. That Was not all. After this condemnation, he went round his own estates, and from selected trees out down morsels of wood, and carried them to the city to use in burning his own daughters. He was allowed to do this, and of course the priest commended him for his piety and love of God! Thus, in 1581, in Valladolid, a father, at noon-day, with wood from his own estate, on his own complaint and evidence, with his own hands, burned his two daughters alive; and the Catholic Church said, "Well done!" Now, in my opinion, the Hidalgo of Valladolid a little surpasses the Unitarian Doctor of Divinity. I do not know what re- compense of reward" the Spanish Hidalgo got for his deed; but the American divine, for his offer, has been put into "one of the priests' offices, that he might eat a piece of bread." He has been appointed, as the newspapers say, a chaplain of the navy at Washington. Verily he has his reward.
But there have been found men in Boston to go a little further. Last Thanksgiving Day, I said it would be difficult to find a magistrate in Boston to take the odium of sending a fugitive back to Slavery. I believed, after all, men had some conscience, although they talked about its being a duty to deliver up a man to bondage. Pardon me, my country, that I rated you too high! Pardon me, town of Boston, that I thought your citizens all men! Pardon me, lawyers, that I thought you had been all born of mothers! I Pardon me, ruffians, who kill for hire! I thought you had some animal mercy left, even in your bosom! Pardon me, United States' commissioners, marshals, and the like, I thought you all had some shame! Pardon me, my hearers, for such mistakes. One commissioner was found to furnish the warrant! Pardon me, I did not know he was a commissioner; if I had, I never would have said it
Spirits of tyrants, I look down to you! Shade of Cain, you great first murderer, forgive me that I forgot your power, and did not remember that you were parent of so long a line! And you, my brethren, if hereafter I tell you that there is any limit of meanness or wickedness which a Yankee will net jump over, distrust me, and remind me of this day, and I will take it back!
Let us look at the public conduct of any commissioner who will send an innocent man from Boston into Slavery. I would speak of all men charitably; for I know how easy it is to err,—yea, to sin. I can look charitably on thieves, prowling about in darkness; on rum-sellers, whom poverty compels to crime; on harlots, who do the deed of shame that holy woman's soul abhors and revolts at; I can pity the pirate, who scours the seas in doing his fiendish crimes—he is tempted, made desperate by a gradual training in wickedness. The man, born at the South, owning slaves, who goes to Africa and sells adulterated rum in exchange for men to retail at Cuba,—I cannot understand the consciousness of such a man; yet I can admit that by birth and by breeding he has become so imbruted, he knows no better. Nay, even that he may, perhaps, justify his conduct to himself. I say I think his sin it not so dreadful as that of a commissioner in Boston who sends a man into Slavery. A man commits a murder, inflamed by jealousy, goaded by desire of great gain, excited by fear, stung by malice, or poisoned by revenge, and it is a horrid thing. But to send a man into Slavery is worse than to murder him. I should rather be slain than enslaved. To do this, inflamed by no jealousy, goaded by no desire of great gain,—only ten dollars!—excited by no fear, stung by no special malice, poisoned by no revenge,—I cannot comprehend that in any man, not even in a hyena. Beasts that raven for blood do not kill for killing's sake, but to feed their flesh. Forgive me, O ye wolves and hyenas! that I bring you into such company. I can only understand it in a devil!
When a man bred in Massachusetts, whose Constitution declares that "All men are born free and equal;" within sight of Faneuil Hall, with all its sacred memories; within two hours of Plymouth Bock; within a single hour of Concord and Lexington; in sight of Bunker Hill,—when he will do such a deed, it seems to me that there is no life of crime long enough to prepare a man for such a pitch of depravity; I should think he must have been begotten in sin, and conceived in iniquity, and been born "with a dog's head on his shoulders; than the concentration of the villany of whole generations of scoundrels would hardly be enough to fit a man for a deed like this!
You know the story of Thomas Sims. He crept on board a Boston vessel at Savannah. Perhaps he had heard of Boston, nay, even of Faneuil Hall, of the old Cradle of Liberty, and thought this was a Christian town, at least human, and hoped here to enjoy the liberty of a man. When the ship arrived here, the first words he spoke were, "Are we up there?" He was seized by a man who at the court-house boasted of his cruelty towards him, who held him by the hair, and kept him down, seeking to kidnap and carry him back into Slavery. He escaped!
But a few weeks pass by: the man-stealers are here; the commissioner issues his warrant; the marshals serve it in the night. Last Thursday night—when odious beasts of prey, that dare not face the light of heaven, prowl through the woods,—those ruffians of the law seized on their brother-mam. They lie to the bystanders, and seize him on a false pretence. There is their victim—they hold him bust. His faithless knife breaks in his hand; his coat is rent to pieces. He is the slave of Boston.[7] Can you understand his feelings? Let us pass by that. His "trial!" Shall I speak of that? He has been five days on trial for more than life, and has not seen a judge! A jury? No,—only a commissioner! O justice! O republican America! Is this the liberty of Massachusetts?
Where shall I find a parallel with men who will do such a deed,—do it in Boston? I will open the tombs, and bring up most hideous tyrants from the dead. Come, brood of monsters, let mo bring you up from the deep damnation of the graves wherein your hated memories continue for all time their never-ending rot. Come, birds of evil omen! come, ravens, vultures, carrion-crows, and see the spectacle! come, see the meeting of congenial souls! I will disturb, disquiet, and brine up the greatest monsters of the human race! Tremble Dot, women; tremble not, children; tremble not, men! They are all dead! They cannot harm you now! Fear the living, not the dead.
Come hither, Herod the wicked. Thou that didst seek after that young child's life, and destroyedst the Innocents! Let me look on thy face! No; go! Thou wert a heathen! Go, lie with the Innocents thou hast massacred. Thou art too good for this company! Come, Nero! Thou awful Roman Emperor! Come up! No; thou wast drunk with power! schooled in Roman depravity. Thou hadst, besides, the example of thy fancied gods! Go, wait another day, I will seek a worser man.
Come hither, St. Dominic! come, Torquemada!—Fathers of the Inquisition! Merciless monsters, seek your equal here! No; pass by! You are no companions for such men as these! You were the servants of atheistic popes, of cruel kings. Go to, and get you gone. Another time I may have work for you,—not now; lie there and persevere to rot. You are not yet quite wicked and corrupt enough for this comparison. Go, get ye gone, last the sun turn back at night of ye!
Come up, thou heap of wickedness, George Jeffries thy hands deep purple with the blood of thy murdered follow-men! Ah, I know thee! awful and accursed shade I two hundred years after thy death, men hate thee still, not without cause I Let me look upon thee! I know thy history. Pause and be still, whue I tell it to these men.
Brothers, George Jeffries "began in the sedition line." "There was no act, however bad, that he would not resort to, to get on." "He was of a bold aspeot, and oared not for the countenance of any man." "He became the avowed, unblushing slave of the court and the bitter persecutor and unappeasable enemy of the principles he had before supported.. He "was universally insolent and overbearing." "As a judge, he did not consider the decencies of his post, nor did he so much as affect to be impartial, as became a judge." His face and voice were always unamiable. "All tenderness for the feelings of others, all self-respect, were obliterated from his mind." He had "a delight in misery, merely as misery," and " that temper which tyrants require in their worst instruments." "He made haste to sell his forehead of brass and his tongue of venom to the court." He had "more impudence than ten carted street-walkers;" and was appropriately set to a work " which could be trusted to no mail who reverenced law, or who was sensible of shame." He was a " Commissioner" in 1685, You know of the "Bloody assizes" which he held, and how he sent to execution three hundred and twenty persons in a single circuit. "The whole country was strewed with the heads and limbs of his victims." Yet a man wrote that "a little more hemp might have been usefully employed." He was the worst of the English judges. "There was no measure, however illegal, to the execution of which he did not devotedly and recklessly abandon himself." "During the Stuart reigns, England was cursed by a succession of ruffians in ermine, who, for the sake of court favour, wrested the principles of law, the precepts of religion, and the duties of humanity; but they were fill greatly outstripped by Jeffries." Such is his history.
Come, shade of a judicial butcher! Two hundred years thy name has been pilloried in face of the world, and thy Memory gibbeted before mankind! Lot us .see how thou wilt compare with those who kidnap men in Boston! Go seek companionship with them! Go claim thy kindred, if such they be! Go tell them that the memory of the wicked shall rot,—that there is a God; an eternity; ay, and a judgment too! where the slave may appeal against him that made him a slave, to Him that made him a mail.
What! Dost thou shudder? Thou turn back? These not thy kindred! Why dost thou turn pale, as when the crowd clutched at thy life in London Street? It is true, George Jeffries, and these are not thy kin. Forgive me that I should send thee on such an errand, or bid thee seek companionship with such—with Boston hunters of the slave! Thou wert not base enough! It was a great bribe that tempted thee? Again I say, pardon me for sending thee to keep company with such men! Thou only struckst at men accused of crime; not at men accused only of their birth! Thou wouldst not send a man into bondage for two pounds! I will not rank thee with men who, in Boston, for ten dollars, would enslave a negro now! Rest still, Herod! Be quiet, Nero! Sleep, St. Dominic, and sleep, O Torquemada ! in your fiery gaol ! Sleep, Jeffries, underneath "the altar oi the church," which seeks, with Christian charity, to hide your hated bones.
"But," asks a looker on, "what is all this for?" Oh! to save the Union. "A precious Union which needs a saving such as this! And who are to rend the Union asunder ?" Why, men that hate Slavery, and love freedom for all mankind. "Is this the way to make them love the Union and Slavery, and hate freedom for all mankind?" We know none better. "What sort of a measure is this Fugitive Slave Law?" Oh! it is a "peace measure." Don't you see how well it works P how quiet the city, in the country not a mouse stirring? There will not be a word against the peace measure in all New England on this Fast Day. Blessed are the peacemakers, saith the Lord! "But you have great warrant for such deeds?" Oh, yes, the best in the world,—the example of Washington. He also "saved the Union." "So men blaspheme."
Let me tell you a little of that great man. Shortly after the passage of the law of 1703, a favourite female slave of Washington's wife ran away from the President of the new republic, and went into New Hampshire. She lived at Portsmouth. Washington wrote to Mr. Whipple, a United States' marshal, I think, or, at any rate, an officer of the United States, saying that he should like to have the woman sent back to him, if it could be done without tumult, and without shocking the principles and the feelings of the people. He added that the slave was a favourite of his wife. Mr. Whipple wrote back, and said, "It cannot be done without tumult, nor without shocking the principles and feelings of the people." Washington said no more! The woman died at a great age, a few years ago, at Portsmouth. That was the example of Washington,—a man who at his death freed his slaves! Would to God he had done it before! But they that come at the eleventh hour shall never be cast out from my charity.
See what is the consequence of this measure! See what has been the condition of Boston for the past week! Read the mingled truth and lies in the newspapers; look at men's faces in the street; listen to their talk; see the court-house in chains; see one hundred, policemen on guard, and three companies of military picketed in Faneuil Hall; behold the people shut out from the courts—I will not say of justice! See the officers of Massachusetts made slave hunters—against the law; constitutional rights struck down—against the law; sheriffs refusing to serve writs—against the law; see the great civil rights our fathers gained five hundred years ago, the trial by jury, by our "peers," by the "law of the land," all cloven down; the writ of "personal replevin" made null—no sheriff daring to execute a law made to suit such a case as this, made but eight years ago! Where is your high sheriff? Where is your governor? See the judges of Massachusetts bend beneath that chain; see them bow down, one by one, and kneel, and creep, and cringe, and crouch, and crawl, under the chain! Note the symbol! That was the chain on the neck of the commonwealth, visible on the nooks of the judges as they entered tho Bastile of Boston,—the Barracoon of Boston! A few years ago, they used to tell us, "Slavery is an abstraction;" "we at the North have nothing to do with it." Now liberty is only an abstraction! Here is a note just handed mo in the pulpit:—
"Marshal Tukey told me this morning that his orders were not merely to keep the peace, but to assist the United States’ marshal in detaining and transporting the slave; that he knew he was violating the State law, as well as I did; but it was not his responsibility, but that of the mayor and alderman. I thought yon might like to know this."
Well, my brethren, I know Boston has seen sad days before now. When the Stamp Act came here in our fathers' time, it was a sad day; they tolled the bells all over town, and Mayhew wished "they were cut off that trouble you." It was a sad day when the tea came here, although, when it went down the stream, all the hills of New England laughed. And it was ft sadder day still, the 17th of June, 1775, when our fathers fought and bled on yonder hill, all red from battle at Concord and Lexington, and poured sheeted death into the ranks of their enemies, while the inhabitants of this town lifted up their hands, but could not go to assist their brethren in the field : and when, to crown all their sadness, they saw four hundred of the houses of their sister town go up in flames to heaven, and could not lend a helping hand! A sadder day when they fired one hundred guns in Boston for the pass? ge of the Fugitive (Slave Law. It was the saddest day of all, when a man wan kidnapped in Boston by tho men of Boston, and your court-house hung with chains.
It was not from the tyrants of the other side of the world that this trouble came!
If you could have seen what I have this morning, at sunrise, one hundred of the police of this city, contrary to the laws of the State, drilling with drawn swords, to learn to guard a man whilst he should be carried into bondage! And who do you suppose was at their head? A man bearing an honourable name—Samuel Adams! Tell it not in Massachusetts ; let not your children hear of this, lest they curse the mothers that bore them. It is well that we should have a day of fasting and humiliation and prayer, when such things are done here. Well, my brethren, these are only the beginning of sorrows. There will be other victims yet; this will not settle the question. What shall we do? I think I am a calm man and a cool man, and I have a word or two to say as to what we shall do. Never obey the law. Keep the law of God. Next, I say, resist not evil with evil; resist not now with violence. Why do I say this? Will you tell me that I am a coward? Perhaps I am; at least I am not afraid to be called one. Why do I say, then, do not now resist with violence? Because it is not time just yet; it would not succeed. If I had the eloquence that I sometimes dream of, which goes into a crowd of men, and gathers it in its mighty arm, and sways them as the president boughs of yonder elm shall be shaken by the summer breeze next June, I world not give that counsel. I would call on men, and lift up my voice like a trumpet through the whole land, until I had gathered millions out of the North and the South, and they should crush Slavery for ever, as the ox crushes the spider underneath his feet. But such eloquence is given to no man. It was not given to the ancient Greek who "shook the arsenal and fulmined over Greece." He that so often held the nobles and the mob of Rome within his hand, had it not. He that spoke as never man spake, and who has since gathered two hundred millions to his name, had it not. No man has it. The ablest muit wait for time ! It is idle to resist here and now. It is not the hour. If in 1765 they had attempted to carry out the Revolution, by force, they would have foiled. Had it failed, we had not been here to-day. There would have been no little monument at Lexington "sacred to liberty and the rights of mankind," armouring the men who "fell in the cause of God and their country. No little monument at Concord; nor that tall tale of eloquent stone at Bunker Hill, to proclaim that "Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God." Success is due to the discretion, heroism, calmness, and forbearance of our fathers: let us wait our time. It will come—perhaps will need no sacrifice of blood.
Resist, then, by peaceful means ; not with evil, but with good. Hold the men infamous that execrate this law; give them your pity, but nover give them your trust, not till they repent, then swiftly forgive. Agitate, discuss, petition, and elect to office men whom you can trust; not men who never show their face in the day of darkness and of peril. Choose men that are men.
I suppose that this man will be carried back to Slavery. The law of the United States has been cloven down; the law of Massachusetts cloven down. If we have done all that we can, we must leave the result to God. It is something that a man can only be kidnapped in Boston by riding over the law, and can only be tried in a court-house surrounded by chains, when tho crouching judges crawl under the iron of Slavery to enter their house of Dondage; that even on Fast Day it is guarded by one hundred police, and three companies of military are picketed in Faneuil Hall—the "Sims Brigade!"[8]
The Christians saw Christ crucified, and looked on from afar; sad, but impotent. The Christians at Rome saw their brethren martyred, and could not help them: they wore too weak. But the blood of martyrs is the seed of the church. To-day is St. Bademus' Day: three hundred and seventy-six years after Christ, that precious saint was slain because he would not keep the commandment of the king. By crucified redeemers shall mankind be saved. If we cannot prevent crucifixion, let us wait for the redemption.
Shall I ask you to despair of human liberty and rights? I believe that money is to triumph for the present. We see it does in Boston, Philadelphia, New York, and Washington: see this in the defence of bribery; in the chains of the court-house; in the judges' pliant necks ; m the swords of the, police to-day; see it in the threats of the press to withdraw the trade of Boston from towns that favour the unalienable rights e£ man!
Will the Union hold out ? I know not that. But, if men continue to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law, I do not know how soon it will end; I do not care how soon the Union goes to pieces. I believe in justice and the law of God; that ultimately the right will prevail. Wrong will prevail for a time, and attract admiration. I have seen in a haberdasher's shop-window the figure of a wooden woman showily arrayed, turning round on a pivot, and attracting the gaze of all the passers-by; but ere long it is forgotten. So it will be with thii transient love of Shivery in Boston; but the love of right will lost as long as tho granite in New Hampshire hills. I will not tell you to despair of freedom because politicians are false; they are often so. Despair of freedom for the black man! No, never. Not till heaven shakes down its stars; nay, not till the heart of man ceases to yearn for liberty; not till the eternal God is hurled from His throne, and a devil takes His place! All the arts of wicked men shall not prevail against the Father; nay, at last, not against the Son.
The very scenes we have witnessed here,—the court-house in chains,—the laws of Massachusetts despised,—the commonwealth disgraced,—these speak to the people with an eloquence beyond all power of human speech. Here is great argument for our cause. This work begets new foes to every form of wrong. There is a day after today,—an eternity after to-morrow. Let us be courageous and active, but cool and tranquil, and full of hope. These are the beginning of sorrows ; we shall have others, and trials. Coatinued material prosperity is commonly bad for a man, always for a nation. I think the time is coming when there will be a terrible contest between Liberty and Slavery. Now is the time to spread ideas, not to bear arms. I know which will triumph : the present love of thraldom is only an eddy in the great river of the nation's life; by and by it will pass $own the stream and be forgot. Liberty will spread with us, its the spring over the New England hills. One spot will blossom, and then another, until at last the spring has covered the whole land, and every mountain rejoices in its verdant splendour.
O Boston! thou wert once the payer and pride … all New England men; and holy hands were laid in baptism on thy baby brow! Thou art dishonoured now; thou hast taken to thy arms the enemies of men. Thou hunt betrayed the slave; thy brother's blood cries out against thee from the ground. Thou art a stealer of mankind. In thy borders, for long years, the cradle of liberty has been placed. The golden serpent of commerce has twined its snaky folds about it all, and fascinated into sloop the child. Tread lightly, soldiers: he yet may wake. Yes, in his time this child, shall wake; and Boston shall scourge out the memory of the men who have trodden her laws under foot, violated the dearest instincts of her heart, and profaned her religion. I appeal from Boston, swollen with wealth, drunk with passion, and mad against freedom—to Boston in her calm and sober hour.
O Massachusetts, noble State! the mother that bore us all; parent of goodly institutions and of noble men, whose great ideas have blessed the land!—how art thou defiled, dishonoured, and brought low! One of thine own hired servants has wrought this deed of shame, and rent the bosom which took him as an adopted son. Shall it be always thus? I conjure thee by all thy battle-fields,—by the remembrance of the great men born of thee, who battled for the right, thy Franklin, Hancock, the Adamses—three in a single name,—by thine ideas and thy love of God,—to forbid for ever all such deeds as this, and wipe away thy deep disgrace.
America, thou youngest born of all God's family of States! thou art a giant in thy youth, laying thine either hand upon thine either sea; the lakes behind thee, and the Mexique bay before. Hast thou too forgot thy mission here, proud only of thy wide-spread soil, thy cattle, corn, thy cotton, and thy cloth? Wilt thou welcome the Hungarian hero, and yet hold slaves, and hunt poor negroes through thy land? Thou art the ally of the despot, thyself out-heathening the heathen Turk. Yea, every Christian king may taunt thee with thy slaves. Dost thou forget thine own great men,—thy Washington, thy Jefferson? forget thine own proud words prayed forth to God in thy great act of prayer? Is it to protect thy wealth alone that thou hast formed a State? and shall thy wealth be slaves ? No, thou art mad. It shall not be. One day thou wilt heed the lessons of the past, practise thy prayer, wilt turn to God, and rend out of thy book the hated page where Slavery is writ. Thy sons who led thee astray in thy madness, where shall they appear?
And thou our God, the Father of us all, Father and Mother too, Parent of freemen, Parent also of the slave, look down upon us in our sad estate. Look down upon thy saints, and bless them; yea, bless thy sinners too; save from the wicked heart. Bless this town by Thy chastisement; this State by Thine afflictions; this nation by Thy rod. Teach us to resist evil, and with good, till we break the fetters from every foot, the chains from every hand, and let the oppressed go free. So let Thy kingdom come; so may Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
LONDON:
WILLIAM STEVENS, PRINTERS, 37, BELL YARD;
TEMPLE BAR.
- ↑ The above paragraph, refers to cases which had then recently occurred, and were known to everybody.
- ↑ Mr. Peleg Sprague.
- ↑ The above paragraph was written in April, 1851, and was only historical, not also prophetic
- ↑ It was well known that the laws of Massachusetts were violated, but no prosecution of the offenders was ever begun. The committee to whom the matter was referred thought that the Supreme Court of Massachusetts was not to be trusted to vindicate the laws of the State, against kidnappers in Boston.
- ↑ In November, 1851, the City Marshal reports to the Board of Aldermen the following facts:—There are fifteen hundred places in Boston
where intoxicating drinks are sold, in violation of the laws of Massachusetts.
Kept by Americans 490 Kept by foreigners 1010 Open on Sunday 979 Groceries that keep intoxicating drink 469 Other places 1031 All the "first class hotels," except four, have open bars for the sale of intoxicating drink. The government of Boston,—which violate the laws of Massachusetts, to kidnap a man, and deliver him to his tormentors, asks the City Marshal to give such information as is calculated to shock the progress of crime and intemperance. He reports—"Execute the laws!" In 1851, Boston has the honour of kidnapping one of her inhabitants, and sending him to Slavery, and of supporting fifteen hundred rum-shops, in continual violation of the laws of Massachusetts.
- ↑ While these volumes are getting printed, one of the sectarian newspapers of Boston publishes the following paragraph:—
"The English railways are all in use on the Sabbath, and all evidently under a curse; Their stock is ruinously low. Three hundred and fifty millions of dollars have been embarked in these enterprises, and the average dividends, which they pay in but three per cent. And more than this, a large number of fatal accidents have occurred of late. While we regret that the business men of England, who control these lines, have not wisdom enough to see the folly of making haste to be rich, in defiance of the ordinances of God, we rejoice that be many of the railroad operators in this country rest on the Sabbath day, according to the commandment." See note (†) oil p. 289. - ↑ The tattered garment is still kept as a melancholy monument of the civilization of Boston in the middle of the nineteenth century.
- ↑ Mr. Sims was sent off to bondage in the barque Acorn, by the city authorities of Boston. I believe he is the first man ever returned as a fugitive slave from Massachusetts by the form of law since the adoption of the Constitution. Arrived at Savannah, he was immediately conducted to prison. His, mother and cither relatives were not allowed to see him. He was cruelly and repeatedly scourged. Mcantirno the citizens of Boston, who had aided in kidnapping him, and had accompanied him to Savannah, were publicly feasted by the inhabitants of Georgia. The present fate of Mr. Sims is unknown to me.—Nov. 27th, 1851.