USA > New Hampshire > History of New Hampshire, Volume III > Part 11
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31
Chapter IX THE ABOLITIONISTS
Chapter IX
THE ABOLITIONISTS.
Position of the Democratic Party as to Slavery-William Lloyd Garrison and the Liberator-Anti-Slavery Societies-Fifty Petitions to the Legis- lature-Gov. Hill on Slavery-Motion of Samuel Garfield, Jr .- Report of Special Committee-Resolutions of the House-Gov. Colby Speaks out against Slavery-Position of the Clergy-George Thompson and John G. Whittier Mobbed in Concord-Attempt to Make Clergymen Hold Their Tongues-The Northern Churches in General Opposed Slavery-Nathaniel P. Rogers-Stephen S. Foster-Hon. James Wil- son-Senator John Parker Hale-Amos Tuck-"God Bless New Hamp- shire"-Pierce versus Hale in the Old North Church at Concord-Im- mortal Words of Hale-Hale the First Anti-Slavery Senator-Free Soil Candidate for the Presidency-His Eloquent Defense of Shadrach -A Moral Political Reformer of the First Rank.
F ROM the beginning of our national existence slavery had been the bone of contention between the North and the South. While there were prominent men in the South, like President Thomas Jefferson, who admitted and strongly as- serted the evils of slavery, yet it was considered so necessary to the southern planter, that greed could not sacrifice money to morals. The Union of the original States was formed by con- cessions made to the South. Slavery was held to be an institu- tion under the control of separate States. The Democratic party of the North always supported the claims of the South, that they should be let alone and allowed to do as they pleased with their slaves. This position was reiterated in almost every message of New Hampshire's governors, after the great agita- tion in favor of abolition of slavery begun.
In 1831 began a new era in the history of the abolition of slavery. In that year William Lloyd Garrison established the Liberator in Boston, and this paper brought into New Hamp- shire the elements of moral strife. Slumbering humanitarianism awoke. National prosperity, questions of constitutionality, the preservation of the Union itself, were seen to be of importance inferior to the rights of man. The moral aspect of human servi-
129
130
NEW HAMPSHIRE
tude overtopped all others. Societies among men, women and even children were formed all over the North for the suppression and abolition of the great wrong. To confine it within certain States was not enough; it must be blotted out everywhere and forever. There must be no compromise with this "sum of all villainies." Such was the spirit of the New England Anti- Slavery Society, organized in Boston in 1832. The following year a convention of sixty delegates from various parts of the country met in Philadelphia and formed the American Anti- Slavery Society, of which New Hampshire organized a branch in 1834. In June of that year there was a debate in Concord on the burning question, and many of the members of the legislature attended it and in consequence scattered the seeds of abolition all over the State. Petitions flowed into the House in 1838, to the number of more than fifty, relating to the abolition of slavery, signed by men and women by the thousands. All these petitions were referred to a committee, who reported that "it is inexpedient to legislate on the subject," and they postponed action indefinitely by a vote of one hundred and nine to eighty- two. The object of most of the petitions was to exclude slavery from the District of Columbia and from the newly acquired territory of Florida. Some asked that no runaway slave should be returned from New Hampshire without trial by jury, and that the prisons of the State should not be used for the incarceration of hunted slaves.
The message of Governor Hill, in 1836, is explicit on this topic. He said, "We must take things as they are,-not as we would have them." That sentiment will never do for a reformer. We must change the evils that are as quickly as possible into the things that should be. He said further, "That whites found the colored race,-fit only for servitude." The abolitionists re- plied that the whites stole the colored people from Africa and that some of them had been fitted for something better than servitude, and the rest could be. The governor went on with the usual talk about the kind treatment of the southern slaves by their masters and that the well-used slaves considered them- selves superior to the colored persons who were free and had to support themselves. The abolitionists replied by narrations of frightful cruelties on the part of slave-drivers and of the separation of families by the slave-trade. The governor's com-
131
A HISTORY
parison of the slaves of the South with the apprentices of New England was not apt, for the apprentice was sure of freedom after he had learned his trade. He apologizes for slavery, while he admits that it is an evil. The Constitution obliges us "to protect the rights which the slaveholders have in slaves. The North has no right to interfere in the domestic affairs of the South." "It is not to be wondered at that the master should feel obliged to deny the slave the means of education, when he knows that teaching him to read and write will in- crease his ability and his inclination to do his master injury." He declares that the work of the abolitionists has retarded the thing they were seeking for fifty years. The pro-slavery advo- cates were then asserting everywhere that the education or the liberation of the colored people would lead to massacres of the whites. The threat of the disruption of the Union kept the Democrats of the North in the traces. The very foundations of society and civil government must not be suddenly broken up, -such was the party cry, and most of the shouters were sin- cere,-and mistaken.
Samuel Garfield Jr., of Langdon, introduced in the House a resolution, "That it is inexpedient to discuss the sublime merits of Southern slavery, while Northern slaves are required by their taskmatsers in gloves to wear the collar and draw in traces." He was censured by vote of the House and required to apologize for his "unmanly and unjust aspersions." This shows the heat of the discussion and that well-meaning reformers sometimes use unwise language. The abolitionists perhaps employed too much words and epithets of denunciation and scorn, so natural to the lips of one whose heart is burning with moral indignation.
A special committee made a long report to the House, in 1839, in which they say, that "in some of the States the blacks outnumber the whites. They are ignorant and destitute of property. They have been slaves and they will remember it. Let them be emancipated, and they will claim the right of citizens. If denied, what follows? Civil war, the event of which must be the extermination of the blacks or of the whites. But elevate them to the rights of citizenship, place the ballot in their hands, and every election will be a question of color. Nor can the issue be at all doubtful. The Southern States would have a black Governor and a black Legislature; black Senators and
I32
NEW HAMPSHIRE
black Representatives in Congress; black Judges, and your committee fear, black laws." Was this prophetic foresight of the results of post-bellum reconstruction of the South?
The House was led to pass the following resolves :
That the relation of master and slave, as established by law within the jurisdiction of any of the States, is an institution for which the State, within which it is established, is alone responsible, and with which neither Congress, nor the Legislature of any other State, can rightfully interfere.
That the adoption and prosecution of measures by individuals residing within one State, with the avowed design of overthrowing the institutions of another State, by sending emissaries, scattering documents, pamphlets or papers, within that State against the declared will of the same, is a dis- regard of that comity and mutual respect which should ever be cultivated among the States.
That Congress ought not to interdict the slave-trade between the States, or to abolish slavery within the District of Columbia, or the Territories of the United States.
That the resolution adopted by the House of Representatives of the Congress of the United States, by which all memorials relating to the aboli- tion of slavery, upon the presentation of the same, were ordered to lie on the table, without any further action thereon, was not an infringement of the right of petition.
That the immediate abolition of slavery, by whatever means effected, without the expatriation of the slaves, would be productive of calamities, moral and political, such as should be deprecated by every friend of humanity.
Such continued to be the spirit and utterance of Democratic governors and legislatures till, in 1846, Anthony Colby was elected by the Whigs and their friends in the legislature. In his first and only message he changes the whole tone of New Hamp- shire's chief executive and voices the growing protest of her people, declaring that slavery,
at variance with our declaration of liberty and equal rights, and repug- nant to our moral sense, was entailed upon us by the framers of our Con- stitution, whose palliation for the admission of so great a blot upon our system was the weak and embarrassed condition of the country at the close of the revolutionary war. But what can be said of the present generation in the United States? Grasping territory for the purpose of increasing human mis- ery. Texas has been annexed to the United States for no higher object than to perpetuate an institution which degrades the human race and dishonors the God of Heaven. For doing this there is no excuse that will avail for our country before a righteous Judge. Let New Hampshire wipe out the stain which has been flung upon her by party machinery, set in motion by the
I33
A HISTORY
Baltimore convention, whereby she has been made to act contrary to the true spirit of her original democracy, and contrary to the true feelings of three-fourths of her citizens. While we of the North are not permitted to remain in a southern State, by our agents for the purpose of obtaining jus- tice, let us render good for evil and say to our southern brethren, of what- ever rank or color, that if they come into New Hampshire they may enjoy equal liberty with us ;and if any be claimed as servants or as slaves, let a right to their services, founded on mutual contract, be shown to the satis- faction of a New Hampshire jury. If Congress have not the constitutional right to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, it would look better for them to remove the seat of government to some free State.
The reason why abolitionists asked that a hunted slave should have the right to trial by jury was, that they well knew that no New Hampshire jury of twelve men would ever send a runaway negro back to southern slavery. He never entered into contract with his master. The legislature of 1846 passed resolu- tions in harmony with the governor's message after long debate. and the use of every trick known to parliamentary tactics to block the expression of the moral indignation of the majority.
Meanwhile the friends of human liberty were increasing. Anti-slavery societies, both male and female, begun at Concord in 1834, had multiplied to fifteen in the course of the following year, and these societies were circulating such literature as the secular journals would not print, and but few of the religious newspapers then spoke out with clearness. The clergy were growing bolder, though the fear of dividing the churches con- strained many to keep silent and let somebody else do their work of reform. The bread-and-butter prophets have never become extinct. When a moral question gets into politics, there are always some in the pew to cry out, that the pulpit is no place for politics, which always means, if the preacher can not re-echo their sentiments, let him hold his tongue. A few preachers led the way of reform and suffered the fate of the reformer, thus becoming bitterly critical of the churches in general. Gradually, however, the laity became educated and bold enough to sustain the champion of human rights.
In the summer of 1835 George Thompson of England, a noted lecturer on anti-slavery, came to Concord, accompanied by John Greenleaf Whittier, and was advertised to speak at the old State House, before the ladies of the Anti-Slavery Society and their friends. A mob collected, encouraged by a resolution
I34
NEW HAMPSHIRE
passed at a previous meeting of some leaders in society at Concord, and pelted Mr. Whittier with dirt. Mr. Thompson fled to the house of his host, Mr. George Kent, Jr., and thence he and Mr. Kent escaped to the woods. On assurance that Mr. Thompson would not speak in Concord the mob dispersed. However, they constructed his effigy and burned it in the State House yard. Mr. Thompson had made an address in Concord in the previous November before the ladies' society, and in spite of hisses, groans and throwing of missiles, continued his lecture to the end. The opposition published all the accusations they could rake together against the moral character of Mr. Thompson in England, personal abuse taking the place of argu- ment and facts, as is frequent in a losing contest. It is interest- ing to note that in 1864 George Thompson was invited to Con- cord and delivered an address three hours long in Eagle Hall. At the first meeting of the New Hampshire Anti-Slavery So- ciety, held in Concord in 1834, Dr. Nathaniel Bouton of the North church and the Rev. George Storrs of the South church identified themselves with the movement, and a committee was appointed to draw up an address to the people of the State, con- sisting of John Farmer, George Kent and Rufus A. Putnam. The first name on the committee insured historical accuracy and fulness. One can scarcely read that report now without feeling one's blood stirred with indignation. The horrors of the slave- trade are vividly depicted.
Anti-abolition meetings were held in several towns, ad- dressed by such leading politicians as Governor Isaac Hill and Senator Charles G. Atherton, who introduced the "gag law" in Congress, but I have read of no Societies organized, nor asso- ciations of women, to sustain the cause of the slaveholders.
In 1841 a convention of Congregationalists and Presby- terians met in the South church, Concord, to decide on the best method for the abolition of slavery. They adopted a constitu- tion, the preamble of which affirms that slave-holding and slave- trading are heinous sins in the sight of God and that "immediate emancipation is both the duty of the master and the right of the slave, practicable, safe, expedient and for the best interests of all parties." A society was formed, to which any member of the denominations represented was eligible, and when the con- stitution went forth, sixty-five Congregational ministers had
I35
A HISTORY
signed it, and others united with the Society soon afterward. The Methodist ministers of the North were almost unanimously abolitionists, and on the question of slavery the Methodist Epis- copal Church was split asunder along Mason and Dixon's line. It is true, as Garrison wrote, that Professor Moses Stuart of Andover Theological Seminary found slavery in the Decalogue, and some students in that institution were disciplined and left the seminary because of their advocacy of abolition of slavery. Bishop Hedding of the Methodist Episcopal Church, President Lord of Dartmouth College and Rev. Nehemiah Adams are enumerated by Garrison as among the opponents of the cause of the abolitionists, but before 1840 the majority of clergymen in the North were foes of slavery, though many of them thought it not expedient to speak out in their pulpits, lest their flocks should be divided. The cry, "No politics in the pulpit," shut their mouths. Only a few were ready to take the prophet's reward, though after the Emancipation Proclamation all claimed that they were always in favor of the liberation of slaves. Men like Stephen S. Foster, Parker Pilsbury, Wendell Phillips and William Lloyd Garrison assailed the churches bitterly for their apathy and lack of support and open advocacy of letting the institution alone. Phillips said in 1853, that "in some towns large societies were formed, led by most of the clergymen, and having almost all the church members on their lists. In those same towns now you will not find one single abolitionist of any stamp whatever." Why this falling away of the ministers and church members? Because the division was breaking up the churches and endangering ministers' salaries. A few rich Demo- crats in a church,-and there were a very few in many of the churches,-could say, "If abolitionism is preached, then I will neither go to church nor help to pay its expenses." Thus they held the balance of power and silenced the timid and penurious. Reforms cost sacrifice, and not all the professed followers of Jesus are willing to "lay down their lives for the brethren." Nevertheless it was the members of the Christian churches in the North, who by voice and vote sustained the movement for abolition. The refusal of a few to co-operate, or even of the majority at the beginning of the reform, is not evidence suffi- cient to condemn the whole church, as the language of some abolitionists too plainly states. The abolition campaign was not
I36
NEW HAMPSHIRE
confined to church or denomination; neither was it the secular work of those not affiliated with the churches. All lovers of mankind, all friends of liberty, equality and justice, were grad- ually swept into the movement and swept along by it. It was a great revival of national righteousness.
Among the early abolitionists of New Hampshire wwas Nathaniel Peabody Rogers, born at Portsmouth June 3, 1794. He graduated at Dartmouth College in 1816 and practiced law in his native town till 1838, when he edited at Concord an abolition paper, called the Herald of Freedom. He also con- tributed to the New York Tribune, under the name of "The Old Man of the Mountain." Later he was a member of the Non- Resistance Society. On one occasion a speaker in a public assembly declared, in answer to an inquiry, that he would take human life, "if God commanded it." "Well," replied Rogers, "I wouldn't." This shows the moral fibre of the man. There is a higher law within, to be obeyed sooner than any sup- posedly miraculous command of God. Mr. Rogers gave an address before the Female Anti-Slavery Society, at Concord, in 1837, which was published. In it he said:
American slavery is the crime and curse of the whole land. Its root and life principle are in the North. The tree not only overshadows the North, but its roots run up here and are intertwined among the rocks of the soil of freedom. Here it derives its nutriment and here it must be overthrown. It must fall by the axe of Free Discussion. This mighty and peaceful weapon everybody can wield. It is this that Slaveholding dreads, and begs you, commands you not to take up. The South asks the North to sustain her slave system by its silence. She says to us-all we want of you, is that you keep still and hold your peace. We don't want to hear you talk on this subject in our ears. You disturb our tranquility and agitate us. We can't discuss the subject-we can't allow you to discuss it-it must not be dis- cussed. Treat the free negroes as you have done-promote coloniza- tion to drain off as many of them as you can, out of sight of our slaves, and out of sight of the conscience of your church, and we will take care of slavery. You don't know how to talk on this "delicate subject"
. The field for the great conflict that must liberate the slave is the northern church meeting and the northern prayer meeting. . Break up the church's criminal silence on the subject of this heaven-daring abomina- tion, and the foul system perishes in the light of truth.
The whole address shows Nathaniel P. Rogers to have been a man of brains, heart and eloquence. Nothing could be said against his blameless and peaceful Christian life.
I37
A HISTORY
Stephen Symonds Foster was another abolitionist, who made himself felt not only in New Hampshire but throughout the North. He was born in Canterbury, November 15, 1809. He graduated at Dartmouth College in 1831 and studied for the ministry in Union Theological Seminary, but never entered upon his chosen profession, because he was not allowed to preach the abolition of slavery in the pulpit. He was also an advocate of peace and attacked the church, because it sanctioned slavery and war. He published a pamphlet, in 1843, entitled, "The Brotherhood of Thieves, a True Picture of the American Church and Clergy." One of his singular ways of arousing public in- terest in the anti-slavery cause was, to enter a church on Sunday and at first opportunity begin to pray or exhort on his favorite topic, claiming the liberty of prophysying in a known tongue. For such conduct he was cast into prison more than a dozen times. Both the North church in Concord and the South church forcibly expelled him, causing in the latter case injuries that confined him for weeks. His manner and tone were inoffensive, and nobody doubted his Christian spirit and conscientiousness. He seems to have adopted this method, which proved almost as effective as John Brown's raid at Harper's Ferry, to stir up the dormant moral feeling of the North, somewhat as the suffragettes of England shock and frighten the public into listening and reading, by violent conduct, since otherwise the papers would publish nothing about the reform they advocate. It is not, per- haps, the wisest way of pushing forward a reform, unless it is the only way, and of that other people may be better judges. than we. When people will not give ear to the voice of the prophet, he is forced to resort to unusual means to gain atten- tion. Something before unheard of wakes the sleepy up. Nearly all prophets and reformers have been original in their methods; the burning zeal within impels them to give it strange outlets. Let not the dull and unemotional judge them harshly. Stephen S. Foster married a quakeress reformer, as zealous as himself, and together they traveled and preached the Gospel of freedom and peace. He died near Worcester, Massachusetts, September 8, 1881. It is written of him, that "probably he encountered more mob opposition and violence than any other agent ever in the anti-slavery lecturing field, and almost always he would in some way obtain control of his opponents." The poet Lowell
138
NEW HAMPSHIRE
called him "a kind of maddened John the Baptist." While a student in Dartmouth College he was imprisoned, because he would not perform military service. He got printed such a description of the filthiness and unsanitary condition of the prison, that a reform was soon instituted. A prison had no more terrors for him than for St. Paul.1
The Hon. James Wilson of Keene rendered good service to the cause of anti-slavery in the national House of Representa- tives, in 1849. Near the end of a long, printed speech he said :
Gentlemen need not talk to me, or attempt to frighten me, by threats about the dissolution of the Union. Sir, I do not permit myself to talk or even think about the dissolution of the Union; very few northern men do. We all look upon such a thing as impossible. But, sir, if the alternative should be presented to me of the extension of slavery or the dissolution of the Union, I would say, rather than extend slavery, let the Union, aye, the universe itself be dissolved. Never, never will I raise my hand or my voice to give a vote by which slavery can or may be extended. As God is my judge I cannot, I will not, be moved from the purpose I have now an- nounced.
But of all the abolitionists of New Hampshire the one who has reflected most honor upon his State was John Parker Hale. At first a Democrat, he was forced into the ranks of the Free Soil party by his natural repugnance to slavery. He was born in Rochester, March 31, 1806, and graduated at Bowdoin College in 1827, having for college mates, Henry W. Longfellow, Nathaniel Hawthorne, William Pitt Fessenden and Franklin Pierce. He read law with the Hon. Daniel M. Christie of Dover and opened an office in that town in 1830. Soon he found himself in the State legislature and a little later in the national House as a Democrat, though his first election to office was on a workingmen's ticket. In 1835 he was almost a perse- cutor of abolitionists, a sort of Saul of Tarsus, but the Lord had mercy on both because of their ignorance through unbelief. Mr. Hale knew truth when he saw it and followed it unflinch- ingly. He and "Black Hannibal Hamlin" of Maine stood alone and together in the Democratic ranks in Congress in defense of human freedom. He earned the epithets of "Democratic
1 See a biographical sketch of Stephen S. Foster, by Parker Pilsbury, in the Granite Monthly, Vol. V., pp. 369-375.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.