2 10 12 https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/830b924cd18353f92ecb0b7effff524d.pdf?Expires=1787788800&Signature=ZpxmKVLvExTyeHyS9YDNzNe0a3mHDStd4fuDQOgxx62jwUQpLx4cZPgyrRt%7EEowUZEC9gPyEp-tTC7ZzFv1QHkgtSk1IImfEdAFqUcZ4NNDM3kmVY-%7EyHpCnvrPsqwLxoKDc4GYp3VONJkBtgutSi3jpAQz1zBXZedfD0lWafp3npcijQj07FF5bOnNwexZ216gLBQUqKBDsmLvQ-tlx0I4BWmBpuGWGH56i59-lKppQw6unckZCY89yYiWa3XTwdAcbL%7E7BAhuf3fJc1FabAQr4P0gLJVwyX0-v1CO6xe4ywjBSe0b0-rJDEY7gQ0Sl9-Uvay9AcqP7QCTU67jOYw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM faeb5eb6aeab5c7bb5cb00a83d298b57 PDF Text Text EMANCIPATION IN THE WEST INDIES F. B. SANBORN. CONCORD, MASS. Mabch, 1862. ��EMANCIPATION IN THE W E ST INDIES. The substance of the following Essay was given in the form of a Lecture at Concord, and afterwards in Boston, where it was printed in The Pine and Palm. The writer has likewise furnished eight articles for the Springfield Republican, em­ bodying the same views, but presented in a different form. He wishes, in this way, to contribute to the public information concerning a matter understood even in New England. unhappily but little Doubtless there are errors in these pages, but they are not those of intention. Concord, March 27th, 1862. Sidney Smith mentions a critic who would never read a book till after he bad reviewed it; “because,” he said, “reading is apt to bias the mind.” King James I. used to wonder that his judges could decide any case after they had heard both sides; “for if I hear but the one party,” said he, “my judg­ ment is clear; but when they have both told their story, by my saul 1 I canna tell what to say.” Something like the wisdom of these two sages seems to have taken possession of the American mind on the question of Eman­ cipation. There are people enough to ad­ vance the theory; there are more than enough to denounce it, and cry out on its dangers and horrors; but few of either party have taken the trouble to inform themselves of the facts. For the abolition of Slavery is not a mere theory, like the hypothesis of an open sea at the North Pole, which they say Lieut. Maury believed in, because he heard there were whales in Baffin’s Bay, with their noses pointing to the north,—no, it is a great his­ torical fact, and we are to judge of it as we do of other facts, less by the arguments ad­ vanced in its favor than by the results which have attended it. Let us consider, then, this most important topic—Emancipation as a Fact, not as a Theory,—confining the inquiry to Negro Emancipation in the West Indies. What should we think of a man who should today gravely raise the question whether the Atlantic can be crossed by steam­ ships,—whether a Sharpe’s rifle is better than a crossbow, or a power press than a monk’s inkhorn and sheepskin ? Should we not imagine he had strayed away from Ken­ tucky or the office of the Boston Courier ? Yet the facts which prove the safety and profit of Emancipation are less recent than the success of ocean steamships, against which Lardner prophesied in vain ; nay, they are older than the bold contrivances of Ful­ ton, which, within half a century, have revo­ lutionized commerce and maritime warfare. They lie at our very door ; we have only to look at them to be convinced. Yet, so inveterate are the prejudices which our unfortunate political and commercial sins have brought upon us, that not one person in a hundred, it is safe to say. is acquainted with-the truth of the West Indian experiment of freedom. In the British, French, and Danish West Indies, and in Hayti, together with the South African colonies of Bourbon, Mauritius and the Cape of Good Hope, about 1600 000 slaves of the African race, have been set free since 1792, or within seventy years. Of these, half a million were libera­ ted in Hayti, in 1793 ; 100 000 more in the same island a few years later; 770 3i0 by England, in 183*4-5 ; and about 260 000 by �France, Denmark, and Sweden, in 1848. mingo by two commissioners, Sonthonax and It is. then, 14 years since the last act of lib­ Polverel, was on the point of losing the rich eration, 28 since the. most important one, colony. The commissioners had but a thou­ and 69 since the first. There still remain in sand French soldiers, a few hundred mulat­ Slavery, about 6750 000 Africans on the toes, and the fragment of loyal slaveholders, continent and islands of America ; that is to to oppose so many enemies. At this crisis, say, nearly 4C00 000 in the United States, by a bold act of justice, the very thought of nearly 2000 000 in Brazil, 750 000 in Cuba, which they had repelled four months before, and Porto Rico, and 50 000 in the Dutch they brought to the French cause the power­ possessions. ful aid of 500 000 negroes. On the 29th of The slaves ot Sc. Domingo were set free August. 1793, they declared all the slaves under martial law, amid the disorders of the free. Just three weeks after, the English first French Revolution; those of Great troops landed, but it was too late. On°the Britain were led into liberty in time of pro­ 4th of February, 1794, the National Con­ found peace, by carefully prepared statutes ; vention confirmed the proclamation of the those of France and Denmark during the Commissioners, and abolished slavery in the Revolutionary year of 1848, but without the other colonies. In June of the same year, interposition of martial law. We have here, Toussaint L’Ouverture, with 5000 men, then, all the possible conditions of a commu­ who till then had fought under the Spanish nity,—peace, war, and that intermediate flag, forced himself into the chief city, re­ state which we call Revolution. If the ex­ leased the drench General, and put himself periment had failed in any of these cases, we and his negro soldiers at the orders of the might think it owing to peculiar circum­ Republic. From that hour the fortune of stances ; if it had failed in all we might the war was changed. The English were think the policy a mistaken one, at least, so driven out, (1798) the Spanish retired, and far as these Islands are concerned ; if it has early in 1801, Toussaint proclaimed the succeeded in all, shall we not say it will also French Republic in the Spanish portion of succeed every where ? Let it be noticed that the Island, already ceded to France by the the number of slaves set free is about two- treaty of 1795, thus confirming the liberation fifths of those in this country ; or, to be more of 100 000 more slaves who bad been own­ exact, as many as are now in the States of ed by the Spaniards. Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, Virginia, . In the meantime, war alone had not occu­ Tennessee, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, pied the great genius of this negro warrior Texas, and Florida. But while the 1 600- and statesman. Having become virtually 000 freedmen occupied an area of less than Governor of the colony, in 1796 he had set 300 000 square miles, these ten States have himself to the task of organizing free labor, an area of 600 000 square miles,—a circum­ —a work begun by the French Commission­ stance very favorable to Emancipation ; while ers in 17 94. Sonthonax, returning from the climate of none of them is such as to ex­ an absence in France, in 1796, was astonished clude the white man from active labors, as in at the prosperity which he saw. After the the West Indies. expulsion of the English, in 1798, Toussaint At the period of emancipation, St. Domin­ recalled the fugitive planters, gave them their go presented a condition of things somewhat former slaves for hired laborers, and opened Like our own at this moment, but much more the ports to free trade. To direct and enforce like what ours may be a year hence if we do his regulations, he put the whole Island under not avail ourselves of the teachings of expe­ military government, and supported his sys­ rience. ■ For three years the colony had been tem of labor, when resisted, by the bayonet. torn by civil wars between the whites and The fruits of this sagacious policy were in­ mulattoes, in which the negroes had taken stantly visible. Commerce returned to the little part. The Spaniards, in alliance with unfortunate Island; labor flourished; the the revolted slaves of 1791, and in the inter­ planters grew rich ; the condition of the la­ est of the exiled Bourbons, had invaded the borers was wonderfully improved ; the Gov­ country, and occupied several important ernment was respected, and every thingplaces. The English, then as now eager to promised well for the future. destroy a commercial rivals were in treaty Suddenly, all this prosperity was again with the planters to invade the island also. destroyed—not by the negroes, who had cre­ The French Republic, represented in St. Do­ ated it—but by the stupendous folly of Na- �13 There was a derangement of commerce and agriculture for a few years. The trade of the colonies fell off 40 per cent, in 1848, as compared with 1847, which was a very pros­ perous year. At the same time, the trade of France fell off 25 per cent. From 1848-53 there is a falling off of 10 per cent., as com­ pared with the five years before Emancipa­ tion ; but in the five subsequent years, from 1852-57, there is a gain of nearly 50 per cent., and the four colonies are steadily gain­ ing in wealth and numbers. We have al­ ready spoken of the effect of slavery to di­ minish population in the West Indies. Since emancipation, this tendency has been checked in the French colonies, though it still con­ tinues in some of the English islands. The population of the French possessions, in 1836, was 376 296; in 1846, it had fallen to 374 548 ; in 1856, it had risen to 387821, exclusive of immigration.§ The Dutch colony of Guiana, where slaves are still held, gives a most atrocious example of this loss of population. || About 1800 there were 80 000 slaves there, producing an annual value of $7 000 000 ; in 1845 there were but 43,285 slaves and 9712 free blacks; a decrease of 46 per cent, in 45 years, or, if we include the free blacks, of 34 per cent. But these 43 000 slaves only pro­ duced in 1845 a value of $700 000. Of 917 plantations 636 have been abandoned.“IT and the production has fallen away nine-tenths; yet Emancipation has never troubled the Dutch sugar growers. From the Danish colonies since Emancipa­ tion we have few statistics, but those are all favorable to freedom. We know that St. Thomas is a rich emporium, and that Santa Cruz flourishes. Some disorders, by which the negroes were the greatest sufferers, attended emancipation ; but they were occasioned by the ill temper of the planters, and were soon quieted by the excellent government. For the past ten years we hear no tidings of tu­ mult or distress from them. In 1859 when Theodore Parker visited Santa Cruz and St. Thomas, a member of his family wrote thus of the freed slaves :|||| “I often think how delighted you would be with the results of Emancipation, as we see them all around us, and have abundant op­ portunity to examine them ; twenty thousand § Cochin, Tome I., p. 276. ' ||8ee Cochin, II.. p 267. ^Edinburgh Review, April, 1859. !l||27th Report of the Am. A. 8. Society, N. Y., 1861—p. 309-10. people raised at once from the condition of cattle to that of responsible beings,—pro­ tected and assisted, if need be, by the Gov­ ernment. The thrifty and industrious al­ ready succeed in laying up enough to put them forward in the world, build a comforta­ ble little home in town, and bring their children up to trades. They have great pride in being independent. . . . They are gradually acquiring a pride of matrimony. A noble young man here, an Episcopal minister, has established a day school for the colored children of his parish, and I was never so pleased with any school I have ever visited. The progress has been surprising indeed.” “Here, as elsewhere,” says Cochin, “Slav­ ery did no good, and Emancipation no harm. A hurricane, or the change of a single degree in the thermometer, would have had an in­ fluence more hurtful and more lasting, than the fortunate release of 25 000 or 30 000 men, unjustly enslaved.” In the single Swedish island of St. Bar­ tholomew, there were in 1846, 531 slaves, out of a population of 1700. These have all since been freed by purchase gradually made by King Oscar, $10 000 a year having been voted for this purpose by the Swedish Par­ liament. We have no information about the effects ; if they had been bad, we should, no doubt, have heard of it. We have now spoken of the condition of all the West India Islands where Emancipa­ tion has taken place. It has been shown that all from -which we have statistics, except Jamaica and Hayti, are more wealthy than during slavery, and that all, without excep­ tion, are increasing their trade and produc­ tion ; that the ruin of Hayti and Jamaica, so far as it exists, is owing to many other causes than Emancipation,—chiefly in the one case, to the cruel policy of Napoleon, and the un­ generous course of France, Spain, and the United States,—and in the other, to the folly of the planters, and the evils begotten by slavery. It has been shown, too, how delu­ sive is the assumed prosperity of Cuba and Porto Rico—islands now passing through the hot fit of the slaveholding fever, but which must soon be let blood by Emancipation, as in Hayti, or pass into the ague fit and mel­ ancholy decline of the Dutch colonies, which slavery still curses. It has been shown that the negro is not bloodthirsty, that he is not idle, that he is capable of civilization. Let us add that he is not a pauper,—contrary to �14 the theories of many Americans, who fear to do an act of justice, lest we of the North «hall be overrun by black paupers from the South. No, the paupers of the South are clothed in soft raiment, and live delicately, and are, or would be, in Kings’ houses. It is a curious, but well attested fact, that among the free colored people of the British West Indies, in 1826, the proportion of paupers was one in 370, while among the whites it was one in 40.* In many places, the proportion was still more surprising. In Barbadoes, there were 14 500 whites, and 4500 free blacks; there were 996 white pau­ pers, and one black one ! In Berbice, there were two colored paupers out of 900, and sev­ enteen white ones outof 600. In Jamaica, the free colored were to the whites as two to one, while the white paupers were to the colored, as two to one. In Massachusetts, in 1855, the number of paupers was one in 148. No return was made of colored paupers, but we are told that the returns of Philadelphia, where there were in 1850, about 20 000 col­ ored persons, show a much greater proportion of white, than of colored paupers. Many authorities have already been quoted to show the happy results of Emancipation, and we have been careful to take the testi­ mony of enemies as well as friends. Let us add a few more to the list. In 1839, De Tocqueville wrote thus “Many persons, preoccupied by the recollec­ tions of St. Domingo, are led to believe that the Emancipation of the slaves will occasion bloody collisions between the two races, whence the expulsion or the massacre of the whites may soon follow. Everything leads to the belief that these fears are imaginary, or at least, much exaggerated. Nothing which has taken place in the English colonies leaves room to suppose that Emancipation would be accompanied with the disasters which are dreaded.” In the Encyclopedia Britannica, a work of the highest authority, occurs this passage in the article on Slavery, published in 1859 : “There can be but one opinion regarding the results of Emancipation entertained by any man who will dispassionately investi­ gate the condition of the colored populations in the West Indies; and that opinion will redound, in the highest degree, to the sa* Blue Book, May 9,1826. Quoted in The Tourist 1882. t lieport on the Abolition of Slavery in the French Colo­ nies. By Alexis De Tocqueville. (Translation) Boston, 1840. p. 26. This is a pamphlet of 54 pages. gacifcy of those who then advocated the de­ liverance of the slave. England, by freeing her slaves, performed a politic, as well as a very jdst act.” Mr. Sewell, who has already been quoted, says, at the close of his book, written in 1860 : “The act of British Emancipation has been widely abused; but its detractors must live among the people it disenthralled, if they would learn the value at which it can be es­ timated. Time, which develops the freedom that aot created, adds continually to its lustre. Freedom, when allowed fair play, injured the prosperity of none of these West Indian colonies. It saved them from a far deeper and more lasting depression than any they have yet known. It was a boon conferred upon all classes of society; upon planter and upon laborer; upon commerce and agricul­ ture ; upon industry and education; upon morality and religion. And if a perfect measure of success remains to be achieved, let not freedom be condemned; for the ob­ stacles to be overcome were great, and -the workers few and unwilling.” The Hon. Charles Francis Adams, in a letter written July 21st, 1860, says : “West India Emancipation is gravely pro­ nounced a failure. I have heard it so de­ scribed on the floor of the House of Repre­ sentatives. The only reason given, is that the British Islands do not produce so many pounds of coffee and sugar as they did when they could force them out of the bones and ■ muscles of slaves. Now mankind may, by possibility, be tolerably well off, and yet do entirely without coffee and sugar. But how can they be happy without good security for their right to seek happiness in their own way ? . . .Yet they tell us, because coffee and sugar fail there is no good in Emancipation. If, by reason.of this failure, it could be shown that there was misery and famine in the land, that starvation was in a fair way to turn the garden into a wilder­ ness, I should be ready to concede something to the argument. But I hear of no such thing as that.” The Hon. Charles Sumner, in a letter of July 30th, 1860, says : “Well-proved facts vindicate completely the policy of Emancipation, even if it were not commanded by the simplest rules of mor­ ality. . . . Two .different Governors of this island (Jamaica) t have assured me that, with tSee New York Independent of March 20, for an impor­ tant letter of Gov. Hinks on this point. �15 all their experience there, they looked upon Emancipation as a blessing.” Here ends our chapter on the West In­ dies. What inference can be drawn from all this ? We answer—First: That Emancipation in the United States is safe. If it was so in Jamaica, where the whites were as one to fif­ teen, will it not be in Maryland, where they are more than three to one, in Kentucky, where they are nearly four to one, in Mis­ souri, where they are nearly ten to one ? Second: It will he politic. If the free­ ing of half a million of slaves in 1793, saved St. Domingo, from falling into the hands of England, the freeing of four mil­ lions, in 1862, may save the Cotton States from a like fate, which even our recent and brilliant victories perhaps may hasten. Third: It must not be attended by forced colonization. If the great want of the West Indies is labor, with what expectation can we ship out of our Southern States two-thirds of the laboring population ? Immigration is the demand in the West Indias, it would be folly for us to try emigration. Fourth. It must not be gradual, but im­ mediate and complete. If the experience of Antigua and Jamaica teaches anything, it Teaches that simultaneous and entire emanci­ pation is the safest, the cheapest, and the wisest course. Fifth. It will attract more white men to the South than it will send black men to the North. This is the opinion of a sensible fu­ gitive, to whom we owe the statement; but the history of immigration to the West In­ dies, and to Mauritius and Bourbon proves it true. Why should the negroes come here after emancipation? On the contrary, reasons both of climate and of political economy will carry them South in great numbers, not only from the border States, but from the North and from Canada. Finally, these facts prove, what no man of lofty virtue ever can doubt,— That justice is always expedient. The Greeks had a story which devout old Herodotus has preserved, that Glaucus, the Spartan, wishing to commit an injustice, and to confirm it by an oath, asked of the oracle if he might do so. “Glaucus, son of Epicydes!” answered the priestess, in her solei®n chant, “for the present perjury is profitable, and theft; swear, then, for death lies in wait for the just and the unjust. But there is a nameless child of perjury, without hands, without feet, yet swiftly she pursues till she clutches and destroys thy race, and all thy house. But the race of the just man flour­ ishes forever.” Thus the oracle. “And now,” adds the narrator, “there is no descendant of Glaucua at all, nor any branch of the stock of Glaucus; but he has been cast forth from Sparta, root and branch.” Centuries earlier, the wise Athenian law­ giver, in grave verse, which Demosthenes loved to quote, had warned his countrymen of the same truth.* My soul, Athenians, prompts me to relate What miseries upon injustice wait. Riches by theft, and cozenage to possess, The sacred bounds of Justice ye transgress ; Who silent sees the present, knows the past, And will revenge these injuries at last. But Justice all things orderly designs, And in strict fetters the unjust confines. What’s sour she sweetens, and allays what cloys. Wrong she repels, ill in the growth destroys, Softens the stubborn, the unjust reforms, And in the State calms all seditious storms. Bitter dissensions by her rule supprest, Who wisely governs all things for the best. And earlier yet, the stern warnings of the Hebrew sage, who led forth his despised peo­ ple from the oppression of Egypt, had an­ nounced the eternal law with no doubtful voice: “Beware that thou forget not the lord thy God, in not keeping his commandments and his judgments, and his sta­ tutes which I command this day ; lest when thou hast eaten and art full, and hast built goodly houses, and dweit there­ in; And when thy flocks and thy herds multiply, and thy silver and thy gold is multiplied, and all that thou hast is multiplied; Then thine heart be lifted up, and thou forget the Lord thy God. . . . And thou say in thine heart, my power and the might of my hand hath gotten me this wealth. And it shall be, if thou do at ail forget the Lord thy God, I testify against you this day that ye shall surely perish. As the nations which the Lord destroyeth before your face, so shall ye perish ; because ye would not be obedient unto the voice of the Lord your God.”—[Deuteronomy viii. *Demosthenes. False Legation, 255. Stanley’s Trans­ lation in the History of Philosophy. �.i '»Ä-. ’ Uftí, IJB •r.» *j-ít':TO Í •A MW» *v � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Emancipation in the West Indies Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Sanborn, F.B. Description An account of the resource Place of publication: Concord, Mass. Collation: [3]-4, 13-15 p. ; 23 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed in double columns. Includes bibliographical references. "The substance of the following Essay was given in the form of a Lecture at Concord, and afterwards in Boston, where it was printed in The Pine and Palm". [Title page]. Incomplete copy - pages [3]-4. 13-15 only. Please note that this pamphlet contains language and ideas that may be upsetting to readers. These reflect the time in which the pamphlet was written and the ideologies of the author. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available [s.n.] Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1862 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5239 Subject The topic of the resource Slavery Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Emancipation in the West Indies), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Caribbean Conway Tracts Slavery https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/b05d847039de8f3d04d13bba3f5a2597.pdf?Expires=1787788800&Signature=AYo4Qztla4dxA75whCi4pDdlpg%7EzNcVIatOpdU27OU11gsIasZzaZSDsx8st7%7EJ7cE65pEW3PY3bCbrqDv-y2SZsca%7E23knNYsg4kkgrehD4pCrxubjoSQcPTwLkr-dSzgYPuBztOmdutWtza2MO4fc4RX08gSxD0nd%7ESdmjzJvk-t3cr0kvr5898d9jAlQ5FK2lzDgjt6XOlIcMdVSwiYKAo2WjBCF7FnsiBoelBOoDXRfrISZAhtYi0CUP01kR5ZB9dj2%7E3Wk3s8-l4X4L7dDFO4I4g3iWU19uKUD6fxwawkz7DNMPahjbehX70t2o-DMzjPKan5YsBYRJM1J2pQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM a97d637342f4bc16382d50fd2aa2f3cc PDF Text Text PRICE THREEPENCE. No. 1 OF ANTI-SLAVERY TRACTS FOR THE TIMES. THE AMERICAN BOARD OF MISSIONS AND SLAVERY. |-Xw & Begrmt ■ OF THE CORRESPWi>E>NCE IN THE “ NONCONFORMIST ” NEWSPAPER; TO WHICH IS ADDED, - AN ARTICLE ON THE FALL OF DR. POMROY, AND HIS CONSEQUENT DISMISSAL EROM OFFICE, BY CHARLES K. WHIPPLE, Esq., OF BOSTON, U.S. ■K ' : ’/'WuHW® EDITED BY |F . - JOSEPH A. HORNER, HON. SEC. TO THE WAKEFIELD ANTI-SLAVERY ASSOCIATION. “ It is right to have an expansive benevolence—to take into our regard the world and the race; but where foreign charity is but a defence against home kindness it is a base sentimental sham. Thousands will cry over compressed feet in China who are quite unaffected by souls compressed in America. That religion should compel mothers in India to cast their babes into the Ganges shucks every sensibility of some men’s souls, who can see no occasion for grief that commerce snatches from the dusky mother, in America, her babes, and casts them forth to slavery,—a worse monster than was ever bred in the slime of the Ganges or the mud of the Nile.”—Henry Ward Beecher. LEEDSPUBLISHED BY J. B. BARRY & Co., 18; TRINITY STREET. Printers to the Yorkshire Anti-Slavery Societies. MDCCCLX. �TO THE FRIENDS OF THE SLAVE. This Pamphlet forms the first of a Series of Anti-Slavery Tracts for the Times, which are especially designed to awaken English Christians to a knowledge of the fact that the American Religious Bodies are the bulwark of Slavery. In this important work the English Anti­ Slavery Societies are earnestly invited to unite. Donations in aid of gratuitous distribution may be forwarded by private friends of the cause, and will be thankfully received. It is requested that Societies and others taking large numbers will send their orders as soon as possible to Joseph A. Horner, Hon. Sec. Anti-Slavery Association, Wakefield. March 1st, 1860. �AMERICAN PRO-SLAVERY MINISTERS IN ENGLAND. To the Editor of the Nonconformist. Sir,—I perceive by your impression of Wednesday last, that at the late meeting of the Congregational Union, the President held out the right hand of fellowship ” to the Rev. Dr. S. L. Pomroy, Secretary of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, accompanying it with a “ cordial welcome ” in the name of the delegates, I cannot say that I was surprised at reading this, for this is not the first time that English Christians have been en­ trapped into giving a “ cordial welcome ” to pro-slaVery ministers of religion •. but I must say that I felt extremely grieved to see the Congregational Union “ welcoming ” a man who is utterly un­ worthy of their confidence. Let those who joined in this “welcome” •read the following, which appeared in the Boston (U.S.) Liberator for March 14, 1859, in answer to some questions which had been asked concerning this Dr, Pomroy and the board of which he is Secretary : “ The second inquiry as to whether Dr. Pomroy—now stealthily in England - Receiving the people as secretary of the board—was ever identified with the anti-slaverv movement, we answer in the affirmative. He early espoused it, and was for several years an officer in the American Anti-Slavery Society, and also in the New England Anti-Slavery Society; but he at last shamefully apostatised, and was bribed to silence by the proffer of the office he now fills, and has utterly repudiated that movement which he once so warmly advocated. ' His attempt to make capital for himself, and obtain favour for the American Board on the strength of his old connexion with our cause, is equally dis­ honest and jesuitical.” From this it will be seen that Dr. Pomroy is thoroughly pro­ slavery, and has been bought over by the pro-slavery party. If rHwjything were needed to prove what is stated in the Liberator, his conduct during his visit to Leeds, a few months ago, supplies it. At that time he was reminded by Wilson Armistead, Esq-, Presi­ dent of the Leeds Young Men’s Anti-Slavery Society, and others, of Mrs Stowe’s and Dr. Cheever’s denunciations of the pro-slavery fciaracter of the board he represents. As he continued to make no reference to slavery in public, Mr. W. H. Pullen, hon. sec. of the Anti-Slavery Society, addressed a calm and dispassionate letter to him, requesting him to reply to the charges which had been made and stating that unless he did so, it would of course be assumed that he had to say in defence. To this letter he vouchsafed �4 no answer, and therefore we are compelled to believe him “ verily guilty ” on his own silent testimony. The American Abolitionists have long complained of the coni duct of Englishmen on the slavery question. M e can hold public meetings, and pass anti-slavery resolutions ; but when the time comes for action we disgrace ourselves by giving “ the right hand of fellowship ” to the pro-slavery party—thus more than undoing the good we may have previously done. Such shameful incon­ sistency is deeply to be regretted, as it not oniy strengthens the fetters of the slave, but also injures the cause of freedom. I need not enlarge upon the subject, but it is painfully suggestive, and at the present time, when the slaveocracy are making systematic attempts to corrupt the moral sentiments of Englishmen, and when the honoured name of Joseph Sturge will be no longer known in connexion with the anti-slavery movement, I would that every man who loves liberty and hates despotism should lay it to heart, and determine to be neither directly nor indirectly implicated in the support of slavery. We have a right to demand proof of anti-sla-s very antecedents before we give a “ cordial welcome ” to any American; and until we do this we shall have a repetition of such scenes as the late meeting of the Congregational Union has witj nessed. With sincere respect, I am, sir, your obedient servant, Wakefield, May 20, 1859. JOSEPH A. HORNER. To the Editor of the Nonconformist. Sir,—The London newspapers—reporting the annual meeting of the London Missionary Society—state that the Rev. Dr. Pomrov of the American Mission, was one of the speakers on the occasion! Slavery in America is sustained by the religious bodies, and lheir members visiting England take part in religious movements. White' this is the case, it is only fair to all parties to inform the public of the relations which such visitors sustain to slavery. Permit me! therefore, to refer to the position which Dr. Pomroy occupies this important subject. He is one of the secretaries of the Ameri­ can Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions. Now againM that board 1 bring three charges—First, that one of its slaveholdipg members murderously proposed, in Virginia, to burn the ab^fl tionists ; secondly, that its missionaries baptize slaveholders without requiring them to repent of their slaveholding sins; and, thirdly, that they have declared that the Bible does not prohibit the sale of human beings. These are but a specimen of the numerous charges which the friends of the slave bring against that board. I now submit thejH' ol’mud chilliviimc g gitrad.ci^n. �5 First, that one of the slaveholding members of the board, mur­ derously proposed, in Virginia, to burn the abolitionists. . If your readers will please refer to the Key to “Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” part 4th, chapter 1st, they will read as follows respecting Dr. Plummer —(I have ascertained that he is a slaveholder and a member of the board, and have published it extensively in the United States) : “ The Rev. W. S. Plummer, D.D., of Richmond (Virginia), a member of the old school Presbyterian Church, is another instance of the same sort. He was absent from Richmond at the time the clergy in that city purged them­ selves, in a body, from the charge of being favourably disposed to abolition. On his return, he lost no time in communicating to the ‘ Chairman of the Committee of Correspondence’ his agreement with his clerical brethren. The passages quoted occur in his letter to the Chairman :—‘ I have carefully watched this matter from its earliest existence, and every thing I have seen or heard of its character, both from its patrons and its enemies, has confirmed me, beyond repentance, in the belief that, let the character of abolitionists be what it may in the sight of the Judge of all the Earth, this is the most med­ dlesome, imprudent, reckless, fierce, and wicked excitement I ever saw. If abolitionists will set the country in a blaze, it is but fair they should have the first warming at the fire. * * * * Lastly, abolitionists are like infidels, wholly unaddicted to martyrdom for opinion’s sake. Let them understand that they will be caught (lynched) if they come among us, and they will take good heed to keep out of our way. There is not one man among them has any more idea of shedding his blood in this cause than he has of making war on the Grand Turk.’ ” I come now to the missionaries—those labouring among the Cherokee & Choctaw Indians. These, it is well known hold slaves, In some instances, a hundred slaves are held by one Indian. In the Anti-Slavery Advocate for April last, is a letter from Charles K. Whipple, Esq. of the United States, describing the pro-slavery policy of the above board, from which the following is an extract: ‘♦■Complaints had been made that their slaveholding church members were (accustomed to sell children away from their parents; and the whole body of missionaries, in a letter signed by the Rev. Eliezer Butler, Moderator, and ^gv. S. A. Worcester, Clerk, reply as follows:—‘ In regard to the separation of parents and children, we must first remark, that it is one of those things which are not forbidden by any express injunction of Scripture.’ ” The board and its missionaries deserve the severest censure of the civilized world; but ought not that censure to rest with equal weight upon the secretary also—the Rev. Dr. Pomroy ? Thanking you, sir, for an opportunity of placing these charges aiid proofs before the public, I am, &c., Aidborough, Suffolk, May 20, 1859. EDWARD MATHEWS. �6 MR. PULLEN’S LETTER TO DR. POMROY. Dear Sir, Leeds, 29th January, 1859. By public announcements I perceive that you are to lecture, on Monday evening, in the Music Hall, on behalf of the “ Turkish Mission Aid Society.” As we are informed that that society has severed all connexion with the American Board, of which you are a secretary, we have no objections to urge against that society whatever. But there area as regards the American Board, a few difficulties which present themselves to our minds, which we should feel obliged if you could remove. We understand, that in America the cause of emancipation is greatly retarded by those who, imbibing the spirit of our Living Redeemer, should be its greatest advocates and supporters. We are aware that in the southern States slavery is fostered in the Church, and promulgated by those who profess to be Christ’s ambassador^ on earth, that not only do southern but many of the northern Churches refuse to denounce slaveholding as a sin ; and that many of the large and influential religious institutions, such as the “Tract Society,” “ Sunday School Union,” &c., pursue the same course of action ; that foremost among these is the American Board, which, by its apparent pro-slavery policy, has caused much anxiety - amh trouble to those who are seeking, by righteous and legitimate means, to overthrow this accursed system of oppression. It has been asserted that the American Board is pro-slave^ in policy if not in open avowal, though we fear the latter could be too well substantiated. Having heard this, we feel it our duty, bbfdte taking up arms, to examine the charges preferred against it. All the evidence we have received goes far to substantiate the fact, and we call upon you, therefore, for the sake of the peace of the Chinch I —for the sake of equity and justice,—for the sake of the slave held in fetters—and for the sake of our impugned Christianity—if it /U possible, vindicate the policy of the society you represent. If not', labouring under earnest convictions reluctantly arrived at, wq ffiei it our duty not to remain silent upon the subject. We consider' the Choctaw and Cherokee Indian tribes a living proof of your proslavery missionary efforts. From your own reports we gather the principles which have actuated these efforts. We have the -testi­ mony of Dr. Cheever, Mrs. Stowe, and others whom we greatly esteem ; and all these tell us that your board has pursued^ most dishonourable course of action, making it unworthy of a Christian name or Christian support. If this be the case, it must not be said that you were openly welcomed in England, and our Anti-Slavery SocieSes were silent spectators of the scene. �1 We await your reply and are prepared to give the matter a calmf unprejudiced, and caretui consideration. Much as we regret to Bppose a professedly good and holy cause, yet we shall feel called upon to make known our earnest convictions to the world, if those convictions cannot be disproved. Your reply by letter, or in your lecture on Monday evening, would be esteemed a favour, By your obedient servant, WM. II. PULLEN, Committee Rooms, 7, East Parade. Secretary of tlie Leeds Young Men’s Anti-S>lavery Society. From the British Standard, May 27, 1859. REV. DR. POMROY. “ Certain parties are hereby given to understand that we decline to drag this gentleman before the British public as “ equally dishonest and Jesuitical.” Before we can apply such language to such 'a man we must have far higher authority than Mr. Garrison and his Liberator, which for many long years has poured the foul slime of unscrupulous slander and envenomed malignity on multitudes of the wisest and holiest men of the present generation. That Dr. Pomroy declines to “ answer ” the insolent letters addressed to pirn does not prove that he is “ verily guilty ”; but only that he is a man of sense and verily discreet: standing on his character, and confidently leaving it to defend itself.” Note.—As those gentlemen whom the editor of the British Standard, in language more expressive than elegant, terms “eertain parties," (ala Pimch) had never asked him to “drag’* either Dr. Pomroy’s or any other person’s name before the limited portion of the “ British public" who read his paper, this modest (!) disclaimer was wholly unnecessary. From the Nonconformist, June 1st, 1859. THE REV. DR. POMROY. To the Editor of the Nonconformist. -J fyti. Sir,—The Rev. Dr. Pomroy has found a champion in the British ^Standard, the editor of which paper seems to think that the readiest way of clearing the Doctor's character is to asperse the good name of William Lloyd Garrison. If I were disposed to be uncharitable, TEpionld remind the reverend editor of the Standard, that in thus acting he is only imitating the policy of the pro-slavery party in America; but as I do not wish to say one disrespectful word of a deluded person, I shall simply remark that Mr. Garrison is not the man to be frightened by the blast of a penny-whistle, even though it be blown by the editor of the British Standard. The Standard ignores the Rev. Edward Mathews’s letter altogether, and asks for “higher authority” than “Mr. Garrison �8 and his Liberator before applying such language [vide Nonconformist last week) to such a man.” There are many who would consider Mr. Garrison the very highest authority, but as the British Standard is evidently not of the number, I will adduce further proofs of what I stated last week. The name of Dr. Cheever and his noble exertions on behalf of the slave are “household words” in England, and therefore his testimony cannot but be esteemed. Concerning the American Board of Missions, Dr. Cheever writes:— *• It has been announced that a new Slave State is to be presented for admission into the Union, embracing the territory of the Choctaws and Cherokees, under the teachings of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions. It would seem that those teachings have had no little influence in bringing about this event, and consequently a most serious question presents itself as to the attitude and responsibility of the Board in this matter. * * * It cannot be questioned that if, from the outset, the gospel had been plainly set against this sin, the sin, and not the gospel, would have been abandoned.” Besides Dr. Cbeever many others have denounced the pro-slavery character of the Board, and amongst the rest, Mrs. Harriet Beecher Stowe has spoken out boldly. In September last Mrs. Stowe wrote as follows in the New York Independent:— “A new Slave State is to be formed of this race, of whom our Missionaries have been so many years the teachers; and their laws, in regard to slavery, are to the full as savage and contrary to the gospel as those defended by the other Anti-Christian Churches of the South. A new Slave State! What a monument for Mills, and Newell, and Judson to look down on from heaven! and now the Board wish quietly to withdraw from the responsibility of their protege. Suppose our missionaries had gone into States, as John G. Fee goes into Kentucky, proclaiming the true gospel of liberty to the captive, and opening of the prison to them that are bound—founding churches on principles of strict anti-slavery communion. They would have been driven out, say you ? How do we know? Fee is not driven out of Kentucky. One lone unaided man, with no organised body at his back—with nothing for him but truth and God (alas, that we should always count God as nothing!) John G. Fee is fight*, ing in Kentucky the battle which we weep that it was not given to us and ours, to fight in the Indian territories. He is fighting it successfully—necessities,! afflictions, distresses, only make him stronger. Anti-Slavery Churches are rising round him, feeble indeed in their beginning, but mighty in moral force; and every inch which Chiistianity seems to gain under such auspices, she really does gain. All progress in moral things, founded on compromise with evil, is like the advance of a runner who is tied to a post by an India-rubber band—he may seem to go on, but the moment he rests, snap comes the pull of a recoil, and all goes back. When the American Board lets go responsibility for these churches, how long will it be before the multiplied vices engendered by slavery, the licentious­ ness, the cruelty, the habitual dishonesty, will sweep a polluted flood, over­ whelming all that they have done? And deny—dispute it as they may,it will for ever go forth to Christendom,—‘ This Slave State was educated by the American Board.’” & �9 I submit these facts to your readers, and I think that until the British Standard can answer them with something more than mere vituperation, the verdict of honest freedom-loving Englishmen will still be “verily guilty.” “By their fruits ye shall know them,” and the “fruit” of the teachings of Dr. Potnroy and his colleagues is a new Slave State; therefore we “know them” to be pro-slavery, without Mr. Garrison’s confirmation of the fact. I am, dear sir, your obedient servant, May 27, 1859. JOSEPH A. HORNER. From, the Nonconformist, June 15, 1859. MR. JOSEPH A. HORNER AND THE AMERICAN BOARD. To the Editor of the Nonconformist. Sir,—Within a day or two I have had my attention called to a letter published in your paper of the 1st of June, signed by Mr. Joseph A. Horner, in which he quotes certain communications of Dr. Cheever and Mrs. Stowe, which appeared in the New York Independent. As those communications came before the public last autumn, after I left the United States, I have had no opportunity to examine them. My sole object in this letter is to mention a few facts, which may have a bearing on the interpretation of the language used by the gentleman and lady just named. 1. The communications, quoted by your correspondent, grew out of the action of the American Board at its last annual meeting in Detroit, in Sep­ tember, 1858; at which time the report of a Committee was adopted, recom­ mending that “the Board be relieved, as early as possible, from the unceasing embarrassments and perplexities connected with the missions in the Indian territory.” These “embarrassments” all spring from slavery, which has existed in the Cherokee and Choctaw Tribes for more than a century. The object of the above recommendation was to bring the missions of the Board, in that quar­ ter, to an end—which will, without doubt, be accomplished at no distant day. 2. Dr. Cheever is a corporate member of the American Board, and he and his congregation have been regular and liberal contributors to its funds till within a year past certainly, and I have no reason to doubt have done the same this year. At any rate, if he or his people have withdrawn, and declined further contributions, it must be of a recent date; I have heard no intimations of it. 3. Both the father and the husband of Mrs. Stowe are corporate members of the Board, and have always been its warm friends and supporters, and I have no doubt are so still. The same may be said of the Rev. Henry Ward Beecher, the brother of Mrs. Stowe, who, with his congregation, has been a regular contributor to the funds of the Board; and so have other members of the Beecher family, so far as I know. I have no reason to doubt that Mrs. Stowe fegtill a friend of the Board, though she may be anxious to cor­ rect what she deems an error in its doings. �10 4. The New York Independent, in which the letters of Dr. Cheever and Mrs. Stowe were published, is an unequivocal friend and supporter of the Board. Its oldest editor has long been among its prominent corporate members; I allude to the Rev. Dr. Bacon, of New Haven, Connecticut. It® other editor is the Rev. Dr. J. P. Thompson, of New York City, equally a friend and patron; and so are both the congregations of these two gentlemen. The office editor is the Rev. Joshua Leavitt, whose name is not unknown in this country; he also is among the friends and patrons of the American Board. Dr. Cheever and Mrs. Stowe are among the regular contributors to the columns of the Independent. If therefore, the Independent, by its defence of the Board, is chargeable with pro-slavery tendencies, what shall be said of Dr. Cheeve® and Mrs. H. B. Stowe ? The fact is, there are some people in the world—I wish the number were greater—who can see a fault in a man, or in an institu­ tion, without wishing absolutely to kill either of them, especially when, with a little care and patience, that fault may be remedied. 5. At the last annual meeting, a committee, to whom the general subject had been referred, brought in a report, which was adopted by the Board—I think unanimously—as expressive of its views and wishes. It is as follows “ At Hartford, in 1854=, the views of the Board were clearly and definately expressed, in regard to certain laws and acts of the Choctaw government, which were designed to restrain the liberty of the missionaries as teachers of God’s word. All the action of the Board since that date, and so far as we are informed, the action of the prudential committee also, has been in conformity with the principles then put upon record.” .: “ Your committee have reason to believe that the position of our missionaries among the Choctaws, is one of much difficulty and peril. Among the various religious bodies in the States nearest to the Choctaw nation, there has been, as is well known, within the last twenty-five years, a lamentable defection from some of the first and most elementary ideas of Christian morality, insomuch that Christianity has been represented as the warrant for a system of slavery, which offends the moral sense of the Christian world, and Christ has, there­ by, been represented as the minister of sin. Our brethren among the Choctaws are in ecclesiastical relations with religious bodies (the Presbyterians^ in the adjoining States, the States from which the leading Choctaws are deriving their notions of civilisation and of government. In those neighbouring States,, and in the Choctaw nation, the missionaries are watched by the upholders of slavery, who are ready to seize upon the first opportunity of expelling them from the field in which they have so long been labouring. By the enemies of the Board and of the missionaries, our brethren are charged with what are called, in those regions, the dangerous doctrines of abolitionism. At the same time they are charged, in other quarters, with the guilt of silence in the presence of a great and hideous wickedness.” “ It seems to your committee desirable, that the Board should be relieved, as early as possible, from the unceasing embarrassments and perplexities con, nected with the missions in the Indian territory. Surely the time is not far distant, when the Choctaw and Cherokee Indians, and half-breeds, will stand in precisely the same relation to the missionary work with the white people of the adjacent States; and when the Churches there will be the subjects of home missionary more properly than of foreign missionary patronage.” :■ “ On the whole, your committee, with these suggestions, recommend the report of the prudential committee, as referred to them, be accepted and approved.”—Extract from Report o/1858. I will only add that the Indian territory has not been organised into a State; nor has any proposition to that effect been laid before �II Congress. Whether it will ever be done; is among the things covered with the mists of futurity. It may be—it may not be. If the attempt should be made, it is quite uncertain whether it would succeed. Very respectfully vours, S. L. POMROY, Sec. A. B. C. F. M., Boston. 7, Adam Street, Adelphi, June 14, 1859. From the Nonconformist, June 29, 1859. THE AMERICAN BOARD OF MISSIONS. To the Editor of the Nonconformist. Dear Sir,—“ Save me from my friends” may well be exclaimed by the American Board, for Dr. Pomroy has given his employers, “the unkindest cut of all.” He affirms that Dr. Cheever and Mrs. Stowe are staunch friends of the Board, and tries to convey the Impression that they write in its defence—a flagrant mis-statement,, which the extracts in my last letter clearly disprove. But granting,, for the sake of argument, the truth of his assumptions, then the Board must be bad indeed when all that they can urge in its defence is, that it has led to the formation of “ a new Slave State.”’ With a charming simplicity, which would be very refreshing if it were quite genuine, Dr. Pomroy informs us that, in consequence of the “embarrassments” which beset the Board, they intend to discontinue the mission to the Cherokees and Choctaws. In other words, having encouraged the Indians to commit a great wrong, they wish to escape the censure which the sinfulness of their conduct has evoked by beating an ignominious retreat from the scene of their disgrace. Instead of repenting of their sins, and demanding the release of his victim by the slaveholder, they, like Pilate, wish to wash their hands of the consequences of their own acts. A course of action like this may meet the views of a pro-, slavery Board of Missions, but I very much question whether anti-slavery Englishmen will not understand the true nature of this n^nceuvre. however Dr. Pomroy may try to hide its real meaning. Your readers will mark the characteristic caution with which BU^ Pomroy approaches this subject. He does not venture to deny the charges of Mrs. Stowe, Dr. Cheever, and others. He dare not do it. All he can do is to try and destroy their effect by a roundabout statement which aims at nothing, and proves as little. One paragraph which he quotes as proof of the anti-slavery position of the Board expresses more than he intended �Surely the time is not far distant when the Choctaw and Cherokee Indians will stand in precisely the same relations to the missionary work with the white people of the adjacent States, and when the Churches there will be the subjects of home missionary more properly than of foreign missionary patronage.” Now Dr. Pomroy cannot deny that slaveholding does exist amongst these Mission Churches, and therefore it follows that the American Board, according to their own declaration, do not regard slaveholding as inconsistent with a profession of religion, and that they recognise slaveholding Churches as worthy fellow-labourers in the great field of home and foreign missions. _ That the views of the missionaries may be clearly shown, I will give some extracts from their own published opinions. In a letter to the Board, they say:— “ In regard to the separation of parents and children, we must first remark that it is one of those things which are not forbidden by any express injunction of Scripture.” Again they say:— “In regard to rejecting any person from the Church, simply because he is a slaveholder, we cannot for a moment hesitate. For we regard it as certain that the Apostles, who are our patterns, did deceive slaveholders to the communion of the Church;, and we have not, yet been able to perceive any such difference between their circumstances and ours as to justify us in departing from their practices in this respect.” With regard to the buying and selling of slaves, they are equally plain spoken : “Occasional exchanges of masters are so inseparable from the existence of slavery, that the Churches could not consistently receive slaveholders to their communion, and, at the same time, forbid all such exchanges. We regard it, therefore, as impossible to exercise discipline for the buying of slaves, except in flagrant (!) cases of manifest disregard to the welfare of the slave.” This is pro-slavery enough for the most ultra South American ] and yet, with a hardihood which is characteristic of the double­ dealing of the Board, they add:— “We trust that we shall not for this be looked upon as advocates of slavery. We are not so. We lament and deplore the existence of such a system,—our feelings, our example, our influence are against it. But to make the adoption of all our views respecting it, and a corresponding course of action, a test of piety and a condition of fellowship in our Churches, is what we cannot in conscience do." Your readers may have seen during the great Anti-Corn-law agitation a cartoon, in which Sir Robert Peel was represented with, two faces : on one side, he smiled on the farmers with promises of protection, and, on the other, conciliated the masses with the assurance of cheap bread. The American Board are in an analogous position. On the one hand, they are in fellowship with the slave­ holder, and wink at his delinquencies, whilst, on the other, they try �13 to win favour amongst the anti-slavery party by a judicious enuncia­ tion of anti-slavery professions which, taken in the aggregate, amount to nothing so long as practice is opposed to precept. Dr. Pomroy may urge, in reply, that the statements I have quoted were made by the missionaries some years ago; then I say, so much the greater the guilt of the Board in allowing them to act in its name until the present hour. I am, dear sir, your obedient servant, Wakefield, June 17, 1859. JOSEPH A. HORNER. To the Editor of the Nonconformist. Esteemed Friend,—The last issue of the Nonconformist con­ tained a letter from Dr. S. L. Pomroy, intended to ward off the damaging charges made against the American Board of Commission­ ers for Foreign Missions, in regard to their complicity with slavery. This letter may be divided into two portions—the one intended to show that the American Board is now desirous of colsing its com­ plicity with slavery; the other, that H. B. Stowe and Dr. Cheever are implicated in the present position of the Board. [Having quoted the extracts given in the letter above, our corres­ pondent proceeds:—] Being thus exposed, on the one hand, to the murmurings of their pro-slavery missionaries, and, on the other, to the pressure of the anti-slavery part of their subscribers (which has been the cause of the talk against slavery on the part of the committee) it is not to be. surprised at, that in 1858, they should be desirous of being relieved from the “ unceasing embarrassments and perplexities con­ nected with the missions in the Indian territory.” But can it be considered any proof of anti-slavery feeling that they should wish to shift the responsibility on to the shoulders of the “Home Missionary” Society, which would be the result of the admission of these tribes into the Union as a State. We have seen that, in 1858, the Board endorsed the views expressed in 1854, and that then they had “acknowledged with gratitude to God the wisdom andfidelity” with which the Prudential Committee had been advising and directing the missionaries in conformity with the principles asserted by them in their corres­ pondence, reported in 1848. It is evident, therefore, that the position of the Board now is much the same as it was eleven years ago. What that was has been shown above. The attempt to implicate Mrs. H. B. Stowe in the proceedings of the Board is as feeble as it is dishonest. It is evident that she cannot be held responsible for the conduct of her relatives; and the fact of her contributing to the New York Independent is no �14 proof that she sympathises with or defends its general policy particularly as some, at least, of her communications are made in order to expose the pro-slavery character of different religious’ bodies, one of which is the American Board of Commissioners for I am, respectfully, Foreign Missions. N. N. K. June 22, 1859. Note.—Although Dr. Pomroy remained in England some months after this, he did not dare to question the preceding facts. This silence proved that he had nothing to urge in reply. From the Nonconformist, November 9, 1859. THE AMERICAN BOARD OF MISSIONS AND SLAVERY. To the Editor of the Nonconformist. Sir,—Your readers will not have forgotten the correspondence which took place in your columns a few months ago, concerning the relations of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions to slavery. At that time, Dr. Pomroy, one of the secr@* taries of the board then in England, tried in a very dishonest manner to evade the charges of complicity in slaveholding which had been brought against them. He did not positively deny the alleged facts—that he dare not do, but being forced to say something, he very clumsily attempted a reply, which was nothing more nor less than a piece of refined Jesuitry. My purpose in again referring to this subject is to direct attention to the annual meeting of the American Board, recently held in Philadelphia. Slavery was of course warmly discussed, and those who defended Dr. Pomroy and the board as entirely anti-slavery will do well to remark that the fact of the Choctaw and Cherokee Mission Churches being slave*' holding was never disputed. Throughout the sittings the speakers were unanimous on that point; and yet Dr. Pomroy told the min­ isters of Leeds that the board was “ now (in January last) anti­ slavery,” and on the strength of this he was warmly welcomed. The Leeds Young Men’s Anti-Slavery Society protested against it at the time, but all to no purpose; their statements were disbelieved and in consequence the Dissenting Clergy of Leeds rest under the imputation of having extended the right hand of fellowship, to the pro-slavery representative of a pro-slavery Board of Mission®*! I do not suppose for a moment that this was not the result of ignorance, I believe that all those who received Dr. Pomroy are warm friends to the slave, and I only allude to this in the hope that it may act as a warning. No American minister ought to be welcomed to our pulpits who cannot prove that he has been an abolitionist when in America. If he is really anti-slavery he will be proud to do so. . At the late meeting the Bev. Dr. Cheever delivered a splendid �15 philippic, in which the truckling of the Board to slavery was made ■clear as the noon-day. The following extract shows its spirit: Bk‘ The Board ought to have placed themselves in absolute and total opposition to this wickedness in any shape. As a Board of Commissioners for the salvation of the African race, they might annually have renewed their testi­ mony against slavery, and their demand for its abolition in various appropriate and powerful modes. At any rate, they should careiully have avoided sanc­ tioning it even in appearance. They have had it for forty-eight years directly in their way, directly beneath their power, directly calling for action. against it. Under the system of inaction and indifference it has so maintained its ground that at length not only the ecclesiastical bodies that maintain the system which ma.kes them the reproach of Christendom stand ready to receive and nourish the slaveholding (Mission) Churches, but the politicians and the whole slaveholding policy and power of the United States are waiting to receive a slave state,—a new slave state—into lie Union, from under the favourable tuition and moulding of the religion of the Board during fifty years!" Dr Cheever moved the following amendment to the report con­ cerning the Cherokee and Choctaw Mission Churches : “ Your committee add, that in the opinion of the board, the holding of slaves should be pronounced an immorality inconsistent with membership in any Christian church, and that it should be required that these missionary Churches should immediately put away from themselves this sin, and should cease to sanction it even in appearance.” The feeling of the Board on the subject is clearly shown by the fact that this resolution found no support whatever, except-that it was seconded by Dr. Cheever’s own brother. It was “ laid on the table ” unanimously. Dr. Pomroy made great anti-slavery pro­ gressions whilst in England, why then did he not support Dr. Cheever at this crisis ? The conclusion which the board did arrive at was in favour of the discontinuance of the Choctaw Indian Mission. Dr. Cheever wanted to hold on to the mission, and purify the churches by expelling the slaveholders. Thus the Board having taught the Choctaws to hold slaves, and having in consequence been denied the subscriptions of many rather old fashioned Christians who could not bring their minds to support a Society for the Propagation of SlaI tbry in Foreign Parts, have now turned their backs on their/mode's, hoping in that way to escape the unpleasant results of their wicked­ ness As the National (U.S.) Anti-Slavery Standard remarks—<• Thfev show no signs of repentance; their movement is not macle in such a manner as to entitle them io the least credit, or to give the least hope that they are disposed, to help their ‘ neighbour who lies wounded and bleeding, on the other side.’ ” Dr. Cheever presented a memorial against the slave trade, which was practically “burked,” being referred to the Prudential Com­ mittee, who are little likely to take an anti-slavery position so long as the notorious Dr. Nehemiah Adams, who, in his “ South-side View of Slavery,” recommends the re-opening of the foreign slave trade, �16 is one of the members. It is worthy of note that Dr. Pomroy opposed Dr. Cheever’s memorial, because, as he said, he thought there was not time to take proper measures—-a common excuse in in America, for shelving the slavery question, and one that is per­ fectly transparent. The National A. S. Standard sums up as follows :— “ In conclusion, we beg our readers—and especially the English readers of the Standard—to remark that the Board have shown their pro-slavery char­ acter in these four ways, in the important session which has just closed< “ 1. By their unanimous refusal to adopt Dr. Cheever’s resolution, declaring slaveholding an immorality, incopapatible with membership in a Christian Church.” “2. By their evasion of Dr. Cheever’s memorial against the slave trade. “ 3. By their continued license to the slaveholding churches, and pro-sla­ very missionaries of the Cherokee mission. “ 4. By their continued neglect to enforce measures of Christian reform upon the Choctaw Mission, and by their avowed motive in ultimately discon­ tinuing that mission, namely, not to get rid of sin, but to get rid of trouble! ” I submit these facts to the careful consideration of those whom Dr. Pomroy imposed upon in England, and at the same time I would recommend every lover of pure and undefiled religion to place no dependence upon the bare assertions of any American, whether he be a Doctor of Divinity or otherwise. If he says he “ hates slavery as much as any one,” and yet cannot prove that he has exerted his influence against it, he is only uttering what he knows to be false. I have learnt by experience that American ministers will stick at nothing in order to gain a welcome when they visit us. In conclusion, I beg, sir, to thank you most sincerely for your kindness in opening your columns for the discussion of this subject. 1 have been assured by many ministers and others that some good has been done, and, as an abolitionist, I am grateful to you for having granted the opportunity. Believe me, dear sir, your obedient servant, Wakefield, Nov. 5, 1859. JOSEPH A. HORNER. From the Nonconformist, Nov. 16, 1859. THE REV. DR. POMROY. To the Editor of the Nonconformist. Sir,—In addition to what I have already stated, allow me to add that Dr. Pomroy has been boasting of the reception he received whilst in England. According to the newspaper report of the late meeting: “He (Dr. Pomroy) spoke of the great prosperity of the American Board, and of the favour with which it is regarded abroad, especially in Great Britain where its missionaries are regarded amongst the noblest men engaged in the work of the Lord." Those who welcomed Dr. Pomroy will probably demur to this, as I know that many of them neither regard the spread of slavery �with “ favour,” nor its propagandists as engaged in “ the work of the Lord.” I am, your obedient servant, [Wakefield, Nov. 12, 1859. ' JOSEPH A. HORNER. “ We have sent our missionaries to all quarters of the globe; but how shall they tell their Heathen converts the things that are done in civilized America ? How shall our missionaries in Mohametan countries hold up their heads and proclaim the superiority of our religion, when we tolerate barbar­ ities which they have repudiated ? A missionary among the Karens, in Asia, writes back that his course is much embarrassed by a suspicion that is afloat among them, that the Americans intend to steal and sell them. He says:— ‘ I dread the time when these Karens will be able to read our books, and get a full knowledge of all that is going on in our country. Many of them are inquisitive now, and often ask me questions that I find it very difficult to answer.’ ”—Harriet Beecher Stowe. THE CASE OF DR. POMROY. While Dr. Pomroy was absent from this city a short time since, the letters received at the Missionary house, directed to him, were opened by one of the under secretaries, as most of them relate to the business of the Mission. Among these opened were some which tended to criminate Dr. Pomroy, shewing that he had either been guilty of criminal acts which would destroy his moral character, or that he was the victim of a conspiracy to extort money. The letters were returned to the envelopes, and placed upon Dr. Pomroy’s desk to await his return. On his return he saw that the contents of the let­ ters were known, and he at once made a statement to the other secretaries of what he averred were the facts in the case, and requested them to present that statement to the Prudential Committee. This was done, and Dr. Pomroy himself then went before the committee and made the same statement, which was in substance as follows;—‘ Some time since, while he was walking out in the evening, he was accosted by a well-dressed female, and, at her request, accompanied her to her home. Whilst in the parlour conversing with her, a man came in, and under the threat of exposure forced him to sign a note for 500 dollars, which he did, and subsequently paid it. A short time after he was enticed by another female into another house, and there two men assailed him and forced him to sign another note for 500 dollars, which he subse­ quently paid. Another woman, by the representation that she was suffering with a dissipated husband and destitute childen, enlisted his teelings, and he opened a correspondence with her, and subsequently paid 500 dollais to get his letters back, which he did, and destroyed them. He admits these state­ ments to be true, and has placed his resignation in the hands of the Pruden'tial Committee.—New York Paper. When a man in Dr. Pomroy’s position, and with his intelligence and expeH&ce—not a raw simpleton from some rural district, bnt a man who has seen much of the world’s ways and much of human nature—a man now almost sixty years of age—is involved in such relations with wicked women, more than one or two—that he pays hush money, not only once, but twice, kKg&I four times—when he has made the shameful payment, in one instance for the reeavery of letters which would have disgraced him, and has done it not at the advice of some timid friend to whom he went with his dreadful burden, but at the advice of so dexterous a lawyer as the late Mr. Choate— when it comes to light that out of limited means he has paid to wicked men, �•the vile accomplices of wicked women, an aggregate of some two thousand dollars—when it is announced that the conspirators who obtained his monejt are known to the police, and may he prosecuted if he will initiate the pro­ ceedings—when, under all this, he remains silent, explaining nothing, and not even asking the public to suspend its judgement—surely it is’ time for us all to acknowledge that, whether the man has or has not committed crimes not yet charged upon him, the exposure which has taken place is far less of an evil than that the man should have continued to wear the mask of concealment. To say that the man who, having brought himself into this position, not only hides the shameful facts from everybody—save his legal adviser—but keeps the office which he cannot keep for a moment, save by that concealment, and not even confining himself to the performance of his official work—volunteers to make himself conspicuous on British platforms, with devout exhibitions of religious sensibility—-must not be spoken of as having worn a mask, is not what the occasion requires, in our way of thinking.—New York Independent. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF THE SEVENTH AND NINTH COMMANDMENTS. By Charles K. Whipple, Esq., of Boston, U.S., Author of Relations of Anti-Slavery to Religion, de., de. * Ths following notice has lately appeared in all the newspapers, religious and secular, in Boston, and thence has been circulated all over the country, and sent over to England :— To the Public.-—Facts have recently come to the knowledge of the Pru­ dential Committee of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Mis­ sions, deeply implicating the moral character of Dr. Pomroy, and rendering it impossible that he should longer retain his official position as a secretary of the Board. He has resigned, and is no longer to be recognised as an offieeM of the Board. The facts referred to have no connexion with his official action. By order of the Prudential Committee: (Signed) R. Anderson, Clerk. CHARLES STODDARD, Chairman. Boston, November 29th, 1859. The explanation of this sudden and decisive action, appearing immediately after the card above quoted is, that the Prudential Committee of the American Board have accidentally discovered that Pomroy has, on three different occasions, paid large sums of hush-money to buy the silence of three women who made charges against him. What wonder that, after this, they should say, it is ‘ impossible that he should longer retain his official position as a secretary of the Board ’ I Whatever may be the faults of the American Board of Com­ missioners for Foreign Missions, no one can say that they approve or favor, or apologise for, or acquiesce in, adultery, as far as heathen countries and the free States of the American Union are concerned. In all these regions, they are careful to guard a purity as free from suspicion as from sin ; and, as soon as the character of one of their officers falls under the suspicion of this guilt, they feel that he is no longer a suitable person to transact their busi» * Mr. Whipple is well-known in the United States as the author of several important works on slavery. English readers will find quotations from his writings, in American Slavery and Colour, by William Chambers. �19 K ness, and they require his resignation as the alternative of imme| diate expulson. If they should ever be charged with favouring 7 the commission of adultery, or allowing it to pass unreproved I among their Northern Corporate and Honorary Members, and especially among their official servants, they can point to the case I of Dr. Pomroy as a triumphant vindication. , If a Turk, unacquainted with the peculiarities of the popular E American religion, and unacquainted with the lives of Southern ■ members of the Board, should ask the reason of this unsparing ■ severity against adultery, they would tell him that this act is a ■ violation of the seventh commandment of the decalogue. He would I naturally infer from this, that the whole of this code is held in like ■ veneration, and that the disregard of any other of its provisions ■ would be visited with the same severity. But sueh a conclusion I would show his ignorance of the peculiarities above mentioned. The ninth commandment of the decalogue forbids lying as stringently as the seventh forbids adultery. It is said that a strict | ___ ■ constructionist once attempted to excuse his violation of truth by IS saying that it uros! /»rkmTYiii+Arl for Ti1Q tiAirrhVmni* ATld Tin'h 4 fJOTHTlS't was committed ~Prw his neighbour, and not ‘ against his neighbour.’ But no such theory of the meaning of the ninth commandment has been openly assumed as the correct one, even by the New York and Boston Tract Societies, and certainly not by the American Board. They would undoubtedly declare it to forbid all 1 saying of that which is not.’ This very Dr. Pomroy who has just now, under suspicion of adultery, made a compulsory resignation of his secretaryship in the American Board, told a deliberate lie in regard to their posi_ tion during his recent visit to England, repeating it as often as he R was met by a statement of ths facts respecting their Cherokee and K Choctaw missions. It had become known to a portion of the ■ English people, that slaveholders were admitted as Christians into T the churches established by those missions; that the missionaries I insisted upon so receiving them; that the Prudential Committee I never at all prohibited such admission of slaveholders—and never made the least objection or showed the least repugnance to this wicked practice, until importunate remonstrances were repeatedly made by a portion of their patrons in the northern states; then they hinted to the missionaries the expediency of taking away the occasion of such complaints, all the time carefully avoiding the giv­ ing of ‘decisions and instructions,’ against the practice in question. And when, in his visit to England, Dr. Pomroy found these facts known, and the knowledge of them (of course) Operating to the discredit of the Board; he turned the tide, for the time, by this deliberately false statement—‘ The Board now hold ah anti-slavery position.’ y I I �The Board soon had information of this lie, told in their behalf and for their credit. The clerical dignity, the solemn and serious aspect of Dr. Pomroy, (‘well fitted,’ as Bev. John Waddington, of London, remarked at the late Annual Meeting, ‘ to represent the Board in England,’) gave currency to the statement for a time, though investigation soon showed its utter falseness ; but neither j then nor since have they called Dr. Pomroy to account for this®? falsehood. Are we to infer that they think the ninth command­ ment less obligatory or less important than the seventh ? or that the violation of some or any of these commandments is palliated, 9 or excused, by being done in advancement of ilieir purposes ? These are important questions. We have no hope of their being $ answered at the call of abolitionists by the prosperous and powerfull body in question, who absorb the voluntary contributions v, of the country at the rate of more than a thousand dollars a day, but expend so much more as to leave them, this year, sixty-six \ thousand dollars in debt. They are accustomed to seem to ignore <1 American abolitionists, while they are secretly working to counter- ■ act them. Their position in regard to the anti-slavery movements remains precisely as it was in 1837, when they adopted, and in 1839, when, after discussion, they re-affirmed a resolution forbidding those missionaries, in their employ, who had embraced anti-slavery principles to use the paper and presses of the Board, (the only means of printing within their reach,) ‘to print any letter, tract, or appeal ’ remonstrating against slavery, ‘ with a view to its being y sent to individuals, or communities in the United States.’ Their missionaries still labour under this dis-qualification for using their experience of the pernicious and depraving influence of slavery 1 abroad, in direct opposition to the slavery they have left at home. But English abolitionists can, if they will, extort answers to tlidse questions, as well as to the additional questions, which should now demand of the Board, in thunder tones, from every evangelical Church in Great Britain. Why they did not purge the Choctaw Churches from slaveholders, instead of, or previous to, cutting them adrift? and—Why they still suffer their Cherokee church­ members TO HOLD, BUY, AND SELL SLAVES, WITHOUT LIMIT AND | WITHOUT OBSTRUCTION ? Leeds : Printed by J. B. BarRt & Co., 18, Trinity Sheet. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The American Board of Missions and Slavery: a reprint of the correspondence in the "nonconformist" newspaper: to which is added an article on the fall of Dr. Pomroy and his subsequent dismissal from office by Charles K. Whipple Description An account of the resource Place of publication: Leeds Collation: 20 p. ; 18 cm. Series: Anti-Slavery Tracts for the Times Series No.: No.1 Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed by J.B. Barby & Co., Leeds. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Whipple, Charles K. (Charles King) Pomroy, Swann Lyman Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Horner, Joseph Alfred (ed) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [1860] Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available J. B. Barry & Co. Subject The topic of the resource Slavery Anti-Slavery Movements Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The American Board of Missions and Slavery: a reprint of the correspondence in the "nonconformist" newspaper: to which is added an article on the fall of Dr. Pomroy and his subsequent dismissal from office by Charles K. Whipple), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5227 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English American Board of Commisioners for Foreign Missions Anti-Slavery Movements Conway Tracts Slavery