Изображения страниц

could not do the sword of the warrior would do." Mr Beecher, in his Manchester speech at the Free Trade Hall, said " Let me say one word here about the constitution of America. It recognises slavery as a fact, but it does not recognise the doctrine of slavery whatever." In this paragraph Mr. Beecher puts the constitution of our dis-United States in the same relationship to slavery as the Bible stands to sin. It recognises sin as a fact, but not as a doctrine. otherwise than to be shunned, contemned, despised, abhorred. But Mr. Beecher in the paragraph extracted from his Thanksgiving Sermon speaks of the " compromises of the constitution." What does he mean by them? Surely not the recognition of slavery as a fact, but a doctrine to be believed in, embraced, and practised. He wished it had been otherwise, as in the case of Adam's transgression, but that did'nt help the matter." Quite true, Mr. Beecher; but you say that it made "political emancipation impossible." This is a most strange, delusive, and dangerous doctrine to be taught by any man, but especially by an avowed minister and disciple of Christ.

But why was political emancipation impossible? Let Mr. Beecher answer-" We had sworn fealty to the constitution" (with its compromises), which at Manchester he said contained no compromises; "we had made a promise," and if we could not keep our plighted faith, and abide by our promise, we had better stand apart as two peoples." But have the Northern partners in our black partnership concern

[ocr errors]

kept their promise, or maintained their plighted faith to a constitution which, according to Beecher, the administrators of the government, with the consent of the people, had made a covenant with death and an agreement with hell? No. "But what the pen of the legislator could not do the sword of the warrior would," said Beecher. Instead of sensibly standing apart as two peoples, the more inhuman, irrational, and terrible arbitrament of the sword is resorted to. The above pretexts of Mr. Beecher are not only hollow, but horrible; and it would be quite in harmony with Mr. Beecher's theory to throw off his prophet's mantle, or to lay aside his shepherd's crook in his lecture, in the Philharmonic Hall, next Friday evening, and to appear in his "Pantomime covered with the war paint, and holding the "war hatchet" in his hands.

Mr. Beecher, in his speech at Manchester, spoke of a class of men "who licked the feet of slaveholding men." In the facts, however, that we have given we leave our readers to judge who has been the greatest "lickspittle."

Thus, Mr. Beecher has gone for saving the union by keeping his plighted faith with the constitution and "its compromises," but now a spirit has come over his dreams, and he throws "his compromises" overboard to urge men to get not at what he calls the "Christian conscience of the South," but at the necks and throats of his "Christian slaveholders,"

to preserve his blind devotion to and superstitious veneration of the Union.

Mr. Beecher, in his recent speech at Glasgow, avowed that the Northerns would give "their last child and last dollar to restore the Union; but the conscription, associated with its dreadful tragedies, and his own avowal "that God and the negro are to save the Republic" do not harmonise, nor does also the belief which he avowed at Manchester that in the present fratricidal war the Northerns" are giving their best blood for principle." The seed corn of the old English martyrs was not associated with the doctrine of compromising truth with falsehood, or of uprooting error with the sword.

[ocr errors]

Mr. Beecher said "Under God, the South has done more to bring on than the North itself." the days of Calhoun to slavery no more as a misfortune, but as a Divine blessing. The above is quite true, but it is not the whole truth, since the cause of this dreadful apostacy in the South originated in the teachings of the Northern pulpits, colleges, missionaries, and tract society boards, who for commercial causes introduced the "obscene goddess" of slavery, and proclaimed its humanity and divinity until, as Wendel Phillips, Esq., in 1860, declared orthodoxy was a "sea of rottenness." So that, base and infamous as "the hierarchs of infidelity" may be in the South who declare that the foundation of the Southern republic

this work of emancipation First, they began after the declare that they accepted

is slavery, it emanates from Northern tuition; and vile and degrading as the sentiments are which have been addressed by the Southern clergy and churches to the Christians of this country, viler, blacker, and more atrocious sentiments still, if possible, may be culled from the writings, sermons, and speeches of Drs. Nehemiah Adams, Lord, Stuart, and Hoge, and the Rev. Vandyke, of New York, and the Right Rev. Bishop Hopkins, of Vermont, &c., &c.

Mr. Beecher said "No offence had been committed, none threatened by the North against the South, but the arrogation was that the election of a man (Lincoln) known to be pledged against the extension of slavery was not compatible with the safety of slavery in the South." Mr. Beecher must be strangely ignorant of the speech made by President Lincoln at Springfield, June 12, 1858, when he said-" I believe this country cannot endure permanently half slave. and half free," &c., &c.; also of the interpretation which the Southerns put upon it as a war of sections;" and also of Lincoln's recantation of the above speech at Ottawa, Illinois, Aug. 21, 1858; and also of the declaration made by Lincoln at Freeport, Illinois, Aug. 27, 1858, “that if any territory adopted a slave constitution uninfluenced by the actual presence of the institution amongst its members, that he saw no other alternative, if we held the union, but to admit them."

Mr. Beecher's statement in regard to the spread of abolitionism on the basis of no compromise is not in

accordance with the history of the case. In Fred. Douglas's Monthly, for August, 1860, reference is made by him to Wendel Phillips, declaring that "the efforts of abolitionists for twenty years in the cause of freedom had been bootless ;" and Douglas himself said at the same period-"Little progress had been made in twenty-five years of anti-slavery effort. There have been many mistakes to be corrected, and there has been much force used up by needless faction between contending factions." The testimony of the above men is complete, and as Mr. Beecher claims it a privilege to "unloose their shoes," he will hardly dispute their authority.

But if the above should be deemed insufficient out of many facts which we could give of the "pro-slavery proclivities" of our Northern people, take the following. It is the case of the Rev. Dr. Plummer, who, instead of losing caste for the expression we have quoted and the unchristian spirit which he manifested was promoted to honour after the above "diabolical utterances" referred to; chosen professor of didactic and pastoral theology in the Western Theological Seminary at Alleghany City, Pennsylvania:-"And," according to the testimony of Wm. Loyd Garrison, "so far from the American board rebuking him in this wickedness, he has virtually rebuked the board by resigning his membership at the last annual meeting (October, 1859), probably because the board had sneaked out of the support of slavery in the Choctaw mission, instead of continuing to uphold it, as they

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »