Imagens da página
PDF
ePub

leage, or 'direct action in the South, for the benefit of any loured population," would be to infer from that fact, the pe cy of the Society to waken public attention to the interests people. In this effort, it seems that Mr. B. relied, "as au impulses of benevolence," on "the selfish advantages to the liance which he has since found reason to condemn. His p appears to be that the Colonization Society cannot be a sche nevolent to the coloured people, and conducive to the in whites at the South; he having recently discovered a tota between the two principles! He even thinks this truth to as to require from him an apology for his not having form it. "I UNHESITATINGLY DECLARE, that the total incongrui principles did NOT strike my mind, as it has done, since I w dissociable, and mutually destructive energy." Now, we is by no means wonderful that this imputed incongruity did Birney's mind sooner. The wonder is, that it ever struck h or the mind of any man. Reflecting persons have generally a plan may be based on the strongest foundations of duty, an by the most enlarged principles of philanthropy, and yet pro ges, on the score of individual interests, which its advocate only justifiable for pressing, but inexcusable for omitting. I ject, in comparison with which all matters of merely human co but trifles, appeals to subordinate interests have been regar priate. The Ministers of our Holy Religion, not content w high sanctions as a Revelation from the Almighty, announc and demanding the obedience of His creatures, habitually en sideration, that man's temporal happiness is best subserved mity with the rule of life which that Revelation prescribes. men are now to be told, that there is a "total incongruity" spiritual character of the Gospel, and its capacity to confer "se ges" on man. It must be noted, that in using the latter to careful not to invest it with an importance disproportioned main argument. A similar caution is incumbent on the adv inferior system, recommended on the one hand by its benevo the other by its utility. If, in pleading for Colonization, dwelt exclusively or too fondly on its "selfish advantages," t ror of his own, which it is not very gracious in him to make of his impeachment against the Society.

If this gentleman's theory of the "total incongruity, &c.' the illustration of it. which he complacently calls "evidence so. What is it? Why, that an Auxiliary Colonization So solved last autumn. This may show that the Auxiliary had calls a "dissociable energy," but it no more proves his assu the death of an individual proves a "total incongruity" betw

"I mention the institution of the Society at Huntsville and its decline, not for the purpose of giving its history as a matter of interest in itself, nor solely with the view of showing my friendly disposition towards Colonization, but as an instance, (to which the condition of the others mentioned, as wel: as that of all the smaller Societies throughout the region in which I acted, might be added,) falling under my own obervation that every day's experience is making more palpable to my mind, that there is not in Colonization any principle or quality, or constituent substance, fitted so to tell upon the hearts and minds of men as to ensure continued and persevering action. If there be the onnection supposed, between the facts introduced above and the proposition just stated, may I nət ask you, sir, if the little that has been done for Colonization by our own State, where years ago it was welcomed with open arms, and within whose limits I could not state from personal knowledge that it has a single enemy, and the present crippled and unmoving condition of the numerous Societies, auxiliary to that whose correspondence you so ably conduct, do not furnish testimony very powerful if not irresistible, that the whole matter has not in it any principle exciting to strenuous-to continuous action."

The case of the Huntsville Society seems as little likely to promote the object for which it is here brought forward, as it was to prove the dogma of the "total incongruity." The revised motive for the reference to it, is to show, "that there is not in Colonization any principle, or quality, or constituent substance, fitted so to tell upon the hearts or minds of men, as to ensure continued and persevering action;" or, in other words, that the vicissitudes of an Auxiliary Society prove the system of which it is a part, to be unsound and desperate. If this be "logic" at all, it may readily be admitted to be "unequalled." The corollary is, that the hopelessness of the Colonization Society being thus demonstrated, its friends ought to abandon it. Is it then true, that no scheme, however redundant of promised benefits and blessings, can ultimately prosper, because it sustains occasional disasters? It is well that this timid philosophy was unknown to Columbus, when ignorance and prejudice opposed his plan for discovering a world; or to the colonizers of Jamestown, so often suffering under aggravated calamities, and so nearly their victim; or, to cite a loftier example, to the early Missionaries of the Cross, when principalities and powers sought to trample on them: and that it has not chilled those countless plans of benevolence which characterize our own day and generation. Justice, as well as sound philosophy, prescribes a test for trying any project, very different from that of its partial unpopularity. Both require that if on fair and full examination it appear worthy of acceptance, its friends should find in its adversity an added stimulus to "strenuous to continued action.'

But, on this topic, we not only reject Mr. Birney's reasoning, but we deny his facts. Without expressly affirming, he leaves it to be plainly inferred, that the cause of Colonization is weaker now than it was at its inception. That it is vehemently denounced in various quarters, is admitted. But this very circumstance has induced an investigation of its principles, and a comparison of it with other projects for meliorating the condition of the African race; and the result, by throwing into bright contrast its practical, peaceful and constitutional character, has acquired for it a popularity too solid to be shaken by occasional misfortunes, by the vituperation of foes or the infidelity of friends. If Auxiliary Societies have gone down in one place, they have risen up in another; if prominent individuals, who had embraced it under erroneous views, have since forsaken it, other individuals equally prominent, whom prejudice had estranged from it, have, on farther observation, cast away that prejudice, and are now its zealous supporters; the torpor of the public mind on the subject has been roused by discussion, and discussion has in the general result, increased and confirmed the claims of our cause on public confidence. As the alleged unpopularity of the colonizing system seems to have weighed heavily with Mr. Birney, it might perhaps be advisable for him to re-examine his con

clusions on that point. It is not easy to reconcile them with his subsequent complaint, that the "Colonization Society has succeeded in bringing around it the learned, the religious, the influential;" and that "by the multiplied resolutions of favoring legislatures, of ecclesiastical bodies, with their hundred conventions, assemblies, conferences and associations, it has so far exalted itself into the high places of public sentiment, as itself to constitute public sentiment." But this is not, as will be seen in the sequel, the only instance in which the "unequalled force" of Mr. Birney's logic is directed against his own arguments.

The compliments of intelligent prints to the moderation of this gentleman's language in the letter under review, had prepared us to find him free from the error so common with converts, of vilifying their forsaken faith; and we felt quite sure that good taste would prevent him from reproaching his former associates. These agreeable impressions were strengthened by the just tribute to their motives, contained in the following paragraph:

"In stating the objections which exist in my mind to Colonization, I wish to be understood distinctly at the outset, that I do not, in the slightest degree, impute to the benevolent individuals by whom it was originated, or even to a large majority of those by whom it is still warmly cherished, any unworthy motive as prompting their zeal. Whilst I cheerfully attribute to this majority stainless purity of motive in what they have done and are doing; and further, a strong persuasion that it is the only means of rescue from the polluting and crushing folds of slavery; I should be insincere, were I not to state my belief that Colonization, if not supported, is not objected to, by many a keen-sighted slaveholder in the abstract, who has perspicacity enough to discern that the dark system in which he has involved himself, his posterity and their interests, will remain as unaffected by it as mid-ocean by the discharge of a pop gun on the beach.

"Nor do I intend to be understood, as making any objection to the purpose of the American Colonization Society, as expressed in its constitution, "to promote a plan for colonizing (with their consent) the free people of colour residing in our country, in Africa, or such other place as Congress may deem most expedient.' If its operations be limited to the gratification of an intelligent wish on the part of the free people of colour, or any other class of our population, to reinove to Africa, with the view of establishing a colony for the prosecution of an honest commerce, or for any lawful purpose whatever, there could exist, so far as I could see, no reasonable ground of opposition, any more than to the migration, that is now in progress, of crowds of our fellow citizens to Texas, or any other part of Mexico."

Alas! immediately after the foregoing passages, in which "a stainless purity of motive" is so emphatically ascribed to "a large majority" of the friends of Colonization, comes the subjoined description of that very majority:

"If on the other hand, it is meant that this "consent" may be lawfully obtained by the imposition of civil disabilities, disfranchisement, exclusion from sympathy; by making the free colored man the victim of a relentless proscription, prejudice and scorn; by rejecting altogether his oath in courts of justice, thus leaving his property, his person, his wife, his children, and all that God has by his very constitution made dear to him, unprotected from the outrage and insult of every unfeeling tyrant, it becomes a solemn farce, it is the refinement of inhumanity, a mockery of all mercy, it is cruel, unmanly, and meriting the just indignation of every American, and the noble nation that bears his name. To say. that thconsent" thus extorted is the approbation of the mind, is as preposterous as to affirm that a man consents to surrender his purse, on the condition that you spare his life, or, to be transported to Botany Bay, when the hand of despotism is ready to stab him to the het. "Now, if the Colonization Society has done-is doing this; if it has succeeded in bring ing around it the learned, the religious, the influential; if by the multiplied resolutions of favoring legislatures, of ecclesiastical bodies, with their hundred conventions, assemblies, conferences, and associations, it has so far exalted itself into the high places of public sentiment, as itself to constitute public sentiment; if it has acquired great authority over the mind of this people, and uses it to encourage and not to check this heartless and grinding oppression; if, instead of pleading for mercy to the weak an helpless, it sanctions the most open and crushing injustice, or even connives at it, by urging the necessity of Colonization upon the alleged ground of the immutability of the state of things, for the perpetua

Let us

iate remedy for slavery")-which attaches its e preceding sentences in the connexion. of the machinery of ifs," with which the author,

to wound, but yet afraid to strike,"

et us demand his evidence. Where is his proof ety means "force," when it says "consent?"-that n the victim of a relentless proscription, prejudice solemn farce," "the refinement of inhumanity, a that it is cruel, unmanly, and meriting the just incan?”—that it encourages "heartless and grind"sanctions the most open and crushing injustice" ess, its foulness, cannot be too soon or too fully entence of condemnation may be passed upon it by ot of the land?"

[ocr errors]

ombined duplicity, cruelty and malignity, brought iation, by an accuser whose lips were almost warm it! 'We believe," says the Editor of the New r. Birney in his first paragraph, that a large maColonization, are men of stainless purity of mo, if any man charges them with encouraging or on of the blacks, he is a false accuser of his

nstrous and so utterly unsustained by proof, as v, deserved a formal reply, we should probably ollowing considerations:-The Colonization Soto an enterprise which is exactly defined in its object to which its attention is to be exclusively d execute a plan for colonizing (with their own e of colour, residing in our country, in Africa, or ress shall deem most expedient." The Society sons living in the midst of a community, from they were entirely debarred, in whose civil participated, and in relation to whose social conof a separate and inferior caste : Laws existed,

us disabilities of greater or less severity, and siIs passed: But all these enactments were made e competency for the object had been solemnly can Constitution, and was beyond controversy: denunciation against these laws, and thereby foates enacting them, would have been a course on s of the Colonization Society, inconsistent with of the American Confederacy: Such a course

[ocr errors]

After Birney ral head 2. Up pics are The followin

"All gre

ponding ch undeniably

ore, and

This t Aral and aptitud

"What," tion was su was the tru their Creato You, I am s would have

in our condi

Can it lieves that which he school his and her co

ral equalit tude. Th dependend truth;" bu for the wa incited ou they so gl tions abou sult has no wisdom of object, not organizatio of bad men portion to t If a ca

Birney classifies his objections to Colonization, under the ral heads:-1. The practical influence of Colonization 2. Upon the coloured population; and 3. Upon Africa; wh pics are, of course, divided into a goodly number of subor The discussion of the first of these grand divisions, com following postulate :

"All great revolutions of sentiment in masses of men, calling, of co ponding change of action, must lay their foundation in some great princ undeniably true in theory; which all the facts pertaining to it, when t prove, and taken together, fully establish as true, to all unprejudiced

This theory is then elongated into several ramificatio moral and political, of which we shall notice the last, as inaptitude of the writer's course of reasoning to practical s

“What,” he asks, “was the great truth, or principle, upon which th tion was supported? Was it any other than this, that all men were cr was the trunk throwing out towards heaven its noble branches, 'that t their Creator with the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the purs You, I am sure, sir, do not believe that this principle, had it suffered th would have been sufficiently vivifying to produce the great revolution in our condition, &c."

Can it be possible, that so intelligent a man as Mr. F lieves that the American Revolution was produced by t which he refers to, or by any other abstract principle? school histories of that great event would inform him, th and her colonies no more went to war for a disagreement ral equality of mankind, than they did to settle the questi tude. The principle cited is indeed announced in our D dependence, and, properly understood, deserves the na truth;" but that celebrated paper goes on to assign specific, for the war of Independence. It was the influence of the incited our ancestors to commence and to continue the they so gloriously terminated. There have indeed been tions abounding at every turn in announcements of abstract sult has not said much for either the efficacy of those inst wisdom of using them. Such commotions have generall object, not the restoration of Government to its true princi organization of society, the triumph of anarchy, and the of bad men, whose professions of zeal for human rights w portion to their own reckless audacity injustice.

If a careful compiler were to collect together the poli dogmas spread over the speeches and publications of the el

« AnteriorContinuar »