Images de page
PDF
ePub

ception which the Rev. Dr. Meade, then Agent of the Society, met with at these places and at Charleston in 1820, was most encouraging, and gentlemen of the first distinction and talents gave to his efforts their countenance and support. On the list of donors to the Society at that time were many eminent names in both these States, and the first remittance from Charleston was $500. In that city one of the most liberal contributors was Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, a gentleman who has recently pronounced the scheme of African Colonization both cruel and absurd. The Society had then existed for more than two years; it had applied to Congress for assistance; the address of its venerable President, Judge Washington, in which the hope was expressed that “it should lead to the slow but gradual abolition of slavery," and a letter of General Harper, in which the opinion was avowed that the "tendency of the Institution to rid us gradually and entirely of slaves and of slavery, most strongly recommended it to attention and support," had been given to the world in the First Annual Report; and yet, Dr. Meade encountered no opposition in his Agency, and in concluding his Report to the Managers, remarks, "I have endeavoured to inform myself, as correctly as possible of the general feeling and opinion in regard to our Society, and the result has been a conviction that, unless a great alteration takes place, or I have been misinformed, it will meet with a liberal support."

Certain it is, however, that the prediction of Dr. Meade has not been fulfilled, and it is equally certain, that within four years past many prominent individuals in South Carolina have manifested a determined spirit of hostility to our Institution. This spirit has rapidly increased in activity and virulence, and the most illiberal and angry essays have been issued against the Society from the Charleston press. Brutus denounced it in 1827, in his pamphlet on the usurpations of the federal government, as making an "insidious attack on the domestic tranquillity of the South, as the "nest egg placed in Congress by Northern abolitionists, that therefrom might be hatched and raised for the South anxiety, inquietude, and troubles to which there could be no end." The Charleston Mercury on the 24th of April last, asks in the most exasperated tone, "Will Congress aid a Society reprobated at the South and justly regarded as murder

ous in its principles, and as tending inevitably to the destruction of the public peace? Will it become an instrument in the hands of fanaticism-and act as the abettor of the incendiary and assassin." In the speeches recently delivered in Charleston, the design of the Society is represented as threatening the ruin of the South, and in toasts at public dinners, the most opprobrious epithets are applied to it, and bitter and scornful invectives uttered against its members. Nor is this all. The Managers deemed it expedient, in order to secure more general and liberal collections in the Churches on the last Fourth of July, to print and circulate among Clergymen, a pamphlet containing a few facts relating to the origin, objects and success of the Society, with two or three encouraging letters which had just then been received from Liberia. Several members of Congress felt themselves justified, as the claims of the Society were under consideration in that body, in distributing copies of this pamphlet, and several bearing the frank of these gentlemen were sent to the Clergymen in Charleston. Immediately, the Editor of the Mercury (the Hon. Intendant of Charleston) is apprized by "one of the most talented, eloquent and estimable Clergymen in that city," that several of these pamphlets had been received by him; (one of them is submitted to his (the Hon. Mayor's) examination) that as he is in no way connected with the Society, he "considers it somewhat remarkable, that they should have been sent to him;" that he is more struck with the fact that he was instructed (requested?) to distribute them (among ministers) in his District; and that he thinks it strange (the Hon. Intendant agrees with him) that these packages (pamphlets) should have been franked; and finally, that he has no use for them and "most seriously questions the wisdom of the whole scheme of Colonization." The Hon. Intendant pronounces "these views to be just and patriotic and worthy of their respectable Author, withholds his name from a sense of delicacy, is thankful for his communication and for the information that neither he nor his Brethren are connected with a Society so justly regarded as highly dangerous to the welfare of the South, and should be extremely glad to learn that this was the case with every other religious denomination in South Carolina." Though the whole of this proceeding certainly approaches the ridiculous, and

though we suspect that the eloquent Clergyman has before this regretted his conduct; (since our Society has received the unqualified approbation of nearly, if not quite, every Religious denomination in the Land) yet, it is obvious from this statement, that a morbid sensitiveness exists in Charleston in relation to our Institution; that some individuals there, at least, look upon it as upon an odious enemy, and believe or would make others believe that it is coming upon them like the terrors of death upon a guilty conscience. We propose to inquire into the cause or causes of the change which has taken place in the opinions of some distinguished men in South Carolina towards our Society, since the period of Dr. Meade's visit to that State in 1820.-What has awakened that spirit of suspicion and enmity which is now manifested by these men in every form of open and active hostility?

Can it be attributed to any departure of the Society from its avowed original design and principles? We maintain that it cannot; we maintain that the character of the Society, has from the commencement been uniformly the same, and that its proceedings have been consistent with its character.

Were or are the design and principles of the Society hostile to the rights and interests of the Southern States? We maintain that they were and are not; but on the contrary, are worthy to be cherished by the citizens of these States, and to be sustained with all their energies as means of their political and moral strength.

In order to ascertain whether or not the Society has departed from its avowed original design and principles, what this design and these principles were at its origin must first be understood. Let us seek for information on this subject from the Constitution of the Society, interpreted by the recorded opinions and by the acts of its Founders. We might here allude to the character of those men who engaged most earnestly and actively in establishing our Institution and ask is there an individual who dare to question their integrity, their patriotism, or their honour? Is there a generous Carolinian who would cast reproach upon the memories of such men as Caldwell and Finley, of Washington, Harper and Fitzhugh? These names are sacred. Of those still living, their associates in laying the foun

dations of this Society, we say only, that if they are not incapable of deception, confidence should not be placed in human virtue.

It should not be forgotten that several years previous to the organization of this Society, the subject of African Colonization had been considered in the Legislature of Virginia; that the Governor (Mr. Monroe) had been requested to correspond with Mr. Jefferson, (then President of the United States) in regard to it; that the idea met the entire approbation of the President; that efforts made by him to secure a home for the Free People of Colour in the United States, at Sierra Leone, proved unsuccessful, as did also the attempt to obtain territory for them from the Portuguese in South America, and finally that Resolutions in favour of renewed exertions were adopted by the Virginia Legislature three several times before December 1816, when this body, by an almost unanimous vote, expressed its desire that the general government "might obtain Territory on the Coast of Africa or at some other place not within the territorial limits of the United States, to serve as an asylum for such persons of Colour as are now free and may desire the same, and for those who may hereafter be emancipated." Nor should it be forgotten that most of those who assembled to form the Society, and all who expressed their sentiments on that occasion, were slave-holders; nor does there appear to have existed at the time a suspicion that their motives were unworthy or their acts reprehensible. The lofty State of Virginia had taken the lead, which none seemed to have imagined that it would be unwise or unsafe to follow.

And

The second Article of the Society declares that "the object to which its attention is to be exclusively devoted is to promote and execute a plan for colonizing (with their own consent) the free people of colour, residing in our Country, in Africa, or such other place as Congress shall deem most expedient. the Society shall act to effect this object in co-operation with the General Government, and such of the States as may adopt regulations upon the subject." Before the adoption of the Constitution, at the very first meeting of the Society, Mr. Clay observed that "it was not proposed to deliberate on, or consider at all any question of emancipation," and Mr. Randolph of Virginia expressed a similar opinion, while at the same time he

remarked, "if a place could be provided for their reception and a mode of sending them hence, there were hundreds, nay thousands who would by manumitting their slaves, relieve themselves from the cares attendant on their possession, The First Annual Report contains the Opinions of the Founders of this Society, expressed in the most clear and unambiguous languageJudge Washington observed in his Address,

"As little can be apprehended by the proprietor, who will not voluntarily avail himself of the opportunity which this settlement will afford him, of emancipating his slaves, without injury to his country. The effect of this Institution, if its prosperity shall equal our wishes, will be alike propitious to every interest of our domestic Society; and should it lead, as we may fairly hope it will, to the slow, but gradual abolition of slavery, it will wipe from our political Institutions the only blot which stains them; and in palliation of which we shall not be at liberty to plead the excuse of moral necessity, until we shall have honestly exerted all the means which we possess for its extinction."

On motion of Mr. Clay, a letter dated in 1811, from Mr. Jefferson was read, in which he states that he had long ago made up his mind on the subject of Colonization, and that he had ever thought that the most desirable measure which could be adopted for gradually drawing off this part of our population." Having mentioned his negociations during his Presidency, with England and Portugal, he adds: "Indeed, nothing is more to be wished than that the United States, would themselves undertake to make such an establishment on the Coast of Africa."

Mr. Mercer, alluding to the Virginia Resolution, said, "many thousand individuals in our native State, you well know, Mr. President, are restrained, as you and I are, by the melancholy conviction, that they cannot yield to the suggestions of humanity without manifest injury to their Country. The laws of Virginia now discourage, and very wisely, perhaps, the emancipation of slaves. But the very policy on which they are founded, will afford every facility to emancipation, when the Colonization of the slave will be the consequence of his liberation."

« PrécédentContinuer »