just. But is not this the colonization principle? Who are the individuals that applaud, that justify, that advocate this exclusion? Who are they that venture to tell the American people, that they have neither honesty enough, nor patriotism enough, nor morality enough, nor religion enough, to treat their colored brethren as countrymen and citizens? Some of them—I am sorry to say—are professedly ministers of the gospel; others are christian professors; others are judges and lawyers; others are our Senators and Representatives; others are editors of newspapers. These ministers and christians dishonor the gospel which they profess; these judges and lawyers are the men spoken of by the Saviour, who bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. These Senators and Representatives ought not to receive the suffrages of the people. These editors are unworthy of public patronage.

'Colonizationists too generally agree in discouraging your instruction and elevation at home. They pretend that ignorance is bliss; and therefore 't is folly to be wise. They pretend that knowledge is a dangerous thing in the head of a colored man; they pretend that you have no ambition; they pretend that you have no brains; in fine, they pretend a thousand other absurd things-they are a combination of pretences. What tyranny is this! Shutting up the human intellect-binding with chains the inward man-and perpetuating ignorance. May we not address them in the language of Christ? "Wo unto you, scribes and pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men : for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in ! Ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy and faith."

'Colonizationists generally agree in apologising for the crime of slavery. They get behind the contemptible subterfuge, that it was entailed upon the planters. As if the continuance of the horrid system were not criminal! as if the robberies of another generation justify the robberies of the present! as if the slaves had not an inalienable right to freedom! as if slavery were not an individual as well as a national crime! as if the tearing asunder families, limb from limb,-branding the flesh with red hot irons,-mangling the body with whips and knives,-feeding it on husks and clothing it with rags,-crushing the intellect and destroying the soul,—as if such inconceivable cruelty were not chargeable to those who inflict it!

'As to the effect of colonization upon slavery, it is rather favorable than injurious to the system. Now and then, indeed, there is a great flourish of trumpets, and glowing accounts of the willingness of planters to emancipate their slaves on condition of transportation to Africa. Now and then a slave is actually manumitted and removed, and the incident is dwelt upon for months. Why, my friends, hundreds of worn-out slaves are annually turned off to die, like old horses. No doubt their masters will thank the Colonization Society, or any one else, to send them out of the country; especially as they will gain much glorification in the newspapers, for their disinterested sacrifices. Let no man be deceived by these manœuvres.

'My time is consumed-and yet I have scarcely entered upon the threshold of my argument. Now, what a spectacle is presented to the world !—the Amer

ican people, boasting of their free and equal rights—of their abhorrence of aristocratical distinctions-of their republican equality; proclaiming on every wind, "that all men are born equal, and endowed with certain inalienable rights,” and that this land is an asylum for the persecuted of all nations; and yet as loudly proclaiming that they are determined to deprive millions of their own countrymen of every political and social right, and to send them to a barbarous continent, because the Creator has given them a sable complexion. Where exists a more rigorous despotism? What conspiracy was ever more cruel ? What hypocrisy and tergiversation so enormous? The story is proclaimed in our pulpits, in our state and national assemblies, in courts of law, in religious and secular periodicals,―among all parties, and in all quarters of the country,— that there is a moral incapacity in the people to do justly, love mercy, and to walk uprightly-that they must always be the enemies and oppressors of the colored people that no love of liberty, no dictate of duty, no precept of republicanism, no dread of retribution, no claim of right, no injunction of the gospel, can possibly persuade them to do unto their colored countrymen, as they would that they should do unto them in a reversal of circumstances. Now, to these promulgators of unrighteousness, with the Declaration of Independence in one hand, and the Bible in the other, I fearlessly give battle. Rich and mighty and numerous as they are, by the help of the Lord I will put them to open shame. They shall not libel me, they shall not libel my country, with impunity. They shall not make our boasted republicanism a by-word and a hissing among all nations, nor sink the christian religion below heathen idolatry; and if they persist in publishing their scandalous proclamations, they shall be labelled as the enemies of their species and of the republic, and treated accordingly.

The Colonization Society, therefore, instead of being a philanthropic and religious institution, is anti-republican and anti-christian in its tendency. Its pretences are false, its doctrines odious, its means contemptible. If we are to send away the colored population because they are profligate and vicious, what sort of missionaries will they make? Why not send away the vicious among the whites, for the same reason and the same purpose? If ignorance be a crime, where shall we begin to select? How much must a man know to save him from transportation? How white must he be? If we send away a mixed breed, how many will be left? If foreigners only, then the people of color must remain-for they are our countrymen. Would foreigners submit? No-not for an instant. Why should the American people make this enormous expenditure of life and money? Why not use the funds of the Society to instruct and elevate our colored population at home? This would be rational and serviceable. Instead of removing men from a land of civilization and knowledge—of schools, and seminaries, and colleges to give them instruction in a land of darkness and desolation—would it not be wiser and better to reverse the case, and bring the ignorant here for cultivation?'

The foregoing accusations are grave, weighty, positive-involving a perilous responsibility, and requiring ample and irrefragable proof. They are expressed in vehement terms: but

to measure the propriety of language, we must first examine the character of the system, or the nature of the object, against which it is directed. If we see a person wilfully abusing the goods of an individual, we may reprehend him, but with comparative mildness. If we see him maiming, or in any way maltreating another man's cattle, we may increase the severity of our rebuke. But if we see him violating all the social and sacred relations of life,-daily defrauding a number of his fellow creatures of the fruits of their toil, calling them his property, selling them for money, lacerating their bodies, and ruining their souls, -we may use the strongest terms of moral indignation. Nor is plain and vehement denunciation of crime inconsistent with the most benevolent feelings towards the perpetrators of it. We are sustained in these positions by the example of Christ, and the apostles, and the prophets, and the reformers.

So, also, if there be an institution, the direct tendency of which is to perpetuate slavery, to encourage persecution, and to invigorate prejudice,-although many of its supporters may be actuated by pure motives,-it ought to receive unqualified condemnation.

What does

It is proper to call things by their right names. the law term him who steals your pocket-book, or breaks into your dwelling, or strips you on the highway? A robber! Is the charge inflammatory or unjust? or will it please the villain ? The abuse of language is seen only in its misapplication. Those who object to the strength of my denunciation must prove its perversion before they accuse me of injustice.

Probably I may be interrogated by individuals,— Why do you object to a colony in Africa? Are you not willing people should choose their own places of residence? And if the blacks are willing to remove, why throw obstacles in their path or deprecate their withdrawal? All go voluntarily of what, then, do you complain? Is not the colony at Liberia in a flourishing condition, and expanding beyond the most sanguine expectations of its founders ?'

:

Pertinent questions deserve pertinent answers. I say, then, in reply, that I do not object to a colony, in the abstract-to use the popular phraseology of the day. In other words,

I am

entirely willing men should be as free as the birds in choosing the time when, the mode how, and the place where they shall migrate. The power of locomotion was given to be used at will; as beings of intelligence and enterprise,

The world is all before them, where to choose
Their place of rest, and Providence their guide.'

The emigration from New-England to the far West is constant and large. Almost every city, town or village suffers annually by the departure of some of its adventurous inhabitants. Companies have been formed to go and possess the Oregon territory -an enterprise hazardous and unpromising in the extreme. The old States are distributing their population over the whole continent, with unexampled fruitfulness and liberality. But why this restless, roving, unsatisfied disposition? Is it because those who cherish it are treated as the offscouring of all flesh, in the place of their birth? or because they do not possess equal rights and privileges with other citizens? or because they are the victims of incorrigible hate and prejudice? or because they are told that they must choose between exilement and perpetual degradation? or because the density of population renders it impossible for them to obtain preferment and competence here? or because they are estranged by oppression and scorn? or because they cherish no attachment to their native soil, to the scenes of their childhood and youth, or to the institutions of government? or because they consider themselves as dwellers in a strange land, and feel a burning desire, a feverish longing to return home? No. They lie under no odious disabilities, whether imposed by public opinion or by legislative power; to them the path of preferment is wide open; they sustain a solid and honorable reputation; they not only can rise, but have risen, and may soar still higher, to responsible stations and affluent circumstances; no calamity afflicts, no burden depresses, no reproach excludes, no despondency enfeebles them; and they love the spot of their nativity almost to idolatry. The air of heaven is not freer or more buoyant than they. Theirs is a spirit of curiosity and adventurous enterprise, impelled by no malignant influences, but by the spontaneous promptings of

the mind. Far different is the case of our colored population. Their voluntary banishment is compulsory-they are forced to turn volunteers, as will be shown in other parts of this work.

The following proposition is self-evident: The success of an enterprise furnishes no proof that it is in accordance with justice, or that it meets the approbation of God, or that it ought to be prosecuted to its consummation, or that it is the fruit of disinterested benevolence.

I do not doubt that the Colony at Liberia, by a prodigal expenditure of life and money, will ultimately flourish; but a good result would no more hallow that persecution which is seeking to drag the blacks away, than it would if we should burn every distillery, and shut up in prison every vender of ardent spirits, in order to do good and to prevent people from becoming drunkards. Because Jehovah overrules evil for good, shall we therefore continue to do evil?

If ten thousand white mechanics, farmers, merchants, &c. &c. were to emigrate to Africa, does any man doubt whether permanent good would result from the enterprise-good to that benighted continent, which would counterbalance all the sacrifices and sufferings attending it? And yet is there a single mechanic, farmer or merchant, who feels it to be his duty, or would be willing to go? Suppose the people of color should get the power into their hands to-morrow, and should argue that the whites must not be admitted to equal privileges with themselves; but that, having so long plundered Africa, and oppressed her children, justice demanded that they should be sent to that desolate land to build up colonies, and carry the light of civilization and knowledge, as a sort of reparation-and that, having superior instruction in literature and science, they were peculiarly qualified for such a mission-how would this doctrine relish? It is a poor rule that will not work both ways,' says the proverb. Yet this logic would be more sound than is our own with regard to the colonization of the blacks.

On this point, deception is practised to a great extent. The advocates of the Colonization Society are constantly aiming to divert public attention from the only proper subject of inquiry, namely, Is it based upon benevolence and justice ?-to the [PART I.]

3