On the morning of Friday 25th, Frederick Douglass and William Lloyd Garrison ‘addressed a numerous meeting of ladies, convened by the Edinburgh Female Anti-Slavery Society.’1 Wrote Garrison: ‘We had a social ladies’ meeting, which was highly interesting, and they seemed to be greatly delighted.’2
And then in the evening they spoke for the second time at Brighton Street Church. Reports in the Scotsman, the Caledonian Mercury and the Edinburgh Evening Post overlap, but none contains all the details, so all three are reprinted below.
For an overview of Douglass’s activities in Edinburgh during the year, see Spotlight: Edinburgh.
AMERICAN SLAVERY
Last night a second meeting was held in the same place [i.e. Brighton Street Church]. The area of the chapel and a portion of the galleries were filled. Professor Dick occupied the chair. Mr Douglass opened the proceedings by reviewing two sermons which had been published in the State of Virginia, by a clergyman in that quarter, ‘for the peculiar edification of the slave, and for the comfort of the slaveholders.’
A person in the meeting, whose name we did not learn, complained that much time was taken up with one or two speeches, while he himself had something to say on the subject. Permission was then given him to ascend the platform, which he did, and commenced a long dissertation about slavery not being condemned in the Bible; and that in certain circumstances the Scriptures even enjoined the keeping of slaves. He said that he had not his Bible with him, but every one knew the facts for himself.
During the remarks of this speaker considerable amusement was created by his statements, as well as by his peculiar gesticulation.
Mr GARRISON then rose, and after some introductory remarks, alluded to the enormities committed in the slave states. From January 1845 to the time he reached this country – a period of eighteen months – he kept a list of the cases which had been inserted in the southern newspapers. This list of slave torture and oppression, although composed of paragraphs of only four or five lines, occupied, when pasted together many yards in length; and this notwithstanding it contained no record of the more common cases of ill-treatment, such as branding and whipping. He denied that the churches in America with which the Free Church held communion, increased any discipline whatever in regard to slaveholders. The Free Church, therefore, in consequence of this connection, must be regarded as implicated in the crime of American slavery.
He quoted the sentiments of a number of the American ministers as to the anti-slavery movement; one of whom called it a wicked, fierce, and wild agitation; and another threatened any of the abolitionists who crossed the Potomac river, and entered the Southern States, with the fate of Haman. He would not say that every minister in the slave states was in favour of slavery; but none of them had the courage or humanity to come forward and denounce the atrocious system.
He showed that the slave powers in America sought not only jurisdiction over the soil of that country, but over that of England and the world at large, in as much as if a coloured person were to visit the Southern States he might, without any crime being imputed to him, be seized, cast into prison, and sold as a slave. Here, therefore, was a ground on which Britain ought to protest against America for breaking her treaty of amity with this country, and trampling under foot the rights of British coloured subjects.
Mr Garrison, as bearing on this point, related several instances in which seamen who had gone to America in British ships were taken into custody, or forcibly banished from the country, on account of the colour of their skin. He also quoted the laws of some of the States, particularly that of South Carolina, in order to prove that if a British ambassador was to interfere for the purpose of obtaining the release of such coloured British subjects, he might himself be thrown into prison, and punished as a felon.3 Mr Garrison, while disclaiming all antipathy to the Free Church, concluded by calling on that church to ‘send back the money.’
Mr DOUGLASS said he had to mention, in regard to the Free Church, that the deputation sent out to America, although they attempted to deny it, were met on their arrival in New York, with remonstrances not to connect themselves with the slave churches of America; but they paid no heed to the remonstrances. On the contrary they held out their hand to the man-stealers, and gladly took the gold wrung from the blood and sinews of the slave to build their churches. He would, therefore, have the people of Edinburgh to revive the old musical cry of ‘send back the money,’ because he said the Free Church could be regarded as nothing else than a brotherhood of thieves, so long as they retained that money in their coffers. He trusted that the Anti-Slavery Society of Scotland would never let that church rest until she had sent back the stolen money that was in her coffers.
The Rev. Mr KIRK, seconded by the Rev. Mr ROBERTSON (Independent), then moved three resolutions, the first of which deprecated the conduct of the Free Church for holding communion with the slave churches of America, and for retaining in its treasury the ‘price of pollution and blood’ obtained from that country; the second resolution condemned the cowardly subserviency of the Evangelical Alliance to the pro-slavery delegates to America; and the third resolution expressed a grateful sense of the exertions which Mr Lloyd Garrison and others had made for the extinction of the accursed system of slavery. These resolutions on being put to the meeting were unanimously agreed to; and the proceedings closed with Mr Douglas giving an outline of his controversy with Dr Smythe.4
Scotsman, 26 September 1846
AMERICAN SLAVERY
A second meeting was held on Friday night in Brighton Street Church – Professor Dick in the chair.
Mr Douglass commenced his address by characterising slavery as a system which was at war with the law of God, and which aimed at the destruction of those faculties with which God has blessed man. Slavery (he said) laid its iron grasp upon the intellect of man, and declared it to be a crime to cultivate and expand the mind. God had made the happiness of mankind to depend upon the proper cultivation of their faculties, or their use and development, but slavery forbade their development, and would not allow their exercise. Slavery, in short, was at war with the noblest workmanship of God, and aimed at the destruction of all that was good in man, transforming him into a brute, and condemning him to perpetual servitude for the advantage of his master.
The cause of all those evils was the slaveholder, and it was impossible to extend the hand of fellowship to such a man without becoming a partaker of his sins, which he conceived the Evangelical Alliance to be. That body had conceived the slaveholder to be such as it could ally itself with, and he considered the refinement of their wickedness to lie in the manner in which they had adopted this measure. They held out the deceitful idea that a man could hold a slave not by his own fault, but that the blame might lie with another party, thus proclaiming by the sanctity of their name, that there were slaveholders in the United States of America who were not so by their own desire, and not for their own interest, and leaving the inference to be drawn, that such men were fit objects of commiseration rather than condemnation. The declaration of the Evangelical Alliance was calculated to do more harm to the cause of abolition than could arise from any other cause, for they had made out a case of innocent slaveholding, and excused the system in such a way as to mislead the judgment of the people of this country. These men of the Evangelical Alliance had furnished an excuse for the Free Church of Scotland, and given the slaveholders an apology he never dreamed of. But the broad eye of the Christian world was looking upon these things, and there were still a few faithful and true men who were willing to hazard their popularity for a time by endeavouring to wipe out this stain upon Christianity – (loud applause.)
Mr M’Arra claimed the right of being heard in reply to Mr Douglas, which having been conceded, he proceeded to state that his object was to prove that slavery was in some cases necessary and useful, and that, where it was so, it was authorised by Scripture. He then referred to the Old Testament in support of his views, contending that authority was extended to the Israelites to make the inhabitants of various cities that they conquered their slaves, to whom they consigned the most menial offices. The meeting becoming impatient, the chairman interfered, and declared, that, as Mr M’Arra was not speaking to the subject before the meeting, he could not be heard farther.
Mr Lloyd Garrison, after adverting to the assertions of the advocates for slavery, that the slaves were more comfortably situated than the labouring population of Europe, said that if the facts were true, the slaves did not seem to entertain that idea, for no expression to that effect was ever heard from them.
With reference to the character of the slaveholder, it would invariably be found that the men who struck down the liberties of mankind, and did not care for human life in one direction, were men who did not value life or liberty in any other; and of all the bloody minded and ferocious men to be found in the world, the men most ready to deprive each other of life, and act in the most merciless manner, were the American slaveholders.
Dr Candlish had said that a slaveholder must make out that he is such innocently before he could be admitted into the Christian Church; but the American Churches in no case went through that rigid examination, and he could assure them that such a case of innocent slaveholding never existed, and never would, while slavery existed. There was, therefore, no ground for the position assumed by the Free Church, which was one that sanctified slavery, and obstructed the progress of abolition.
Mr Garrison then adverted to the fact that free persons of colour, though British subjects, on landing in any of the Southern States of America from a British vessel, were liable to be seized and imprisoned, and if by accident they were left in prison, they would be sold to pay their expenses, and concluded by calling upon the people of Great Britain to protest against so unwarrantable an interference with the rights of British subjects.
The meeting shortly afterwards separated.
Caledonian Mercury, 28 September 1846
AMERICAN SLAVERY
A public meeting was held on Friday night in Brighton Street Chapel – Professor Dick in the chair – to afford an opportunity to the American abolitionists, Mr Lloyd Garrison and Mr Frederick Douglass, the fugitive slave, of reviewing the position which the Free Church and the Evangelical Alliance have assumed in regard to American slavery.
Mr Douglass said that slavery was at war with the noblest workmanship of God, and aimed at the destruction of all that was good in man, transforming him into a brute, and condemning him into perpetual servitude for the advantage of his master.
The cause of all those evils was the slaveholder, and it was impossible to extend the hand of fellowship to such a man without becoming a partaker of his sins, which he conceived the Evangelical Alliance to be. That body had conceived the slaveholder to be such as it could ally itself with, and he considered the refinement of their wickedness to lie in the manner in which they had adapted this measure. They held out the deceitful idea that a man could hold a slave not by his own fault, but that the blame might lie with another party, thus proclaiming by the sanctity of their name, that there were slaveholders in the United States of America, who were so not by their own desire, and not for their own interest, and leaving the inference to be drawn that such men were fit objects of commiseration rather than condemnation. The declaration of the Evangelical Alliance was calculated to do more harm to the cause of abolition than could arise from any other cause, for they had made out a case of innocent slaveholding, and excused the system in such a way as to mislead the judgment of the people of this country. These men of the Evangelical Alliance had furnished an excuse for the Free Church of Scotland, and given the slaveholders an apology he never dreamed of. But the broad eye of the Christian world was looking upon these things, and there were a still a few faithful and true men who were wiling to hazard their popularity for a time by endeavouring to wipe out this stain from Christianity. (Loud applause.)
Mr M’Arra claimed the right of being heard in reply to Mr Douglass, which having been conceded, he proceeded to state that his object was to prove that slavery was in some cases necessary and useful, and that, where it was so, it was authorised by Scripture. He then referred to the Old Testament in support of his views, contending that authority was extended to the Israelites to make the inhabitants of various cities that they conquered their slaves, to whom they consigned the most menial offices. The meeting becoming impatient, the Chairman interfered, and declared that, as Mr M’Arras was not speaking to the subject before the meeting, he could not be heard farther.
Mr Lloyd Garrison, after adverting to the assertions of the advocates for slavery, that the slaves were more comfortably situated than the labouring population of Europe, said that if the fact were true, the slaves did not seem to entertain that idea, ,for no expression to that effect was ever heard from them.
With reference to the character of the slaveholder, it would invariably be found that the men who struck down the liberties of mankind, and did not care for human life in one direction, were men who did not value life or liberty in any other; and of all the bloody minded and ferocious men to be found in the world, the men most ready to deprive each other of life, and act in the most merciless manner, were the American slaveholders.
Dr Candlish had said that a slaveholder must make out that he is such innocently, before he could be admitted into the Christian Church; but the American churches in no case went through that rigid examination, and he could assure them that such a case of innocent slaveholding never existed, and never would, while slavery existed. There was, therefore, no ground for the position assumed by the Free Churuch, which was one that sanctified slavery, and obstructed the progress of abolition.
Mr Garrison then adverted to the fact that free persons of colour, though British subjects, on landing in any of the southern states of America from a British vessel, were liable to be seized and imprisoned, and if by accident they were left in prison, they would be sold to pay their expenses and concluded by calling upon the people of Great Britain to protest against so unwarrantable an interference with the rights of British subjects.
Mr Douglass said he had to mention, in regard to the Free Church, that the deputation sent out to America, although they attempted to deny it, were met on their arrival in New York with remonstrances not to connect themselves with the slave churches of America; but they themselves paid no heed to the remonstrances. On the contrary, they held out their hand to the man stealers, and gladly took the gold wrung from the blood and sinews of the slave to build their churches. He would, therefore, have the people of Edinburgh to revive the old musical cry of ‘Send back the money;’ because he said the Free Church could be regarded as nothing else than a brotherhood of thieves, so long as they retained that money in their coffers. He trusted that the Anti-Slavery Society of Scotland would never let that church rest until she had sent back the stolen money that was in her coffers.
The Rev. Mr Kirk, seconded by the Rev. Mr Robertson (Independent), then moved three resolutions, the first of which deprecated the conduct of the Free Church for holding communion with the slave churches of America, and for retaining in its treasury the ‘price of pollution and blood’ obtained from that country; the second resolution condemned the cowardly subserviency of the Evangelical Alliance to the pro-slavery delegates of America; and the third resolution expressed a grateful sense of the exertions which Mr Lloyd Garrison and others had made for the extinction of the accursed system of slavery. These resolutions, on being put to the meeting, were unanimously agreed to; and the proceedings closed with Mr Douglass giving an outline of his controversy with Dr Smythe.
Edinburgh Evening Post, 30 September 1846
NOTES
- Andrew Paton to Edmund Quincy, Glasgow, 2 October 1846, reprinted in Liberator, 30 October 1846.
- William Lloyd Garrison to Richard D. Webb, Edinburgh, 30 September 1846, reprinted in The Letters of William Lloyd Garrison. Volume 3: No Union with Slave-Holders, edited by Walter M. Merrill (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1973), p. 430.
- For an analysis of South Carolina’s Negro Seamen Acts see Edlie Wong, Neither Fugitive Nor Free: Atlantic Slavery, Freedom Suits, and the Legal Culture of Travel (New York: New York University Press, 2009), pp. 183–239.
- Thomas Smyth, of the Second Presbyterian Church in Charleston, South Carolina, played a leading role in raising funds for the Free Church of Scotland, and visited Britain and Ireland in 1846. During his visit he repeated a rumour that Douglass had ‘been seen coming out of a Brothel in Manchester’. Douglass’ lawyers eventually forced a retraction. See Thomas Smyth, Autobiographical Notes, Letters and Reflections, ed. Louisa Cleves Stoney (Charleston: Walker, Evans & Cogswell Co., 1914), pp. 362–78. The rumour itself is specified in a letter from Douglass’s lawyers in Belfast dated 16 July 1846 (p. 372). See Iain Whyte, ‘Send Back the Money!’: The Free Church of Scotland and American Slavery (Cambridge: James Clarke, 2012), pp. 113–16. The affair is summarised in the Edinburgh Evening Post, 19 August 1846.