Press enter after choosing selection

Abolition Is Democracy

Abolition Is Democracy image
Parent Issue
Day
9
Month
June
Year
1841
Copyright
Public Domain
OCR Text

Does any one. doubt the truth of this caption ? If the conduct of the Democratie party Í3 taken for cvidence, every one may well doubt it. When we look at the bitter hostiliiy exhibited by members of this party, to anti-slavery agents and paperd and measures, we should naturally conclude, that the principies of the two classes were the direct antipodes of each other; that they possessed a repulsive power that would forever separate them, and that they. could no more mingle in ihe same creed, than sin and holiness can unite IQ heavcn. But party spirit wil! stoop to any thing. There is no independnee about it. Vet tt dreams of liberty and equality, when the fetters are fastening upon its nncles, and ils hands are bound. Like a maniac in bis cage, ihe democratie party prate of equal rights and universal liberty, while southern mad-caps die- late their measures, and guide them at their pleasure. There is not a man at the North, of information euíFicient to judge correctly upon the subject, who will deny that slavery is both a poiitical and moral evil. But the South say if you meddle with it, 'you will lose our votes i" And would as soon tread on the tail of a Boa-con3trictor, as to irrítate southern chivalry. Mercy onus! - they are ready to cryj what could we do without your votes!! But democracy and abolitionism are in reality the same in principie, and ali the malice displayed by the democratie party against abolitionists, is an attack also upon their own princiciple?. It has been shown time and again that the foundation principie of both was the same: "equal rights." it is a declaración of our Constitution - and every body is crying, "equal rights," equal rights!" But when I compare their actions with their words, the conduct of democratie politicians toward the slave, reminds me of a demon, who will lure a soul to heil by preaching the gospel of Christ. I have collected a few resolutions passcd at democratie conventions the past winter, to Ilústrate this positionj and 1 cali upon the delegates to those convenlions to reconcile them with slavery. - The Rockingham Councillor District Convention resolved "ihat all lawsina republican government should be based on equal and exact justice o all." Here is a declaration of sentiments that every aboütionist would subscribe; - but the difference is, the one would carry his sentiment out in practice, and the otber would tar an'l feather him for doing so. Again, the Senatorial Convention, District No. I, resolved "ihat in supporting democratie principies, we are governed by good will to all; ihat our object is not to molest the rich, but todo justice to thepoor; that government was instituted for the common benefit - not to bestow exclusive privileges; that whenever the tendency of legislation has been such as to pervert government to private uses, rendering the condition of men unequal, and injurious to the common good, it is the right, it is the duty of the people to seek redress in any rational manner." Who ihat has witnesed the conduct of the democratie party for a few ycars past, would have thought suuh a resolution wouid have originated and been ndoptxd in such a meeting? I verily believe if P. Pillsbury, or S. S.Foster, were to introduce the same, in a similar convention, he would be hissed out of the company. Did the delegates to this condition mean to say it? or was it a trick played oli" upon them? Was it the delibérate opinión oí'that convention that ''the people oughtto seek redress in uny ralional manner," when the tendency of legislation was such as to render the condition of men unequal? If so, why do they not altempt to obtain a repeal of tho slave laws, the most abominable code of usurpation and tyrann3r on the one hand, and of degrada tion on the other? If it is their "object to do justice to the poor," as they teil us, where can they fiud a better opportunity to display their benevolence than in doing justice to the slave? - fur of all the poor men in ihis miserable world, he is the poorest; his very person is not his own. - If it is objected that as citizens of NewIlampshire the subject is beyond their province - I ask if New-IIampshire democracy and southern democracy are not the same. Are they not in f'ull fellowship with each other? Do they not commune at the same table, and worship at the same shrine? Indeed they are the same. Southern democracy is slaveholding, and Northern democracy is aiding and assisting - and the contemptible hypocrisy that will pass such a resolution, under such circumstances, is absolutely repulsive to every refleding ruind, that will tako the trouble . look at it. Abolitionisic are cmly asking the democracy of our country to carry out their own declarcd principies - ío be consistent with themselves - "to show Lheir good will lo all" - "to do justice to the poor" - flot to bestow exclusive privileges" - nor " render the condition of men unequal." We only ask for this, and what io we get in return? Let democraisswerit - they very well know it. Butthe new County of Belknap starts off in real old fashioned Seventy-Sixstyle She will yet have to take a lecture for her rush re solves. Modern democracy can't bear thera - or rather it can't Lear to be told of them. Just look here! - ''Resolved that we are for equal rights against partial legislation"! - ''Resolved, that we are in favor of universal education"!! - "Resolved, that we are in favor of univorsal suffrage"!!! Now I ask ihe delégales to this Belfcnap County Convenlion - holden at the Coffee House at Meredith Bridge, Honorable Samuel Tilton, Chairman, and Col Joshua L. Woodraan, Secretary - to sit down and look at these resolutions. They wül not deny that such were passed at the convention; but I presume they were forgotten before the delegates Ieit the Cofi'ee Íiou3e. And after ihey have well digcsted the subject, fa humble and despised abolitionist, a tiller of the soil, with "huge paws" rnay presume to ask so great favor, I would request some one among them to teil what they meanl by "equal riglits,1 "universal education," and "universal suflrage." Would they elevale the black man so high as to make his rights equal to their own? No- this can hardly be expeeted. It is feared that after all, equal rights in their vocabulary, means partial rights or no rights at all when applied to a negro. This again, Í6 democratie consistency. But this "universal education.'' What would the good democral3 of this State and Connecticut, who have been engaged in breaking up schools for the blacks think of that? Oh they would think, no doubt, t is a very fine thing to pass such resolutions, but it is a most nefarious business to practice them. The passage of them shows a liberal spirit. - The resolution has passed, and to be sure, it embraces negroes, we are sorry for it, but there is no help for it now. This will be the reflection, or something similar to this, by those democrats who moved off ihe Academy, and, brook up Miss Grandaü's school, while all the party approved of it. But Belknap won't say so next year. Then there is this "universal suffrage." What! would go to the ballotbox beside a negro! No, no - we don't mean so. Universal means it don't mean universal. Walk to the ballot box with a negro'. No- we would'nt sit in tha room, nor walk the street, if we could help it, nor ëo to meeting with hin),unles3 he had an enclosure in one corner of the meeting house, where he could be caged up by himself. Belknap displays in her resolutions, the most rank abolitionism. I do not know a single individual in the County, but I do know what democratie consistency is, as it is generally exhibited, and judging by th3 should conclude that Belknap was one of the most bitter Counties, in her opposition toabolitionists, lo be found in the State. Jn conclusión, let me ask if it weuld not be more hgnest in all parties, to act out their principies, than it would to pass such resolutions as the above and then viólate every principie they contain ? These resolutions are in truth democratie; and they are such only in theory - while the abolitionists are democratie in theory and practice both - at least they would carry their principies out farther, and show less inconsistency in their conduct than demccrats do.I make use of üns expression because demagoguea oflatc, in one party at least, have a great regard for the "huge pavv," and am led on this account to look more confidently for answer.