declared that in due time they would meet to urge their principles in Faneuil Hall--a most audacious declaration, but he was right.
The writer, when a boy, was witness to an exhibition of the same spirit.
A kinsman of his was a zealous Abolitionist, although not particularly gifted with controversial acumen.
He and his minister, as often happened, were discussing the slavery question.
The minister, like many of his cloth at that time, was a staunch supporter of “the institution,” which, according to his contention, firmly rested on biblical authority.
“How do you expect to destroy slavery, as it exists in Kentucky
, by talking and voting abolition up here in Ohio
asked the clergyman.
“We will crush it through Congress when we get control of the general government,” said my kinsman.
“But Congress and the general government have, under the Constitution
, absolutely no power over slavery in the States.
It is a State institution,” replied the clergyman.
It is unnecessary to follow the discussion, but, one after another, the quicker-witted and better-informed preacher successfully combated all the propositions advanced by my relative in trying to give a reason for the faith that was in him, until he was completely cornered.
“Well,” said he at last, “the good Lord
has not taken me into His confidence, and I don't know what His plans for upsetting slavery are, but He will be able to manage it somehow.”
My kinsman lived long enough to see the day