previous next
‘ [91] ought not to be approbated by any genuine abolitionist. “He that is not with us is against us.” ’1

While this censure was in the press the following was being penned for private reading:

W. L. Garrison to William Goodell, at Providence.

Brooklyn, February 26, 1836.
2 My Dearly beloved coadjutor: Your very kind, instructive and acceptable letter of yesterday has been received, for which I return you many thanks.

I perceive that bro. George has misapprehended me, 3 respecting my contemplated review of Dr. Channing's book. Whether I shall give my criticisms to the public through the medium of the Liberator exclusively, or whether they will appear in another form, I have not yet determined, for they remain to be written. At the longest, I shall make only a small pamphlet—not ‘a book.’ Nor is it my design to taunt the Dr. on the ground of ‘plagiarism,’ because many of his thoughts are like our thoughts, and much of his language is like our language. It would partake too much of the ridiculous, and savor too strongly of vanity or churlishness, for any abolition writer to plume himself upon having anticipated other writers in vindicating certain fundamental doctrines, appertaining to governments and the rights of man. Be assured, such a course is foreign both to my disposition and purpose.

It is true, I mean to draw some parallel resemblances between Dr. Channing and certain ‘ultra’ abolition writers, i. e., from their disquisitions—and for several reasons. First—To show


1 Compare this judgment, for severity, with John Quincy Adams's (from quite another point of view), in the following extract from his Diary under date of Jan. 8, 1836: ‘Read part of a pamphlet on slavery by the Rev. Dr. Channing, of Boston. He treats the subject so smoothly that some of the Southern slaveholders have quoted it with approbation as favoring their side of the question; but it is in fact an inflammatory, if not an incendiary publication. There is a chapter containing an exposition of the nature and character of slavery; then, one upon rights; and then, one of explanations. These have a very jesuitical complexion. The wrong or crime of slavery is set forth in all its most odious colors; and then the explanations disclaim all imputation of criminality upon the slaveholders. There are some remarks, certainly just, upon the relaxation of the moral principle in its application to individual obligation, necessarily resulting from ancient and established institutions. But this is an exceedingly nice and difficult line to draw, and belongs at least as much to the science of casuistry as to that of ethics.’

2 Ms.

3 G. W. Benson.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide Places (automatically extracted)

View a map of the most frequently mentioned places in this document.

Sort places alphabetically, as they appear on the page, by frequency
Click on a place to search for it in this document.
Providence, R. I. (Rhode Island, United States) (1)

Download Pleiades ancient places geospacial dataset for this text.

hide People (automatically extracted)
Sort people alphabetically, as they appear on the page, by frequency
Click on a person to search for him/her in this document.
W. E. Channing (3)
William Goodell (1)
William Lloyd Garrison (1)
George W. Benson (1)
John Quincy Adams (1)
hide Dates (automatically extracted)
Sort dates alphabetically, as they appear on the page, by frequency
Click on a date to search for it in this document.
February 26th, 1836 AD (1)
January 8th, 1836 AD (1)
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: