Francis Jackson Garrison, William Lloyd Garrison, 1805-1879; the story of his life told by his children: volume 2

‘ [372] such an assembly as the present, he should be acting in opposition to what he considered the word of God.’ Cheers and more confusion ensued. Another clergyman, the Rev. John Angell James, of Birmingham, thought the question prejudicial to the cause. It was new in England and unsettled in America, and involved far wider considerations than slavery. Imitating the facetiousness of the Rev. Mr. Burnet, he said that if the women yielded this point, it would be one more laurel in their Martyr Age.

James G. Birney deprecated the impression that had been conveyed by George Thompson and some of the American speakers, that the question was settled in the United States. On the contrary, it had, since his departure from that country, led to a split in the American Anti-Slavery Society, and to the founding of a new organization from which women would be excluded. A similar separation had taken place in Massachusetts. ‘Besides,’ he continued, with a wide divergence from the facts, ‘most of those who were for the rights of women were also in favor of what was called the nohuman-government system.’ Mr. Phillips denied this in his own behalf, in remarks which terminated the debate; and, the vote being taken, an overwhelming majority gave the victory to sectarianism by adopting Mr. Stacey's substituted resolution.¹

George Thompson then said: ‘I hope that as the question is now decided, it will never be again brought. forward; and I trust that Mr. Phillips will give us the assurance that we shall proceed with one heart and one mind.’ To this Mr. Phillips responded: ‘I have no doubt of it. There is no unpleasant feeling in our minds. I have no doubt that the women will sit with as much interest behind the bar as though the original proposition ’