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

[424] perish ignominiously. If we resolve upon it, we can have a good meeting.

The call for the Sabbath, ministerial and church Convention is beginning to make a mighty stir among the priesthood, and even to fill with dismay some of our professed anti-slavery friends. Cowards! not to know that truth is mightier than error, and that it is darkness, and not light, that is afraid of investigation. Several of our subscribers have already discontinued their papers on account of the publication of the call in the Liberator, and more, I suppose, will soon follow their¹ example. The New Hampshire Panoply, Vermont Chronicle, New York Observer, Zion's Herald, Boston Transcript, Greenfield Gazette, Lynn Puritan, American Sentinel, etc., etc., are out in full blast about it. They attribute it all to me, of course; some of them insisting that my name is appended to the call. You will see, in the next Liberator, what they have said. This² will be the occasion of a fresh attack upon my devoted head, and also upon the Liberator, to crush it. But, truly, none of these things disturb me. I can ‘smile at Satan's rage, and face a frowning world,’ for my trust is in the Lord, and Christ is my Redeemer. Dear George, come on to the Convention, and do not say, ‘I cannot.’ Bring bro. Wright with you, and³ friend Coe, and as many of the Brooklyn friends as possible. These are solemn, glorious, stirring times to live in! Let us do with our might what our hands find to do. So, come along! . . .

Bro. May speaks of his visit to Brooklyn with a great deal⁴ of pleasure. He will be at the Sabbath Convention. . . .

No adequate report of the Convention was ever made. It met at the Chardon-Street Chapel on November 17,⁵ 1840, and sat for three days, without arriving at any conclusion or adopting any resolutions. The roll of members embraced, besides the persons already enumerated, Francis Jackson, Henry G. Chapman, Samuel Philbrick, William Adams, Andrew Robeson, James Russell Lowell, George Ripley, C. P. Cranch, and not a few ladies. Among the interested but passive spectators⁶ were Dr. Channing, who, as Theodore Parker reports, doubted the propriety of the Convention, ‘since it looks like seeking agitation, and [he] fears the opinion of Garrison, Quincy, and Maria W. Chapman’; and R. W. Emerson, who has left the best—indeed, an ideal—