decision of the Society, nor his abrupt discontinuance of1
the paper and refusal to surrender the subscription lists, following Leavitt
example, could disenchant.
A new schism resulted, of limited extent though marked by bitter feeling, and was fostered by the New-Organization and Liberty-Party spirit, ever intent on2
profiting by dissensions in the abolition ranks.
Further details of the controversy belong to a history of the antislavery movement.
's connection with it, as shown above, cost him not only his standing in Rogers
's disordered estimation, but a fresh measure of abuse from the latter's sympathizers and abettors.
Hard enough was the office task of the editor of the Liberator
in this crowded year 1844, when the press of3
matter claiming admission to his columns was full beyond precedent.
The disunion campaign; the hot Presidential canvass, ending in the election of Polk
and the national4
confirmation of Tyler
's Texan policy; Tyler
extraordinary appeal from the Senate, rejecting his treaty, to the House
, for which John Quincy Adams
would have had6
him impeached, as endeavoring to declare a foreign war without the consent of the Senate; Tyler
's message at the7
next session, pointing to the plebiscit in his favor, and urging an act of annexation; McDuffie
's resolution to this8
end—all this was but a part of what our chronicler of the time had to record as fully as possible, let alone the voluminous documents in the Rogers affair.
The year opened with Congressional debates over the Massachusetts
resolves in favor of abrogating the three-fifths9
slaverepresentation clause in the Federal Constitution
—a premium, as Charles Francis Adams
rightly affirmed, on10
the perpetuation of slavery, and, as the elder Adams
showed (in a minority report on the resolves),11
the foundation of a privileged order of citizens, a slaveholding oligarchy, tending infallibly to absorb the leading offices of the Government
as well as of the Slave States
By votes of 121 to 18 and 127 to 41 the House
's resolutions declaring the three-fifths compromise