render his character base and contemptible with posterity.
What the people need is a new government—a free government—no slavery—no guaranties to men-stealers— “no Union with slaveholders!”
We might end here, if it were not instructive to remark on Liberty Party endorsement of the Mexican War
, even1 Gamaliel Bailey
, in his Philanthropist
, praying for the safety of the ‘noble’ Taylor
and his ‘brave army.’
There were other proofs that the party was in a bad way. In the spring of 1846 one of its thirty organs affirmed that ‘its present position is inaction
—a perfect standstill
Almost ‘at a dead stand’ was William Goodells
report of progress, speaking both for New York and for Massachusetts
the State Convention admitted that the party there merely held its own, and looked forward to ‘certain death’ for the party at large if the stationary stage were not quickly escaped—Joshua Leavitt
being present, and discounting the impending catastrophe by denying that the party and the ballot-box were the sole4
means of abolishing slavery.
gave a discouraging account of the Ohio
section, and predicted that all would be over with it if it manifested no strength in the coming gubernatorial election.
lamented in New5
York a falling away on all sides, and W. L. Chaplin
and J. C. Jackson
confirmed his statements.
Only one dollar was raised to ten formerly.
judged it at6
this time to be on its last legs; and the fall elections showed that it could send only five Representatives out of7
232 to the Massachusetts
, polling a total vote of about 10,000.
In New York it cast but 12,000 votes,8
against 16,000 in 1844.
was quite right in9
There are many more A. S. Whigs and Democrats than10 Third Party men, and many more Whig papers, especially, which are more thoroughly anti-slavery than any of the Third11 Party ones.
There is not a Third Party paper that compares in thoroughness and usefulness with the Boston Whig, or even the N. Y. Tribune.
And they have not a man who comes near Charles