Chapter 12: American Anti-slavery Society.—1833.Garrison finds a mob prepared for him on landing in New York, and a would-be mob in Boston. Visiting Canterbury, he is served with the delayed libel writs, but is never brought to trial. In December he effects the organization at Philadelphia of a National Anti-slavery Society, of which he draws up the Declaration of sentiments.
Time would vindicate the essentially patriotic service which Mr. Garrison had rendered by cementing the alliance between British philanthropy and American abolitionism; but, for the moment, his faithful exposure of the national guilt of slaveholding—his ‘washing dirty linen abroad’—caused him to be looked upon at home as the detractor and enemy of his country. Not only what he had himself said in Exeter Hall, but O'Connell's contemptuous treatment of the colonization ‘humbug,’ and tremendous denunciation of American slave-owners, were treasured up against his return. The colonization organs sedulously fanned the public heat caused by the wounding of the national amour propre, and the mind of the respectable classes was prepared for any form of popular resentment against Mr. Garrison by the publication, in the Boston Daily Advertiser and in Niles' Register, while he was still afloat, of Harrison Gray Otis's letter to a South Carolinian, already referred to. Cresson, too,1 had written to the N. Y. Commercial Advertiser: ‘I have2 only time by this packet to tell thee that Garrison and the Anti-Slavery Society are fully employed in endeavoring to crush me, hunt the Colonization Society out of the country, and vilify our national character.’ The flame broke out by reason of an ‘unpremeditated3 coincidence’ for which Mr. Garrison was in no wise responsible. Notices of a public meeting to form that New York City Anti-Slavery Society which he had effectively encouraged on his departure, were read from the4  pulpits5 on the very day the Hannibal cast anchor in New York harbor, and the Courier and Enquirer at once associated it with his arrival. The notorious Garrison has returned; the ‘friends of immediate emancipation’ are summoned to meet together. ‘What, then, is to be6 done? Are we tamely to look on, and see this most dangerous species of fanaticism extending itself through society? . . . Or shall we, by promptly and fearlessly crushing this many-headed Hydra in the bud, expose the weakness as well as the folly, madness, and mischief of these bold and dangerous men?’ Everybody, continued the editor, favors immediate emancipation with compensation, and accordingly he recommended the mob to accept the invitation to attend at Clinton Hall, that same evening (October 2), and to join in the calm and temperate discussion of the different propositions. A communication to the same paper from the ‘Ghost of Peter the Hermit’ predicted slaughter as the result of the antislavery crusade, ‘if you listen to my voice now, and to the solicitations of the pacific Garrison. He will undoubtedly have great weight with you from having abused and maligned your country with such patriotic ardor abroad! He comes in the flush of triumph, and with the flatteries still on his ear of those who wish not well to your country.’ Similar incentives were employed by the Standard of the same date: ‘In this matter we7 have a duty to perform, not to ourselves alone, but to our brethren of the South. . . . We are not astonished at the excitement which the acts of Garrison and his friends have produced in this community. . . . Let the people look to it.’ Meantime, placards were posted about the city bearing the following significant
How Mr. Garrison spent the interval between Sunday and Wednesday evenings (unless at quarantine) is not known, nor whether he had met with his anti-slavery associates in the city up to the hour of the meeting, towards which, as a simple spectator, he made his way in the midst of a large and threatening crowd. Arrived at Clinton Hall,9 it was found closed. The Trustees, Arthur Tappan excepted, had withdrawn their permission to hold the meeting, which accordingly had been quietly adjourned to the Chatham-Street Chapel,10 where organization was effected and a constitution barely adopted before the mob, which had meantime been passing resolutions in Tammany Hall, burst in on the heels of the retreating members. The story of the riot has been told in the “Life of Arthur Tappan” (pp. 168-175) and in Johnson's Garrison and his Times (p. 145). Mr. Garrison's relations to it are all that can concern us here. Swaggering John Neal,11 who, naturally enough as a ‘notorious Colonizationist,’ took a leading part in it, has left  this blundering account in his “Wandering Recollections of a somewhat busy life” :
As I happened to be going through New York, with my12 wife, on our way to the Western country, and thence to Europe, in 1834, or 1835, I should say, I found myself one day in the Courier and Enquirer office, where, by the way, I first met with Mr. Bennett, who had just been secured for that paper, and13 was there introduced to me by Colonel Webb. I was informed14 that a meeting was called in the Park, by William Lloyd Garrison, for that very evening. After some talk, I consented to take a hand. It was arranged that we should all go to the meeting, and adjourn to Old Tammany, and that there I should offer a resolution, which was to be seconded by Mr. Graham,15 afterward postmaster. We went, took possession of the meeting, and adjourned to Tammany; and I had the greatest difficulty in crowding my way up to the platform all out of breath, choked with dust, and steaming with perspiration, where I called for Mr. Garrison, or any of his friends, to appear; promising them safe conduct and fair play. But nobody answered. I made a short speech: Graham backed out; and the resolutions were passed with a roar like that you may sometimes hear in the Bay of Fundy. On my way out, I was completely surrounded, lifted off my feet, and carried by storm into a cellar, and, by the time we were seated at the table, out sprang half a score of bowieknives, and as many pistols; and at least a dozen cards were handed me, with “Alabama,” “Georgia,” and “South Carolina,” under the names. They had proposed, a few minutes before, to go after Garrison, to some church, where they were told he was to be found; and went so far as to say that, when I called for him, if he had appeared on the platform, they would have “rowed him up Salt River.” And then they asked me if I had not seen their handbill. I had not, nor heard it mentioned; but it seems that in the afternoon they had issued a poster, calling upon the “men of the South” to be present at the meeting, which was to take place in the Park. I told them what would have been the consequences, if they had meddled with Garrison where I was; for we were banded together, Colonel Webb, Mr. Graham, and perhaps twenty more, with a determination to see fair play, at the risk of our lives—taking it for granted that free discussion could do the cause of truth no harm. To this my new Southern friends assented, at last,  and gave up the idea of tearing down a church because a hunted man had found shelter with the women there; and we parted in peace.16The contemporary record of Neal's exploits (in which his potential control of the mob naturally does not appear) reads as follows:
In the course of his remarks, he gave a correct portrait of17 Garrison, whom he designated as a man who had gone through this country as far as he had dared, to promulgate his doctrines, and had also crossed the Atlantic with the same object. He stated that Garrison and his associates were willing to trample the Constitution under foot, by the influence of anti-slavery societies; and the object of the present call was to appoint an Auxiliary Society to that already established in the Eastern States by himself and a few deluded followers.An eye-witness of the mob describes it as ‘a genuine,18 drunken, infuriated mob of blackguards of every species, some with good clothes, and the major part the very sweepings of the city.’ ‘The shouting, screaming, and cursing for Tappan and Garrison defy all belief.’ A merchant in respectable circumstances said: ‘If I had my will, or if I could catch him, Garrison should be packed up in a box with air-holes, marked “this side up,” and so shipped to Georgia.’19 The Commercial Advertiser20 confirmed this report: ‘In regard to Wm. Lloyd Garrison, the misguided young gentleman who has just returned from England, whither he has recently been for  the sole purpose, as it would seem, of traducing the people and institutions of his own country,21 and who, it was supposed, was to have taken an active part in this meeting, but one sentiment appeared to prevail. We will not record the expressions of disgust and abhorrence which were coupled with his name.’ Had he been present, many ‘grave and respectable citizens’ would have consented to his being tarred and feathered. ‘We hope, most sincerely, that not a hair of Mr. Garrison's head will ever be injured by personal violence; but he will do well to consider that his course of conduct in England has kindled a spirit of hostility towards him at home which cannot be easily allayed. He will act wisely never to attempt addressing a public meeting in this country again.’ The Evening Post could not credit the stories of 22 threatened violence to Mr. Garrison: ‘The mere feeling of magnanimity towards an antagonist so feebly supported, with so few adherents, with so little sympathy in his favor, should have forbidden the expression of such a design, even uttered as an unmeaning menace. We should be sorry that any invasion of his personal rights should occur to give him consequence, and to increase the number of his associates. Garrison is a man who, whatever may be the state of his mind on other topics, is as mad as the winds on the slavery question.’ It added: ‘We know of no question of public policy on which public opinion is so unanimous’ as that of discountenancing the abolitionists. Deplorably ignorant of what he owed to Neal's friendly protection, but well aware how much restraint magnanimity had imposed on the mob with reference to himself, Mr. Garrison pursued his journey to Boston, where his approach had also stirred the spirit of violence. On Monday, October 7, the following handbill was generally circulated throughout the city: 
This base appeal sufficed to surround the Liberator25 office that night with ‘a dense mob, breathing threatenings which foreboded a storm.’ But as yet, even in Boston, Mr. Garrison was so little known to the public that he might, as in New York, have mingled unsuspected with his pursuers. In fact, nothing came of the demonstration except a silly suggestion by the Post, that the inflammatory handbill had ‘been printed26 and distributed by friends of Mr. Garrison’; and the equally silly comment of the incredulous Transcript, that Mr. Garrison was ‘not quite so mad, (lunatic as he is, on the subject of negro slaves and slavery,) as to excite still further the indignation of his fellowcitizens by such or any similar act of indiscretion and folly.’ The madman (by the concurrent judgment of  two cities) paid his respects to both the mobs and their promoters at his first opportunity, in the Liberator:
To the charge made against me by the cowardly ruffian27 who conducts the New York Courier and Enquirer,28 and by the miserable liar and murderous hypocrite of the New York Commercial Advertiser,29 of having slandered my country abroad, I reply that it is false. All that I uttered in England in reference to the institutions and practices of the United States shall be given to the public. I did not hesitate there—I have not hesitated here—I shall hesitate nowhere, to brand this country as hypocritical and tyrannical in its treatment of the people of color, whether bond or free. If this be calumny, I dealt freely in it, as I shall deal, as long as slavery exists among us—or, at least, as long as the power of utterance is given to my tongue. Still—slavery aside—I did not fail to eulogize my country, before a British audience, in terms of affection, admiration and respect. As to the menaces and transactions of the New York mob, I regard them with mingled emotions of pity and contempt. I was an eye-witness of that mob, from the hour of its assembling at Clinton Hall to its final assault upon the Chatham-Street Chapel—standing by it, undisguisedly, as calm in my feelings as if those who were seeking my life were my warmest supporters.30 The frantic annunciation of the worthless Webb—— “The Agitators Defeated! The Constitution Triumphant!” —is extremely ludicrous. It is not possible that even that wretched man can, for a moment, delude himself with the notion that any abolitionist will abandon the holy cause which he has espoused, in consequence of any threats or any acts of personal violence. For myself, I am ready to brave any danger, even unto death. I feel no uneasiness either in regard to my fate or to the success of the cause of abolition. Slavery must speedily be abolished: the blow that shall sever the chains of the slaves may shake the nation to its centre—may momentarily disturb the pillars of the Union—but it shall redeem the character, extend the influence, establish the security, and increase the prosperity of our great republic. I cannot express the admiration which I feel in view of the moral courage and unshrinking determination of those who assembled at Chatham-Street Chapel, in despite of peril and  reproach, for the purpose of organizing an Anti-Slavery Society. The Constitution which they adopted breathes an excellent spirit, and is sound in principle. Such men can never be intimidated by the vile. The whole of this disgraceful excitement owes its origin and execution to the prominent advocates of the Colonization Society.31 The first who had the hardihood to stigmatize me as having gone abroad to calumniate my country, were those wholesale dealers in falsehood and scurrility, Robert S. Finley, Joshua N. Danforth, and Cyril Pearl. An attempt to create an excitement was made on my arrival in this city, by some anonymous blackguard, which met with partial success. The effect of these proceedings cannot fail to be highly favorable to the cause of emancipation.A month later, as promised, Mr. Garrison printed the ground of his offence against his countrymen, accompanying it with this explanation:Glory to them who die in this great cause!
Mobs—judges—can inflict no brand of shame,
Or shape of death, to shroud them from applause!
No! manglers of the martyr's earthly frame,
Your hangmen fingers cannot touch his fame.
Still in this guilty land there shall be some
Proud hearts—the shrine of Freedom's vestal flame;
Long trains of ill may pass unheeded—dumb—
But Vengeance is behind, and Justice is to come!
The Liberator of this morning embodies all the slanders32 which I uttered in England against the American Colonization Society and the United States. The speeches which were delivered at the great meeting held in Exeter Hall, and which have caused so much excitement among the colonization crusaders and their backers the mobocracy, were all taken down by a skilful and accomplished reporter, expressly for publication in this country. So far from being ashamed of my language on that memorable occasion, I gave eighty dollars for a full report of all that was then uttered by myself and others, in order that I might faithfully present it to the public on my return. I wish neither to modify nor retract a single sentence. The other speeches will follow in due course. To that fearless and eloquent champion of liberty, that first of Irish patriots, Daniel O'Connell, Esq., the colored population of this country  and their advocates are under heavy obligations for his masterly vindication of their cause, his terrible castigation of American slavery, and his withering satire upon the colonization “humbug,” at this meeting. Now let the enemies of freedom foam and rage!—But the secret of their malice lies in the triumphant success of my mission. Had I failed to vanquish the agent of the American Colonization Society, or to open the eyes of British philanthropists to its naked deformity, there would have been no excitement on my return. These sensitive republicans who are so jealous of the reputation of their country, be it remembered, are the most sturdy upholders of the slave system, and the most ardent sticklers for the banishment of our free colored population to the African coast.33 They esteem it no disgrace to debase, lacerate, plunder and kidnap two millions of slaves, and tread upon the necks of half a million free colored citizens; but it is foul slander, in their impartial judgment, to declare before a British audience that such conduct is in the highest degree hypocritical and tyrannical. But their iniquity is not done in a corner, nor can it be hid under a bushel; and I tell them that I will hold them up to the scorn and indignation of the world— I will stamp the brand of infamy upon their brow, which, like the mark of Cain, shall make them known and detested by the friends of freedom and humanity in every country and in every clime. “Where there is shame, there may in time be virtue.” I have already crimsoned their cheeks with the bitter consciousness of their guilt; and through their shame I will never despair of seeing them brought to repentance. It is idle for them to bluster and threaten—they will find out, by and by, that I am storm-proof. If I had outraged common sense and common decency, by throwing all the guilt of our oppression upon the British Government; if I had dealt in the wretched cant that slavery was an evil entailed upon us by the mother country; if I had been as dishonest, as hypocritical, and as pusillanimous as the agent  of the American Colonization Society; if I had extolled that kind of philanthropy which calls for the banishment of every man, woman and child whose skin is “not colored like my own” ; if I had asserted that the stealers of human beings in the Southern States were kind, liberal and paternal in their treatment of their victims, and anxious to abolish slavery; in short, if I had sacrificed conscience, honesty and truth upon the altar of falsehood and prejudice—why, then the reputation of the United States would have been pure and spotless in the eyes of the English nation, and I should have received the applause, instead of the malediction, of a senseless mob! But I was neither knave nor fool enough to do any such thing. I spoke the truth, in the love of the truth—the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I freely acknowledged the guilt, the awful guilt, of this boasted land of liberty, in holding one sixth part of its immense population in servile chains; and besought the sympathy of the friends of bleeding humanity in England, in behalf of our afflicted slaves. Nor did I fail to tear the mask from the brow of the American Colonization Society, so that it might be feared and loathed as a monster of cruelty, violence and blood. For this cause, “the wicked have drawn out the sword, and have bent their bow, to cast down the poor and needy, and to slay such as be of upright conversation. Their sword shall enter into their own heart, and their bows shall be broken.”Undeterred by the riotous demonstrations which had attended his return, and in forgetfulness or defiance of his Canterbury enemies who had sought to prevent his departure for England, Mr. Garrison, in the fourth week in October, paid a visit to Miss Crandall, and saw her34 school ‘in the full tide of successful experiment.’ He saw also ‘the stone which was thrown into the window by some unknown republican of Canterbury—the shattered pane of glass—the window-curtain stained by a volley of rotten eggs—and last, not least, a moral nondescript, though physically a human being, named A——35 T——J—–.’ Thence repairing to Brooklyn, the real Mecca of his journey, he was most hospitably received by the venerable George Benson, under whose roof, on the 27th of October, occurred an incident thus reported in the next issue of the Liberator: 
Acknowledgment.—Just before midnight, on Sabbath36 evening last, in Brooklyn, Connecticut, the Deputy Sheriff of Windham County, in behalf of those zealous patrons of colored schools, those plain, independent republicans, those highminded patriots, those practical Christians, Miss Crandall's nigger school in Canterbury, inserted in the Liberator of March 16, 1833. I shall readily comply with their polite and urgent invitation to appear at the Windham County Court on the second Tuesday of December, to show cause why, &c., &c. As they have generously given me precept upon precept, I shall give them in return line upon line—here (in the Liberator) a little, and there (in the court room) a great deal.These suits were never brought to trial. They were37 continued, at Mr. Garrison's request, to the March term of the county court (1834), and were again postponed to the fourth Tuesday in January, 1835, previous to which date the following proposal was addressed by the cashier of the Windham County Bank to Mr. Benson:
The proposition was accepted by the defendant in accordance with the pithy advice of Mr. Benson—‘You  know that the result of a lawsuit (however just) is very uncertain, but the expense is certain’—and of his counsel.39 A year so crowded with incidents, so full of dramatic scene-shifting, so devoid of rest (except that which comes from change) for the subject of this biography, had still in reserve a climax of action. The same issue of the Liberator which reported Mr. Garrison's arrival in40 New York gave notice that a convention for carrying out his darling project, the formation of an American Anti-Slavery Society, would be held that season in Philadelphia. The call, by concurrent resolution of the friends of immediate emancipation in the cities of Boston, Providence, New York and Philadelphia, was actually issued October 29, 1833, for the fourth day of December, and was signed by Arthur Tappan, President, Joshua Leavitt, one of the Managers, and Elizur Wright, Jr., Secretary, of the New York City Anti-Slavery Society. Delegates were requested to report to Evan Lewis, No. 94 North Fifth St., Philadelphia, and to regard the call as confidential, in order to avoid interruption in the meetings.  So the summons went out to every part of the North. To George W. Benson, at Providence, Mr. Garrison wrote:
In another direction he sped the call to Whittier, on his farm at Haverhill, who answered doubtfully, but eagerly, November 11:
Slenderer purses than Whittier's were those of some of his Essex County neighbors bent on undertaking the same pilgrimage. Mr. Garrison again wrote to Mr. Benson, under date of November 25, 1833:
At the City Hotel Mr. Benson found not only his 50 correspondent but the Quaker poet, for Whittier (thanks to the generosity of S. E. Sewall) had been enabled to join his old friend in Boston. These three, with John Prentice and what others we know not, together made their journey to New York, where they were joined by David Thurston, a Congregational minister from Maine, Samuel51 J. May, and a considerable number of delegates, who  made each other's acquaintance for the first time. Mr. May, who ‘studied anxiously their countenances and bearing, and caught most thirstily every word that dropped from their lips,’ and satisfied himself that ‘most of them were men ready to die, if need be, in the pass of Thermopylae,’ has recorded an episode of the journey (by steamboat from New York to Elizabethtown, and again from Bordentown to Philadelphia):
There was much earnest talking by other parties beside our52 own. Presently a gentleman turned from one of them to me and said, “What, sir, are the Abolitionists going to do in Philadelphia?” I informed him that we intended to form a National Anti-Slavery Society. This brought from him an outpouring of the commonplace objections to our enterprise, which I replied to as well as I was able. Mr. Garrison drew near, and I soon shifted my part of the discussion into his hands, and listened with delight to the admirable manner in which he expounded and maintained the doctrines and purposes of those who believed with him that the slaves—the blackest of them— were men, entitled as much as the whitest and most exalted men in the land to their liberty, to a residence here, if they choose, and to acquire as much wisdom, as much property, and as high a position as they may. ‘After a long conversation, which attracted as many as could get within hearing, the gentleman said, courteously: “I have been much interested, sir, in what you have said, and in the exceedingly frank and temperate manner in which you have treated the subject. If all Abolitionists were like you, there would be much less opposition to your enterprise. But, sir, depend upon it, that hair-brained, reckless, violent fanatic, Garrison, will damage, if he does not shipwreck, any cause.” Stepping forward, I replied, “Allow me, sir, to introduce you to Mr. Garrison, of whom you entertain so bad an opinion. The gentleman you have been talking with is he.” ’The little company reached Philadelphia in the morning of December 3, and found the city sufficiently excited by the cause of their coming to justify all the53 precautions already taken, and (on a hint from the police that they could not protect evening meetings) to make day sessions advisable. They gathered informally,  however, some forty of them, that evening in the parlors54 of Evan Lewis,55 when Lewis Tappan was called to the chair. Their chief concern was for a presiding officer for the Convention—preferably a Philadelphian whose character should propitiate public sentiment and be, says Mr. May, ‘a voucher for our harmlessness.’ Robert56 Vaux, a prominent and wealthy Quaker, seemed, apart from his relations with Elliott Cresson, to fulfil these57 conditions, and a committee consisting of three Friends (Evan Lewis, John G. Whittier, and Effingham L. Capron, of Uxbridge, Mass.), two clergymen (Beriah Green and S. J. May), and Lewis Tappan, was appointed to wait immediately upon him and upon one other forlorn hope. In both places they were received with mortifying frigidity and politely bowed out, and bedtime found them forced back on Beriah Green's sarcastic conclusion58 —‘If there is not timber amongst ourselves big enough to make a president of, let us get along without one, or go home and stay there until we have grown up to be men.’ Between fifty and sixty delegates,59 representing ten of the twelve free States, made their way the next morning60 to Adelphi Hall, on Fifth Street below Walnut, greeted with abusive language as they went along, and finding the entrance to the building guarded by the police. The doors were locked upon an assembly, as Whittier noticed, ‘mainly composed of comparatively young men, some in middle age, and a few beyond that period.’ Five-sevenths of them were destined to survive President Lincoln's emancipation proclamation.61 The Quaker element was naturally prominent. Besides those already mentioned, Maine sent Joseph Southwick, and Nathan  and Isaac Winslow; Massachusetts, Arnold Buffum and Effingham L. Capron;62 Pennsylvania, Thomas Shipley, the intrepid foe of slaveholders and kidnappers, Edwin P. Atlee, whose end, like Shipley's and Evan Lewis's, was lamentably near at hand, Thomas Whitson, James Mott, Bartholomew Fussell, and other less known (Hicksite) Friends. But the variety of character and talent gathered together in that upper story would not be comprehended if allusion were not also made to Joshua Coffin, Orson S. Murray, Ray Potter, Simeon S. Jocelyn, Robert B. Hall, Amos A. Phelps, John Rankin,63 William Green, Jr., Abraham L. Cox, William Goodell, Elizur Wright, Jr., George Bourne, Charles W. Denison, Robert Purvis, and James Miller McKim. On the second day, too, a handful of women, all members of the Society of Friends—Lucretia Mott, Esther Moore, Lydia White, and Sidney Ann Lewis—were, on Thomas Whitson's invitation, in attendance, and, both by their presence and their share in the deliberations, made the occasion still more epochal. A more original, devoted, philanthropic and religious body was never convened, or for a more unselfish purpose, or amid greater public contempt and odium. Its sittings were, while guarded, open to its avowed and bitter enemies. ‘No person was refused64 admittance to the Convention: on the contrary, Messrs. Gurley and Finley [General Agent of the Colonization Society], a large number of Southern medical students, several ladies, and, in fact, all who came as spectators, were politely and cordially furnished with seats.’  On the first day, the meeting was opened with prayer, and ‘timber’ of the right sort for president was found in Beriah Green himself; Lewis Tappan and Whittier being chosen secretaries.65 Membership was accorded to all delegates of anti-slavery societies, and to all persons present who favored immediate emancipation and opposed expatriation. Organization, and the reading of letters of sympathy from William Jay, Jeremiah Chaplin, George Duffield, Theodore D. Weld, and others, consumed the time of the session, which, for prudential reasons, was not interrupted for the noonday meal. Foraging for crackers and cheese was conducted by Joshua Coffin, and pitchers of cold water supplied the only beverage. Mr. Garrison was put on the committee to report a constitution (from which he was evidently excused), as well as on the larger committee66 to draft a Declaration of Principles for signature by members of the Convention. Adjournment took place at five o'clock in the afternoon, and the latter committee met shortly afterwards at the house of its chairman, Dr. Atlee, where, after a comparison67 of views, Mr. Garrison, Mr. Whittier and Mr. May were appointed a sub-committee of three to prepare a draft of the Declaration ‘to be reported next morning, at nine o'clock, to the whole committee, in the room adjoining the hall of the Convention.’ They accordingly withdrew to the house of a fellow-delegate, James McCrummell, the colored host of Mr. Garrison, and there it was finally  agreed that the composition of the document should be given to him who had called the Convention into being. ‘We left him,’ says Mr. May,
about ten o'clock, agreeing68 to come to him again next morning at eight. On our return at the appointed hour, we found him, with shutters closed and lamps burning, just writing the last paragraph of his admirable draft. We read it over together two or three times very carefully, agreed to a few slight alterations, and at nine went to lay it before the whole committee. By them it was subjected to the severest examination. Nearly three hours of intense application were given to it, notwithstanding repeated and urgent calls from the Convention for our report. All the while, Mr. Garrison evinced the most unruffled patience. Very few alterations were proposed, and only once did he offer any resistance. He had introduced into his draft more than a page in condemnation of the Colonization scheme. It was the concentrated essence of all he had written or thought upon that egregious imposition. It was as finished and powerful in expression as any part of that Magna Charta. We commented upon it as a whole and in all its parts. We writhed somewhat under its severity, but were obliged to acknowledge its exact, its singular justice, and were about to accept it, when I ventured to propose that all of it, excepting only the first comprehensive paragraph, be stricken from the document, giving as my reason for this large erasure that the Colonization Society could not long survive the deadly blows it had received; and it was not worth while for us to perpetuate the memory of it in this Declaration of the Rights of Man, which will live a perpetual, impressive protest against every form of oppression, until it shall have given place to that brotherly kindness which all the children of the common Father owe to one another. At first, Mr. Garrison rose up to save a portion of his work that had doubtless cost him as much mental effort as any other part of it. But so soon as he found that a large majority of the committee concurred in favor of the erasure, he submitted very graciously, saying, “Brethren, it is your report, not mine.” ‘With this exception, the alterations and amendments which were made, after all our criticisms, were surprisingly few and unessential; and we cordially agreed to report it to the Convention very much as it came from his pen.’All this time the Convention was speeding the hours as69 best it might with speeches and resolves. After an opening  prayer by William Green, Jr., Dr. Cox read aloud these lines addressed to Mr. Garrison by Whittier, and first published in the Haverhill Gazette early in 1833,70 though composed during the previous year:
John Rankin moved a resolution, seconded by Dr. Cox, thanking editors who had enlisted in behalf of immediate emancipation, and pledging support of the anti-slavery press; upon which the Convention went into Committee of the Whole. Beriah Green expressed his disgust with those who assert that Wm. Lloyd Garrison ‘is so imprudent, and says so many things calculated to weaken his attacks on the system of bondage.’ Dr. Cox followed with some remarks, and then—
Lewis Tappan rose, and asked permission to introduce the72 name of William Lloyd Garrison, and proceeded to say:Some men, Mr. President, are frightened at a name. There is good evidence to believe that many professed friends of abolition would have been here, had they not been afraid that the name of William Lloyd Garrison would be inserted prominently in our proceedings. Sir, I am ashamed of such friends. We ought to place that honored name in the forefront of our ranks. The cause is under obligations to him which such an evidence of respect will but poorly repay. The first time I ever heard of him was when he was in jail in Baltimore, where he was incarcerated like a felon, for pleading the cause of the oppressed and rebuking iniquity. When I saw him, appearing so mild and meek as he does, shortly after he was liberated by a gentleman in New York, I  was astonished. Is this the renegade Garrison? thought I, as I grasped his open hand. Is this the enemy of our country? I shall never forget the impression which his noble countenance made on me at that time, as long as I live. An ancedote is related of a gentleman—a Colonizationist —which is worth repeating in this Convention. That gentleman had purchased, without knowing whom it represented, a portrait of Mr. Garrison, and, after having it encased in a splendid gilt frame, suspended it in his parlor. A friend calling in observed it, and asked the purchaser if he knew whom he had honored so much? He was answered, ‘No—but it is one of the most godlike-looking countenances I ever beheld.’ ‘That, sir,’ resumed the visitor, ‘is a portrait of the fanatic, the incendiary William Lloyd Garrison!’ ‘Indeed!’ concluded the gentleman, evidently much disconcerted. ‘But, sir, it shall remain in its place. I will never take it down.’73 Who that is familiar with the history of Mr. Garrison does not remember the determination expressed in the first number of his paper—the Liberator—to sustain it as long as he could live on bread and water? And, sir, I am informed that he has really practised what he so nobly resolved on in the beginning. Look at his course during his recent mission to England. He has been accused of slandering his country. Sir, he has vindicated the American name. He has not slandered it. He has told the whole truth, and put hypocrites and doughfaces to open shame. He has won the confidence of the people of England. They saw him attached to his country by the dearest ties, but loathing her follies and abhorring her crimes. He has put the anti-slavery movement forward a quarter of a century. A fellow-passenger with Mr. Garrison from Europe—a clergyman of much intelligence—on arriving in this country heard that he was called a fanatic and a madman. ‘What,’ said he, ‘do you call such a man a fanatic? Do you deem such a man insane? For six weeks have I been with him, and a more discreet, humble and faithful Christian I never saw.’ Sir, we should throw the shield of our protection and esteem around Mr. Garrison. His life is exposed at this moment. At the door of this saloon, a young man from the  South said to-day that if he had opportunity, he would dip his hand in his heart's blood.74 And, sir, there must be martyrs in this cause. We ought to feel this moment that we are liable to be sacrificed. But when I say this, I know that we are not belligerents. We would die in such a cause only as martyrs to the truth. In this, our blessed Saviour has set the example. I did not contemplate delivering a eulogy on Mr. Garrison when I rose to speak to this resolution. I wish simply to express my heartfelt sympathy with an injured and persecuted man. Be it the honorable object of the members of this Convention to show to our countrymen that they have misunderstood the character, and misconceived the plans, of William Lloyd Garrison. He is said to be imprudent. What is prudence? Is it succumbing to a majority of our frail fellowmortals? Is it holding back a faithful expression of the whole truth, until the people are ready to say amen? Was that the prudence of the Apostle Paul, when he stood before the Roman Governor? Was that the prudence of William Penn, when he poured contempt on the regalia of kings by wearing before the King of England his broad beaver? Imprudence is moral timidity. That man is imprudent who is afraid to speak as God commands him to speak, when the hour of danger is near. If this reasoning be correct, Mr. Garrison is one of the most prudent men in the nation! He is not perfect. He is frail, like the rest of human flesh. But if God had not endowed him as he has, and smiled propitiously on his imprudences, we should not now be engaged in the deliberations of this most interesting and important Convention. God has raised up just such a man as William Lloyd Garrison to be a pioneer in this cause. Let each member present feel solemnly bound to vindicate the character of Mr. Garrison. Let us not be afraid to go forward with him, even into the ‘imminent breach,’ although there may be professed friends who stand back because of him.
Robert Purvis,75 of Pennsylvania, said he was grateful to God for the day. He felt to pour out the speaking gratitude  of his soul to the Convention, for the spirit they had manifested during the session, and especially during the pending of this resolution. He most heartily concurred in such a vote, and had no doubt but that it would pass unanimously. The name of William Lloyd Garrison sounded sweet to his ear. It produced a vibration of feeling in his bosom, which words could but too feebly sound forth. It was a feeling of love and hearty confidence, which none but a conscientious abolitionist could know. Three years ago he had watched the progress of Mr. Garrison with extreme solicitude. The nation was then sound asleep on this subject. The colonization scheme—that scheme of darkness and delusion—was then making its wide havoc among the persecuted people of color. It was the cholera to our ranks. But Garrison arose. His voice went up with a trumpet tone. The walls of Baltimore prison could not confine its thunders. The dampness of his cell did not repress the energy of his spirit. Free and unfettered as the air, his denunciations of tyranny rolled over the land. The Liberator speedily followed. Its pages flashed light and truth far and wide. Darkness and gloom fled before it. The deep, unbroken, tomblike silence of the church gave way. The tocsin of righteous alarm was sounded. The voice of godlike Liberty was heard above the clamor of the oppressors. The effect of these efforts is seen and felt this moment in this interesting Convention. It is indeed a good thing to be here. My heart, Mr. President, is too full for my tongue. But whether I speak to them—my feelings as they exist in my inmost soul—or not, the friends of the colored American will be remembered. Yes, sir, their exertions and memories will be cherished when pyramids and monuments shall crumble. The flood of time, which is rapidly sweeping to destruction that refuge of lies, the American Colonization Society, is bearing on the advocates of our cause to a glorious and blessed immortality.76Lewis Tappan had also his eulogy for Lundy; and a special resolution of gratitude to the editor of the Genius for his early, disinterested and persevering labors in the  cause was passed on motion of Wm. Goodell and Thomas Shipley. R. B. Hall, C. W. Denison, and S. J. May were appointed a committee to communicate the sentiments of the Convention to both Lundy and Garrison. The hour had now arrived,—it was past noon of Thursday, December 5,—when the Committee on the Declaration was ready to report. Dr. Atlee, the chairman, read the result of their labors to the Convention. ‘Never in my life,’ says Mr. May, ‘have I seen a deeper77 impression made by words than was made by that admirable document upon all who were there present. After the voice of the reader had ceased, there was a profound silence for several minutes. Our hearts were in perfect unison. There was but one thought with us all. Either of the members could have told what the whole Convention felt. We felt that the word had just been uttered which would be mighty, through God, to the pulling down of the strongholds of slavery.’ An impulse to proceed at once to the adoption of the Declaration came from one of the weightiest Friends, who feared that much tampering with it would impair its forcibleness. But it seemed to the Convention more becoming to deliberate, and haply to amend and improve its fundamental utterance. The criticisms were mostly verbal.
Thomas Shipley, that good man and faithful friend of the78 slave, objected to the word “man-stealer” as applied indiscriminately to the slaveholders. To this it was replied that the term was an eminently proper one; that it described the exact relation between the master and the slave. It was urged that things should be called by their right names; that Luther had said he would “call a hoe a hoe, and a spade a spade.” Besides, it was added, it was a Scriptural phrase, and the chapter and verse were quoted in which it was used. This mollified Friend Shipley, though it did not set his mind entirely at rest. At length, some one suggested that the term should be retained, but that it should be preceded by the words, “according to Scripture.” This met the difficulty, and the paper was amended so as to read: “Every American citizen who holds [retains] a human  being in involuntary bondage as his property, is, according to Scripture (Exodus, 21.16), a man-stealer.” 79Lucretia Mott—like the clever school-teacher she had been—suggested one or two rhetorical amendments which were obvious improvements. ‘When our friends80 felt,’ she said years afterwards, with her quaint humor, ‘that they were planting themselves on the truths of Divine Revelation, and on the Declaration of Independence, as an Everlasting Rock, it seemed to me, as I heard it read, that the climax would be better to transpose the sentence, and place the Declaration of Independence first, and the truths of Divine Revelation last, as the Everlasting Rock; and I proposed it. I remember one of the younger members, Daniel E. Jewett, turning to see what81 woman there was there who knew what the word “transpose” meant.’ The formal act of signing the Declaration must, the shortening daylight admonished, be put off till the morrow. On Friday morning, ‘Samuel J. May rose to read it for the last time.82 His sweet, persuasive voice faltered with the intensity of his emotions as he repeated the  solemn pledges of the concluding paragraphs. After a season of silence, David Thurston, of Maine, rose as his name was called by one of the secretaries, and affixed his name to the document. One after another passed up to the platform, signed, and retired in silence. All felt the deep responsibility of the occasion:—the shadow and forecast of a life-long struggle rested upon every countenance.’ The instrument thus conceived and elaborated, and adopted as the justification of a national crusade against slavery, was couched in these terms:
 Of the three-score signers of the Declaration not one was a woman. Such was the custom of the times, in regard to the public relation of the sexes, that Lucretia Mott and her Quaker sisters did not ask or expect to sign; the male delegates—even the members of their own sect—did not think to invite them. It was a significant mark of liberality that they had been permitted to participate in the proceedings of the Convention on an equal footing in other respects. Moreover, on Mr. Garrison's motion, seconded by Dr. Cox, it was resolved on this third day ‘that the cause of Abolition eminently deserves the countenance and support of American women,’ after the British example. By other resolutions, ‘the ladies' anti-slavery societies’ already in existence were hailed ‘as the harbinger of a brighter day,’ and more were called for. In still another, moved by Dr. Cox and seconded by William Goodell, the Convention presented ‘their thanks to their female friends for the deep interest they have manifested in the Anti-slavery cause’ during the long and fatiguing sessions. And finally, Miss Crandall was assured of approval, sympathy and aid. Resolutions relating to free produce; the recreancy of a pro-slavery clergy; the guilt of withholding the Bible from slaves; colored conventions and societies for mutual improvement, and the like—concluded the business of the Convention. Beriah Green dismissed the assembly in words of thrilling solemnity, never to be forgotten by those who heard him, and ending ‘in a prayer to Almighty God, full of fervor and feeling, imploring his blessing and sanctification upon the Convention and its labors.’ So ended the successful attempt to give a national basis to the movement begun only three years before by the publication of the Liberator.84  The significant articles of the Constitution of the American Anti-Slavery Society, adopted at Philadelphia, read as follows:
In choosing the officers of the new Society, Arthur Tappan was fitly made President. Though compelled to be absent from the Convention, he was not and could not  be forgotten. Three secretaries were appointed, Elizur Wright, Jr., of Domestic Correspondence, Wm. Lloyd Garrison, of Foreign Correspondence, and Abraham L. Cox, Recording Secretary. William Green, Jr., was made Treasurer. Mr. Garrison did not long retain his office. The managers seem to have expected of him services in the field inconsistent with his editorial career—they even talked of merging the Liberator in the Emancipator.88 The foreign correspondence itself may have appeared to him unduly burdensome, to say nothing of the vexatious restriction that all his letters must first be submitted to the Executive Committee. He did not covet that (or any other) office, and he seems to have owed it to the wellmeant exertions of his impulsive friend R. B. Hall, who wrote to him from New Haven, under date of January 21, 1834, upon hearing of his resignation:
I will give you succinctly the history of that office. When89 the committee to form a constitution at Mr. Sharpless's were about to retire, I had reason to suppose that the form of constitution which they had in their hands provided but one secretary to the Society. I knew, too, what was to be the management about that office—that Mr. Wright was to fill it,90 and thus be the mouth [piece] of all anti-slavery men in the U. S. This did not exactly suit me. I knew your claims,91 I knew, too, that you would be placed on the Board of Managers or as a Vice-President—in other words, would be second fiddle—and this did not suit me. I laid hold on the committee, and urged and entreated them to create the office to which you were subsequently appointed. I used all the little influence which I had with them to procure the insertion in the draft of the Constitution of that office, and have reason to suppose that they were influenced by my exertions. I remember distinctly telling them, or some of them, that if there was no office for you to fill, or for which you were calculated, one ought to be and must be made. I regarded the office of Foreign Secretary as one of great importance to our cause. Looking back over the year 1832, Mr. Garrison had, in the first annual report of the New England Anti-Slavery Society, rejoiced in the progress of the cause.
With feeble means, the Society has produced great 92 results. . . . It has effected the conversion of a multitude of minds to the doctrine of immediate abolition, and given a wide and salutary check to the progress of the Colonization Society. It has done more to make slavery a subject of national investigation, to excite discussion, and to maintain the freedom of speech on a hitherto prohibited theme, than all other societies now in operation. It has been eminently serviceable in encouraging the free colored population, in various places, to go forward in paths of improvement, and organize themselves into moral and benevolent associations. . . . An Auxiliary Society has been formed in the Theological93 Seminary at Andover. A society, based upon the same principles, has also been formed in Hudson College, Ohio, under the auspices of the President and Professors; and also a kindred association in Lynn, Massachusetts. Other societies, it is expected, will be speedily organized in Portland, Providence, Bath, Hallowell, New Haven, and other places. The light which has burst forth so auspiciously in the West, is the harbinger of a mighty victory.94Much greater reason had Mr. Garrison to be elated and strengthened by the extraordinary events of the year now drawing to a close. The persecution and spirited defence of Miss Crandall, in which the princely liberality of Arthur Tappan, the rare moral courage of Mr. May, and the vigorous articles of Charles C. Burleigh, editor of the extemporized Unionist, combined to strike the imagination and stir the moral sense of the public; the cordial and high social reception in England of the agent of the New England Anti-Slavery Society; his conspicuous success in defeating abroad the ‘humbug’ Society which still retained at home the odor of respectability and sanctity,95 and in bearing back the Wilberforce protest against it; his bitter truths about his sinful  country spoken in Exeter Hall; the abolition of slavery in the British colonies; the mobs awaiting him on his return; his prosecution for libel; finally, the formation of that National Anti-Slavery Society which he had projected from the beginning of his agitation—all these occurrences had fixed public attention on the subject of slavery in a manner never to be diverted for an instant thereafter, had still further awakened the sleeping conscience of the nation, spread the new zeal, and multiplied the advocates and agencies of immediate emancipation, and at the same time developed an active spirit of violent hostility which also would go on widening and intensifying, to cease only on the very eve of the war of emancipation. Statistical signs of the mighty progress are to be found in Mr. Sewall's list, in the second annual report of the New England Anti-Slavery96 Society, of upwards of forty auxiliary organizations formed in the twelvemonth in nearly every Northern State, noticeably at several collegiate institutions and among the gentler sex—the most important of the latter being the Philadelphia Female Anti-Slavery Society.97 Take also the subscribed declaration of 124 clergymen of all denominations against colonization and in favor of immediate emancipation, obtained in 1833 to be prefixed to the forthcoming edition of the Rev. Amos A. Phelps's98 “Lectures on slavery and its remedy.” 99 The delivery of those lectures was itself an important event, and their publication a powerful contribution to the growing body of anti-slavery literature. The Rev. J. D. Paxton's “Letters on slavery” ; the Rev. S. J. May's letters to Andrew T. Judson— “The Right of  Colored People to Education Vindicated” ; Prof. Elizur Wright, Jr.'s, “Sin of slavery and its remedy” ; Whittier's “Justice and expediency” ;100 and, above all, Mrs. Lydia Maria Child's startling Appeal in favor of that class of Americans called Africans—were the more potent of the new crop of writings betokening the vigor of Mr. Garrison's propagandism. If Whittier forfeited his political career by his adherence to ‘Justice,’ Mrs. Child sacrificed without regret in the same cause her popularity as a writer, and invited social indignities that now appear incredible.101 To be sure, she thought it honorable to Mr. Garrison to mention that he was ‘the first person102 who dared to edit a newspaper in which slavery was spoken of as altogether wicked and inexcusable’—the first person, she explains, by way of drawing a distinction between him and Lundy, ‘that boldly attacked. slavery as a sin, and colonization as its twin sister.’ To this double offence she added that of apologizing for Mr. Garrison's want of moderation, and his ‘tendency to use wholesale and unqualified expressions,’ and declaring him to be ‘a disinterested, intelligent, and remarkably pure-minded man.’103 The losses of the year were personal. Greatly deplored was the untimely death of the Rev. Charles B. Storrs, President of Western Reserve College, the focus of the antislavery revival at the West, his last act being an attempt to sign the declaration for Phelps's “Lectures.” Lamented,  also, was the venerable John Kenrick, of Newton, Mass., the newly elected president of the New England Anti-Slavery Society, and one of its most liberal benefactors, as well as of the Manual Labor School. He was ‘a forerunner of Abolition,’ to quote his epitaph—an early and independent opponent of slavery; publishing in 1816 at his own expense a small volume on its horrors, and circulating it in Congress and among State Legislatures. A last word of this strong and benevolent character may fitly close the present chapter: