Francis Jackson Garrison, William Lloyd Garrison, 1805-1879; the story of his life told by his children: volume 3

‘ [44] your friend is “mightily popular among the Irish of Lowell,” though he is personally unknown to almost every mother's son of them. They have probably heard of his “blarney,” let off in their behalf on sundry occasions and in various places.’

The production of this ark of the covenant was certainly among the thrilling incidents of the three days of “hightoned feeling, triumphant enthusiasm, and complete satisfaction,” Jan. 26-28, 1842; Lib. 12.23. occupied by the annual meeting of the Massachusetts Society. It took place in Faneuil Hall, before a¹ great gathering, in which one seemed to discern large numbers of friendly Irishmen in a proper state of² excitement. Mr. Garrison, who presided, read the Address— with due emphasis, we may be sure. Colonel Miller³ spoke to it, alleging Irish blood in his Vermont veins. Bradburn, confessing himself the son of an Irishman, moved a resolution of sympathy with Ireland, then in the throes of the Repeal agitation. James Cannings Fuller, an actual old-countryman, told how he “stood in our Irish House of Peers when Castlereagh took the bribe for the betrayal of Ireland.” Feb. 5, 1800. Wendell Phillips, with only the credentials of his eloquence, joined in what (but for its sincerity) might be called the ‘blarney’ of the occasion. To no purpose, so far as the immediate object was concerned. On February 27, 1842, Mr. Garrison (whose Irish descent might also have been paraded) wrote to⁴ Richard Webb by the hand of Thomas Davis:⁵

‘Our meeting in Faneuil Hall, to unroll the Irish Address,⁶ with its sixty thousand signatures, was indescribably enthusiastic, and has produced a great impression on the public mind. I am sorry to add, and you will be not less ashamed to hear, that the two Irish papers in Boston sneer at the Address, and⁷ denounce it and the abolitionists in true pro-slavery style. I fear they will keep the great mass of your countrymen here⁸ from uniting with us.’

Not only was the Irish press everywhere unanimous in this attitude, but the foremost Catholic prelate in the land, Bishop Hughes of New York, impugned the genuineness⁹ of the Address, and, genuine or not, declared it the duty