Browsing named entities in John F. Hume, The abolitionists together with personal memories of the struggle for human rights. You can also browse the collection for William Lloyd Garrison or search for William Lloyd Garrison in all documents.

Your search returned 38 results in 14 document sections:

1 2
John F. Hume, The abolitionists together with personal memories of the struggle for human rights, Chapter 1: Theodore Roosevelt and the Abolitionists (search)
ostility to the Union, which was disloyalty and treason. The evidence offered by him in support of his accusation was the Anti-Unionist position taken by William Lloyd Garrison, who branded the Union as a league with hell, and some of his associates. But Garrison was not a leader, or even a member, of the third or Liberty party.Garrison was not a leader, or even a member, of the third or Liberty party. He denounced it almost as bitterly as Mr. Roosevelt. Garrison was a Quaker, a non-resistant, and a non-voter. He relied on moral suasion. He saw no salvation in politics. The formation of a new Anti-Slavery party excited his fiery indignation. He declared that it was ludicrous in its folly, pernicious as a measure of poliGarrison was a Quaker, a non-resistant, and a non-voter. He relied on moral suasion. He saw no salvation in politics. The formation of a new Anti-Slavery party excited his fiery indignation. He declared that it was ludicrous in its folly, pernicious as a measure of policy, and useless as a political contrivance. Far and away the most potential member and leader of the political Abolitionists was Salmon P. Chase. Instead of denouncing the Constitution as a league with death and hell, he claimed that it was an Anti-Slavery document and should be so construed. As for the Union, by his service
John F. Hume, The abolitionists together with personal memories of the struggle for human rights, Chapter 2: the Abolitionists — who and what they were (search)
ing which they kept up a steady agitation with the help of platform lecturers, and regularly threw away their votes-so it was charged — in a third party movement that seemed to be a hopeless venture. Another inducement to the writer to take up the cause of the Abolitionists is the fact that he has always been proud to class himself as one of them. He came into the world before Abolitionism, by that name, had been heard of; before the first Abolition Society was organized; before William Lloyd Garrison founded his Liberator, and before (not the least important circumstance) John Quincy Adams entered Congress. He cannot remember when the slavery question was not discussed. His sympathies at an early day went out to the slave. He informed himself on the subject as well as a farmer boy might be expected to do in a household that received the most of its knowledge of current events from the columns of one weekly newspaper. He cast his first vote for the ticket of the Abolitionists
e time or another. For that time they were willing to wait, meanwhile doing what they could to hasten its coming. Benjamin Lundy, the little Quaker mechanic, who was undeniably the Peter-the-Hermit of the Abolitionist movement, when setting out alone and on foot, with his printing material on his back, to begin a crusade against the strongest and most arrogant institution in the country, remarked with admirable naivete, I do not know how soon 1 shall succeed in my undertaking. William Lloyd Garrison, when the pioneer Anti-Slavery Society was organized by only twelve men, and they people of no worldly consequence, the meeting for lack of a better place being held in a colored schoolroom on Nigger Hill in Boston, declared that in due time they would meet to urge their principles in Faneuil Hall--a most audacious declaration, but he was right. The writer, when a boy, was witness to an exhibition of the same spirit. A kinsman of his was a zealous Abolitionist, although not part
t. Bound together by a common interest and a common feeling, its members — in the highest sense co-partners in business and in politics, in peace and in war — were prepared to act together as one man. But why, I again ask, were the Northern people so infatuated with slavery? They raised no cotton and they raised no negroes, but many of them, and especially their political leaders, carried their adulation almost to idolatry. When Elijah P. Lovejoy was shot down like a dog, and William Lloyd Garrison was dragged half naked and half lifeless through the streets of Boston, and other outrages of like import were being perpetrated all over the North, it was carefully given out that those deeds were not the work of irresponsible rowdies, but of gentlemen --of merchants, manufacturers, and members of the professions. They claimed the credit for such achievements. There were reasons for such a state of things — some very solid, because financial. The North and the South were exte<
Georgia, did not hesitate to give that interpretation to the Court's pronouncement, and to insist on it with brutal frankness. If they were wrong, the Court was putty in their hands and they could easily have had a supplemental ruling that would have gone to any extent. If the Dred Scott decision had been promulgated by our highest court, and the slaveholders had insisted upon the license it was intended to give them for taking their slave property into free territory, at the time that Garrison was being dragged by a mob through Boston's streets; when Birney's printingpress in Cincinnati was being tumbled into the Ohio River; when Pennsylvania Hall, the Quaker Abolitionists' forty-thousand-dollar construction, was ablaze in Philadelphia; when Lovejoy, the Abolition martyr, was bleeding out his life in one of the streets of Alton, Illinois-when, in fact, the whole land was swayed by a frenzied hatred of the men and women who dared to question slavery's right to supremacy, the writ
be models of perfect eloquence. Lundy and Garrison met by accident. They were boarding at the s mind was full of the subject of slavery, and Garrison's proved to be receptive soil. They decided decided to continue the Baltimore newspaper. Garrison's plain-spokenness, however, soon got him int Undeterred by his experience as a martyr, Garrison — who had returned to Boston-resolved to estauary, 1831. In entering upon this venture, Garrison had not a subscriber nor a dollar of money. its continuance involved a terrible strain. Garrison and one co-worker occupied one room for work-t farther than that. Less than a year after Garrison had established his paper, the Legislature ofrator establishment was wrecked by a mob, and Garrison, after having been stripped of nearly all hiswas so cordially hated by the slaveholders as Garrison. Of the big men up North--the leaders of polus, although not more zealous, than Lundy and Garrison and a good many of their followers, Birney ea[5 more...]
there was to be no permanent defeat and no compromise. The espousal of Abolitionism by Mr. Chase was a remarkable circumstance. He was not an enthusiast like Garrison and Lundy and many other Anti-Slavery pioneers, but precisely the opposite. He was cold-blooded and cool-headed, a deliberate and conservative man. His speechesclearly realize the wearisome, heart-breaking struggle that was before him. It was an enormous sacrifice that he made. Journeymen printers and saddlers, like Garrison and Lundy, who had never had as much as one hundred dollars at one time in their lives, and who had no social position and no influential kinsfolks, had little te Anti-Slavery cause was in projecting and directing it on independent political lines. Up to that time most Anti-Slavery people opposed separate party action. Garrison and his Liberator violently denounced such action. Moral suasion was urged as the panacea. Chase himself had not been a third party man. In 1840, when there wa
His speech was absolutely crushing. He met every point that had been urged against him and triumphantly refuted it. He handled his oratorical antagonists with merciless severity, depicting certain events in their lives with such vividness that the onlookers gazed upon them with visible and unmistakable pity. Said one of these men when he afterwards understood that a certain party was about to engage in a controversial debate with Mr. Adams, Then may the Lord have mercy on him. Mr. Adams was not expelled. His opponents frankly admitted their discomfiture and dropped the whole business. It cannot be denied that John Quincy Adams, almost by his unaided efforts, preserved and sustained the life of the Anti-Slavery cause at a time when it was almost moribund. He plowed the ground, cutting a deep and broad furrow as he went his way, and in the upturned soil such laborers as Birney and Garrison and Chase planted the seed that rooted and grew until it yielded a plentiful harvest.
Oliver Johnson, who was one of the twelve: A fierce northeast storm, combining rain, snow, and hail in about equal proportions, was raging, and the streets were full of slush. They were dark, too, for the city of Boston in those days was very economical of light on Nigger Hill. Both nature and man seemed to be in league against those plucky pioneers of an unpopular cause. They, however, were not dismayed nor disheartened. It was as they were stepping out into the gloomy night, that Mr. Garrison, who, it is scarcely necessary to say, was one of the twelve, remarked to his associates: We have met to-night in this obscure schoolhouse; our numbers are few, and our influence limited, but mark my prediction. Faneuil Hall shall ere long echo to the principles we have set forth. What those principles were is shown by the declaration adopted by that handful of confederates, and which, in view of the time and circumstances of its formulation, was certainly a most remarkable document.
John F. Hume, The abolitionists together with personal memories of the struggle for human rights, Chapter 10: wanted, an Anti-slavery society (search)
Chapter 10: wanted, an Anti-slavery society The National Anti-Slavery Society--the society organized by Garrison and his confreres, and which longest maintained its organization — made one great mistake. It disbanded. It assumed that its work was done when African slavery in this country was pronounced defunct by law. It took it for granted that the enslavement of the colored man — not necessarily the negro — was no longer possible under the Stars and Stripes. Then and there it committed a grievous blunder. Its paramount error was in assuming that a political party could for all time be depended upon as a party of freedom. It trusted to the assurances of politicians that they would protect the colored man in all his natural and acquired rights, and in that belief voluntarily gave up the ghost and cast its mantle to the winds. Now, the fact is that the National Anti-Slavery Society was never more needed than it is to-day. There is a mighty work to be done that was directl<
1 2