AMY POST¹Amy Post (1802-89) was born Amy Kirby in Jericho, New York. In 1828 she married Isaac Post, a druggist and the widower of her sister. The Posts became involved with Garrisonian abolitionism and the Underground Railroad after they moved to Rochester in 1835. Amy served as a vice president of the American Anti-Slavery Society in the 1850s and 1860s. Douglass first met the couple when he stayed at their house during a lecture tour in 1842, and their friendship influenced his choice of Rochester as the base for his newspaper the North Star. In addition to abolitionism, Amy Post participated in a broad range of reforms, including the women’s movement, which began at the convention that she helped organize in Seneca Falls, New York, in 1848. Hewitt, , 116-17, 119-20, 140, 143, 184, 230-31; Blake McKelvey, “Civic Medals Awarded Posthumously,” , 22:10 (April 1960). TO FREDERICK DOUGLASS

Rochester, [N.Y.] 13 June 1859.

FREDERICK DOUGLASS:

DEAR FRIEND:
In your remarks in your last week’s paper upon “Modern Spiritualism,”² Frederick Douglass attended the annual meeting of the Friends of Human Progress in Waterloo, New York, and recounted his observations in his newspaper on 10 June 1859. Before his description of the meeting, Douglass gave a brief overview of “Spiritualism” as he understood it. Douglass stated that he was present at some of Spiritualism’s “peculiar exhibitions,” but did not agree with its “supremacy over the religion of the New Testament.” After commending Spiritualists for their advocacy of education, women’s rights, temperance, and an end to sectarianism, Douglass condemned their reluctance to accept antislavery reform. According to Douglass, several Spiritualists at the meeting voted against resolutions giving prominence to antislavery reform. Douglass perceived their reluctance as an effort to seek “harmony” with Spiritualists in the South and to ensure the survival of the Spiritualist movement. FDP, 10 June 1859.
I most heartily concur, so far as thinking it necessary that Spiritualists
should be criticised and watched as closely as any other class of men and

women, and have applyed to them the same test, “by their fruits ye shall
know them,”³A slight paraphrase of a portion of the Sermon on the Mount. Matt. 7:16.
as you would to any other class or sect, and when weighed in the balance and found wanting, denounce them with the same severity.
But when you speak of the Spiritualism manifested in the late Water
loo Meeting of the Friends of Human Progress,⁴Douglass attended the 1859 annual meeting of the Friends for Human Progress with his friend Amy Post. The meeting lasted three days and drew large crowds each day. Despite Douglass’s assertions, and the presence of many Spiritualists, Spiritualism was not the main focus of the meeting. Speakers thoroughly discussed temperance, women’s rights, abolitionism, education reform, and an end to sectarianism. Spiritualism came up in a series of resolutions on the second day. In an address on the third day, Phillip D. Moore argued that Spiritualism was a greater friend to human rights than any church, and a better social reformer. Douglass contested these assertions on the third day in a speech that was well received by the audience, calling Spiritualism a mere “theoretical religion.” (Rochester, 1859), 3-17; , 10 June 1859; Hewitt, 135, 141, 184, 190. as placing Spiritualism
pre-eminently before the anti-slavery reform, you make a great mistake,
I think. It was woman’s wrongs that our gentleman speaker considered
pre-eminent.⁵The Friends of Human Progress discussed a number of social reforms, and women’s rights figured prominently on the second day of the meeting. The committee on resolutions presented several that called for the equality of all men in the South. Several speakers however, contested the resolutions. Dr. O. A. Wellington argued that the enslavement of women was far worse than that of slaves. Lucy M. Coleman, who spoke after Wellington, proclaimed herself “deeply sensitive” to the cause of women’s rights, but asserted that slavery was far worse. The debate over women’s rights lasted until the meeting adjourned for one hour. Proceedings of the Yearly Meeting of the Friends of Human Progress, 6-9; Hewitt, Women’s Activism and Social Change, 190.
He, as I was informed, was a Spiritualist, and some twenty,
or perhaps more, voted with him.—Whether they were all Spiritualists,
I know not; but a much larger number, I think, of Spiritualists present
voted in the negative—thoroughly understanding in their own souls that
the slave woman’s wrongs are a thousand fold more terrible, and ought not
for a moment to be put in competition.

At a subsequent session, when the subject of Spiritualism was before
the meeting for discussion, two persons, I think, expressed it as their be
lief that Spiritualism would do more for the overthrow of all evils in the
world, than any other reform;⁶Phillip D. Moore’s speech on the third day was a direct assault on organized religion in America. Moore argued that attachment to individual denominations hindered efforts at social reform. Moore argued that men had become “American slaves” to those institutions and would never advocate reform. Moore further argued that Spiritualism would lead more people to support social reforms in the coming years. , 10-17. but the weight of argument, and the facts
presented on the negative of the question, I thought, were overwhelming.
This is the point which I wish to bring out in as few words as possible.

In the variety of the great and vital subjects that were presented to that
meeting, and so ably discussed through the long sittings of three days, it is
not strange that in some particulars your remembrance of them should be
indistinct; and as a lover of truth and correctness, I tho’t you would like to
have the mistake corrected.
Yours, truly,

A. P.⁷Douglass inserted the following editorial comment immediately following the letter from Post in his newspaper: “Remarks.—The above communication from our respected friend is correct in this particular—two gentlemen, both Spiritualists we are informed, did insist that the wrongs of the free woman were greater than those of the slave, and that the “Woman’s Rights’ reform was of more importance than the anti-slavery reform; but has our correspondent forgotten that Spiritualism, it was asserted, had done more for humanity in the last five years, than the Christian religion in 1800, and as a consequence, was 'first and pre-eminent;' and when we questioned of what it had done for the slave, we were told we must not inquire? Of course, these questions are not put to provoke a rejoinder, as we think enough has already been said upon the subject.—Ed.”: , 24 June 1859.

PLIr: FDP, 24 June 1859.