Communicated.

For Frederick Douglass' Paper.

Peterboro, Aug. 28, 1854.

FREDERICK DOUGLASS: MY DEAR FRIEND:—I see in your last paper, your letter to myself. I shall take great pleasure in answering your questions, since you are of the number of those, whose wishes I am especially glad to gratify.

1st. As you are aware, I went to Congress with very little hope of the peaceful termination of American slavery. I have returned with less. I still see no evidence, that the North will act effectually for such termination—for I still see no evidence, that it will act honestly for it. It is true, that I learn of anti-Nebraska indigestion meetings, all over the North. But this does not greatly encourage me. It is repentence, not indignation, which the North needs to feel, and to manifest. It becomes not the North to be angry with the South about the Nebraska bill, or about any other pro-slavery thing.—Her duty is to confess her shame and sorrow, that her political, ecclesiastical, and commercial influence has gone to uphold slavery, and to deceive the but-too-willing-to-be deceived South into the belief, that slavery is right, or, at least, excusable. Had there been such confession, there would have been no Nebraska bill to get angry about, or to make the party capital of. Had there been such confession, the South would have had no heart to extend slavery. All her concern would have been to abolish it.

Now, for the North to be honest in the matter of slavery, is to treat it as they would any other great crime; and, therefore, to deny, that there can be a law for it. It is, in a word, to do unto others, in that matter, as they would have others do unto them, in it. Do the people of the North believe, that they would honor and obey slavery, as law, should it ever lay claim to their own necks? If they do not, then they are dishonest, in acknowledging it to be law, when others are its victims.

Is it said, that the honesty, which I here commend, would exasperate the South? I answer, that it would go far to conquer the South. Let the North say: "We have sinned against our enslaved brother, in acknowledging, that the immeasurable crime against him is capable of the obligations and sacredness of law. We will do so no more—whatever the Constitutions and Statutes may require of us, and however great the losses we may suffer in our trade, and in our political and religoius party connexions." Let the North speak such words of penitence and principle —and the South will listen. When the Northern heart begins to melt, the Southern heart, also, will begin to melt.

It is demonstrations of our honesty, not of our cunning, which are needed to influence and convert the South. The tricks, which Northern Legislatures have resorted to, or threatened to resort to, for the purpose of evading, or nullifying, the fugitive servant clause of the Constitution and the fugitive servant statutes of Congress, can have no tendency to inspire the South either with the fear of us, or the love of us. I need not say it for the ten thousandeth time—that my eyes detect no slavery in the Constitution, and that I utterly deny, that the attempt to smuggle slavery into it was, at all, successful.

But the great mass of the Northern people widely disagree with me, at this point; and, hence, what is required of them by the spirit of truth and the God of truth is, not to practice indirection and fraud, but frankly to acknowledge, that the South has their bond, and that so wicked is the bond, that conscience constrains them to refuse, at whatever hazard, to fulfil it.

I referred to the fact, that my hope of the bloodless termination of American slavery is less now than it was, when I went to Congress. I confess, that I did hope to find some Southern men there, who are willing to aid in bringing about such a termination. But I found none of them, who are willing to lift so much, as a finger, to this end. A few Southern members of Congress seek, by means of nonsensical and wicked speculation on the nature of the African and on Divine purposes, to persuade themselves, that slavery is right in itself. As a matter of course, such contend, that slavery should endure forever. But even with the mass of them, the case is very little more hopeful.—It is true, that they admit, that slavery is, in itself, an evil. But they will do nothing to put an end to it. They had rather amuse themselves with the notion, that Colonization will drain it off, or with some other equally great absurdity—if, indeed, there is, or can be, any other as great. The more, however, that I know of this class of Southern men, the more satisfied I am, that even those of them, who are the most deeply convinced of the wrongfulness of slavery, regard the evil as too formidable for their little courage to grapple with. They are cowed in the presence of its magnitude; and they prefer to let it roll on to an indefinite future, and to a posterity, which, they hope, will have more advantages than now exist, for happily disposing of it.

2nd. You ask, if the anti-slavery cause has anything to hope for from the present Congress. It has not. What can Liberty hope from a Congress, that commits so heinous a crime against her, as to pass the Nebraska bill? What from a House of Representatives, not fifty members of which dare to say, that they were in favor of repealing the fugitive slave Act?

3d. You wish my opinions of the influence of the anti-slavery members of Congress.—I had rather give you my opinions of the members; and, then, you can judge for yourself what must be the character and extent of the influence, which they exert. I take it for granted, that you mean by antislavery members those only, who are known as aboliltionists, and who accept the reproach
of being abolitionists.

Chase is wise, learned, upright. He is an able lawyer and an able statesman. His range of thought and information is wide; and, even without special preparation, he can speak well on the subjects, that come before him.

Sumner is not so ready and versatile, as Chase. But put into his hands a subject, which interests his heart—Peace or Freedom, for instance—and give him time to elaborate it—and where is the man, who can speak or write better? Sumner is as guileless and ingenuous as a child; and, hence my astonishment at the base and ferocious feeling manifested toward him, at one period of the Session. Chase and Sumner are gentlemen—christian gentlemen. Great is my love of them: and were I to add, "passing the love of women," I should not be guilty or great extravagance.

Gillette has been in the Senate but a short time:—long enough, however, to give

evidence, that he has a sound head and a sound heart. He loves the anti-slavery cause, as well as Chase and Sumner; and surpasses them in zeal for the no less precious cause of temperance.

To come to the abolitionists in the House. All know "Old Giddings." An able man is he. His rough, strong, common sense is worth infinitely more than the refinement and polish of which so many light-minded men are vain. He is ready and powerful in debate. An honest and fearless man, too, is he. I shall never forget the many proofs which I witnessed of his unflinching devotion to the right and the true. If his severity upon slaveholders is, sometimes, excessive, nevertheless it is not for them to complain of it. He learned it of them. Or, to say the least, it is a very natural retaliation for the wrongs and outrages, which, for a dozen or fifteen years, they have been industriously heaping upon him. Greatly do I rejoice to see that the friends of freedom have taken him up for another election to Congress. They honor themselves in honoring him. There should not be one vote against him.

I must not fail to advert, in this connexion, to my great obligations to Mr. Giddings for the assistance, which he so kindly and generously afforded me, in my ignorance of the rules of the House.

We turn, next, to Edward Wade of Ohio. A stranger, looking over the House, would make no account of that black little fellow, who sits in one corner of it. But let him read Edward Wade's remarkably strong speech on the Nebraska bill or hear one of his pithy five minutes speeces, and he will find that he has another occasion for applying the Savior's injunction: "Judge not according to the appearance." Wade is an eminently conscientious and religious man. I am glad to see, that he, too, is nominated for another election to Congress. He should be, as often as he is willing to take the nomination.

Colonel DeWitt of Massachusetts was sick much of the Session. All, who were so fortunate, as to become acquainted with him, were impressed with his good sense, generous disposition, and agreeable manners.

As Davis of Rhode Island was chosen by the Democratic party, that party may not thank me for calling him an abolitionist.—Nevertheless, he is one. He has a mother's heart for every human being, and that makes him an abolitionist. I sat next to him, during the whole Session: and I esteemed it no small privilege to sit, for so long a time, by the side of one, who is so sincere, so affectionate, so philanthropic. Davis is a plain, not forcible, speaker. The city of Providence owes him much for his effective speeches in behalf of a large, (perhaps, too large) appropriation for building her custom-house.

I have, now, spoken of all the abolitionists in Congress, save myself: and, since, in the judgment of many, I have fallen from abolition grace, I had better not speak of myself. Do not exult over my apostacy. Even you, though a literally "died in the wool" abolitionist, should rather be admonished by my apostacy to take heed lest you yourself fall.

4th. In answer to your fourth question, I would say, that all the members of Congress, who belong to the Whig or Democartic party, are necessarily "supporters of slavery." Every national party in this country must be pro-slavery. The South will come into no party, and abide in no party, that is anti-slavery. I cheerfully admit, that there is many a Whig, and that there is many a Democrat,

earnestly anti-slavery. Nevertheless, their individual influence against slavery is as nothing compared with their party influence for it. As well may a man, with a mill-stone tied to his neck, try to save his drowning fellows, as a Whig or a Democrat try, under his heavy pro-slavery load, to promote the anti-slavery cause. His anti-slavery endeavors, however sincere, all are frustrated by his pro-slavery party connexion; and that connexion must be dissolved ere he can give effect to those endeavors.—Our national parties, ecclestiastical, as well as political, once abolished and the peaceful death of slavery would be a speedy event.—But the great reason, why we are denied the prospect of this happy event, is that the members of these parties love them too well, and are too far under their infatuating influence, to consent to their abolition.

5th. I proceed to answer your last inquiry. There are in the House a number of gentlemen of remarkable capacity and training for the transaction of business. Conspicuously among them are Haven of New York, and Orr of South Carolina, and Phelps of Mobile—all three of whom are not only judicious, and clear-headed, but swift, in business. Breckenridge of Kentucky is, perhaps, behind none of them. He gave us but few specimens of his powers. They were sufficient, however, to prove, that his very keen and vigorous intellect is habituated to business. Judging from the admirable discharge of his duties, as Speaker, Boyd of Kentucky must be, in all aspects, one of the best business men in the House. Letcher of Virginia, and Jones of Tennessee, are as expert in stopping business, as any members of the House are in doing it; and to stop business is, often times, more meritorious and useful than to do it.

Chandler of Pennsylvania, is prominent among the scholars of the House. Judge Perkins of Louisiana, struck me as a gentleman of very great refinement, both in mind and manner. F. P. Stanton has a rich and beautiful mind. Its turn is as speculative, as R. H. Stanton's is practical. the former of these brothers lives in Tennessee. The latter in Kentucky. With the single exception of Richard, who is all facts and figures, the whole Stanton family, in several of its generations, is highly poetical.

The House can boast of wits, also. Ewing of Kentucky, is inferior to none of them.

I could name several members of the House who are decidedly eloquent. Gov. Smith of Virginia, with his lively mind, smooth and ready utterance, and various other qualities, must be very effective "on the stump." I wish Banks of Massachusetts, would lay hold of themes worthy of his fine powers of oratory. He would find it easier to be eloquent on them than on inferior subjects. Indeed, a great cause is itself eloquence; and the most, which he, who speaks for it needs to do, is to stand out of its way, and let it speak for itself.

Benton in respect to his remarkable fulness of political knowledge, and, in some other respects also, is, of course, the great man of the House. But he is not the only strong man there. There are more than twenty in that Body, who deserve to be called strong men. there is no lack of talent in it. I wish I could add, that there is no lack of morals and manners in it. But, whilst some of the members are emphatically gentlemen, in their spirit and in their personal habits, there are more of them, who

use profane language, or defile themselves with tobacco, or poison themselves with rum. I trust, that the day has already dawned, in which it will not be allowed, that gentlemen can be guilty of such coarse and insulting wickedness, of such sheer nastiness, and of such low and mad sensuality. You were a slave, until you had reached manhood. Hence, the world is surprised, that you have risen into the highest class of public writers and public speakers.—It is no less cause of surprise, how ever, that you are a dignified and refined gentleman. Nevertheless, gentle man and scholar, and orator, as you are, there are strenuous objections to your taking your seat in Congress. How ludicrous a figure, in the eye of reason, is that member of Congress (and there are more than fifty such!) who, in one breath, swears, that he would not so disgrace himself, as to sit by the side of "Fred. Douglass;" and who, in the next breath, squirts his tobacco juice upon the carpet!

I became pretty well acquainted with nearly all the members of the House. In very many of them there was much to please me —much, indeed, to win my affectionate regards. Nevertheless, I could not be blind to the glaring fact, that Congress preeminently needs to witness the achievements of the
Temperance reformation, and the Tobacco reformation, and the religion of Jesus Christ.

Your friend,

GERRIT SMITHSmith, Gerrit

Gerrit Smith (1797– 1874), a New York businessman and land speculator, became best known for his philanthropic work for such reform causes as temperance and abolition. Between 1828 and 1835, he donated large sums of money to the American Colonization Society, but abandoned that movement in 1835 when his sympathies shifted to the immediate abolitionists. In the 1840s, he gave approximately 140,000 acres of land in upstate New York to three thousand black settlers, thus qualifying them to vote. Smith was a founder and frequent candidate of the Liberty party, running for governor of New York on that ticket in 1840 and winning a seat in Congress in 1852. When the Free Soil merger with moderate antislavery Democrats and Whigs lured away many Liberty party supporters, Smith helped bankroll that organization until 1860. Smith befriended Douglass when the latter moved to Rochester, and Smith frequently helped finance Frederick Douglass’ Paper. Like Douglass, Smith supported John Brown, but psychological stress caused by the failure at Harpers Ferry brought on the first of a series of bipolar episodes that greatly reduced his subsequent reform activities. Ralph Volney Harlow, Gerrit Smith: Philanthropist and Reformer (1939; New York, 1972); Gerald Sorin, The New York Abolitionists: A Case Study of Political Radicalism (Westport, Conn., 1971), 269– 87; Lewis Perry, Radical Abolitionism: Anarchy and the Government of God in Antislavery Thought (Ithaca, N.Y., 1973), 170– 80; John R. McKivigan and Madeleine Leveille, “The ‘Black Dream’ of Gerrit Smith, New York Abolitionist,” Syracuse University Library Associates Courier, 20:61– 76 (Fall 1985); NCAB , 2:322– 23; DAB, 17:270– 71. .