FREDERICK DOUGLASS TO WILLIAM WHIPPER

Rochester[, N.Y.] 9 June 1870.

WM WHIPPER ESQR.

MY DEAR WHIPPER:

Your letters are always welcome. We understand each other about as well
as is possible to mortals. The noise made among the Colored people about
my Horticultural Hall Speech¹On 26 April 1870, Douglass delivered a speech at Horticulture Hall in Philadelphia to celebrate the ratification of the Fifteenth Amendment. During this address, Douglass refused to praise God for any role he might have played in the antislavery movement, instead thanking the countless men and women who fought and died to end slavery. Many black Christian leaders in the city—including Bishop Jabez Campbell of Bethel Colored Methodist Episcopal Church in Philadelphia—severely criticized Douglass for his statements. Campbell led a meeting to address Douglass and his challenges to Christianity. The group adopted a set of resolutions condemning Douglass and his views, including his belief that Bible study should not be conducted in public schools. Douglass replied to these resolutions in a letter to the editor of the Philadelphia Press. The letter was also published in the 7 July 1870 issue of the New York Independent. Boston Investigator, 29 June 1870; New York Independent, 7 July 1870; Reginald F. Davis, Frederick Douglass: A Precursor of Liberation Theology (Macon, Ga., 2005), 54–55; John Ernest, ed., Douglass in His Own Time: A Biographical Chronicle of His Life, Drawn from Recollections, Interviews, and Memoirs by Family, Friends, and Associates (Iowa City, Iowa, 2014), 123; William L. Van Deburg, “Frederick Douglass: Maryland Slave to Religious Liberal,” Maryland Historical Magazine, 69: 27, 38 (Spring 1974). has given me a new impression of the evils
wrought by Slavery. It has almost completely divested us of a love of Philosophical Inquiry. We are afraid of it. Such has been our training that we
cannot trust our natural powers—and <we> lean upon authority more like
children than grown up men. We make ten preachers to one thinker—and
value a scriptural text, far higher than a scientific truth. Slavery never
admitted our manhood. It always called us “boys”— and its whole machinery was so managed to keep us “boys—”

It is time that colored men had waked up to this fact. We have cultivated a love of the marvelous so long, that the simple truth of things
seems to have no attraction for us. It is far pleasanter to us to pursue what
cannot be known than that which may be known. Geology, Chemistry,
Astronomy, Botany, Philology, Ethology—and profane history have no
voice to the masses of our people.

One sweep of the Telescope around the Heavens—convert Genesees
into a mith²Douglass contends that science raises serious doubts about the literal accuracy of the creation myth in Genesis. Gen. 1: 1–31.—The commonest stone on the Earth does the work for the
six days story. But one would be stoned if he said so in the presence of
the religious crowd of colored people, yet all intelligent white men know
this—and know it none the less because they still cling to the Bible. Do
you know that very many scientific men allow themselves to be misunderstood by the church simply because they lack the moral courage
to face the fury of the crowed—which you know are generally furious
in proportion to their ignorance. Others sail along with the church because they fear persecution and starvation. Even George Comb—in his
admirable work, the Constitution of Man,³Writings on moral education by the Scottish phrenologist George Combe (1788–1858) enjoyed a wide circulation on both sides of the Atlantic. Combe argued that happiness resulted from relentless efforts at moral, mental, and physical self-improvement, and that it advanced in proportion to one’s increase in knowledge. The American antislavery community esteemed Combe because “he put himself in communication with the American abolitionists, and ever afterwards kept the channel open.” NASS, 11 September 1858; Washington National Era, 30 September 1858; George Combe, The Constitution of Man Considered in Relation to External Objects (1834; New York, 1974); George Shepperson, “Frederick Douglass and Scotland,” JNH, 38: 307–21 (July 1953); The Dictionary of National Biography, 22 vols. (London, 1921–22), 4: 883–85. after proving—<beyond>
questions that man is in his life what he is in his mutual and moral endowments.—What he is in his very Constitution, goes on to make room
for faith. He wrote in Scotland—Superstitious Scotland—and he must
do this or starve.

As to my taking dear Mr Weir—in place of Bishop Campbell⁴Jabez Pitt Campbell (1815–91) was born in Slaughter Neck, Delaware, to free black parents, Anthony and Catherine Campbell. When he was a youth, his father used him as a security for a debt. When Anthony could not repay the debt, Campbell was forced into slavery. After four and a half years, he was able to pay off the debt and, at age eighteen, regain his freedom. Settling in Philadelphia, Campbell became a member of the Bethel A.M.E. Church and entered the ministry in 1839. From 1856 to 1858 he served as the editor of the Christian Recorder, and in 1864 he was elected a bishop of the A.M.E. Church. Never prominent in black antislavery activities, Campbell was a member of the African Colonization Society and became its vice president in 1876. Throughout his lifetime, he and his wife, Mary Ann, contributed money to many philanthropic institutions, including Wilberforce College in Ohio and Jabez Pitt Campbell College (later Jackson State University) in Mississippi. African Repository and Colonial Journal, 53: 48 (Washington, D.C., 1877); Benjamin T. Tanner, An Apology for African Methodism (Baltimore, 1867), 158–71; Smith, Notable Black American Women, 2: 80–81; Simmons, Men of Mark, 1031–33. you
hit the nail exactly on the head. I know and appreciate Mr Weir. He is
sharpe—but not weighty—intense but not strong—quick but not powerful—

as I a debator—he would be a more formidable opponent than
Bishop Campbell—but for the sake of the position of the latter I prefer
him to Mr Weir.

This whole matter has been more widely circulated than I expected
and will undoubtedly close some doors to me were heretofore open—
but I am prepared for the words and am happy in the consciousness of
being right.

Very truly yours

FREDERICK DOUGLASS

ALS: Leon Gardiner Miscellaneous Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania.