Chicago, Ill., March 3d, 1851.

Friend Douglass:ーIf I could advance any new or additional arguments to those already advanced by yourself and others, against the Colonization scheme, as advocated by Henry ClayClay, Henry

Henry Clay (1777-1852), a native Virginian, entered politics during the 1790s in his adopted state of Kentucky and rose quickly to national prominence. As a congressman, senator, secretary of state, founder of the Whig party, and regular presidential candidate, Clay espoused broadly nationalistic programs designed to avoid sectional antagonism caused by the issue of slavery. He figured prominently in the debates that led to the passage of the Missouri Compromise, and he was a leading architect of the Compromise of 1850. His support of the American Colonization Society earned him the lasting hostility of Garrisonian abolitionists. In Congress, Clay vigorously opposed abolitionist petitions against slavery in the District of Columbia. Robert V. Remini, Henry Clay: Statesman for the Union (New York, 1991); Richard H. Sewell, Ballots for Freedom: Antislavery Politics in the United States, 1837-1860 (New York, 1976), 109; DAB, 4:73-79. and others, I would gladly avail myself of the opportunity; but the whole ground has been fully canvassed, and therefore, there is not room for me to add anything new or interesting upon the subject. I think, however, that it can be safely said that the sentiments of the most intelligent of our people, throughout the Union, are opposed to leaving the country, while three millions of our fellow-countrymen remain in slavery. What could wear the appearance of meanness and cowardice, more than that of abandoning the country, leaving our enslaved brethren to the mercy and despotic control of a people and government, whose only aim seems to be the devising of new plans of oppression and degradation? But surely if moral influence, the medium of which it is said we are to effect the abolition of slavery in this country, is to be relied upon, it does seem to me that we could better effect the object by remaining here, than by going to Africa, from whence we would have to throw our influence across the Atlantic. But the truth is, we know that the authors of the Colonization scheme, were the very men, of all others, who were anxious to get rid of us, and they could devise no better scheme to get us out of the country than through the medium of their pretended friendships of bettering our condition by colonizing us in Africa. But your ninth Lecture, in Corinthian Hall, Rochester, February 2d, '51, is full of argument upon the subject, and is much better adapted to the purpose than anything I could say in this communication. But when I reflect upon the condition of our people in this country, and behold the gloomy prospect before us, I am forced to ask, in the name of high heaven what is to become of us? But in the midst of all this dreariness and gloom, may I not say, that "doubtless a God of justice and mercy will yet awaken to our distresses." But, says some of our learned divines, How awaken to your distresses? I answer, "by diffusing moral light and a love of liberty among the people." Can any man who has a mind to comprehend, and the means of information within his reach, say that light is not bursting in upon us from every quarter? Does not all Europe give signs of the dawn of light? And does not all civilization give testimony to the same import? And is not this some encouragement for us to be patient, and to "wait a little longer for the good time coming."

Coeval with moral light is the love of liberty; and when the love of liberty dies entirely out of the hearts of the people, we may still look for progress, however slow, in the direction of true liberty. Nor should we be discouraged by the efforts which are being put forth from certain high sources, to stifle and to check the tide of "light and liberty among the people," and especially when we are reminded that freedom is not a gift of man, but of God; and we believe that no gift of God can ever be entirely taken from us by mortal man. Great Britain had not the power to take it from our Revolutionary sires, and it is to be hoped that future generations may never have the power to annihilate it.

But I do not say the Colonization scheme is wholly incapable of doing good. But suppose it were to succeed, in a long time, in colonizing all Africa, would that free one slave in America, when the professed object of its founders were not to send the slave there, but the free people of color only.

It is also contended as an objection to the immediate emancipation of the slaves, that they would be incapable of self-government, were they all to be let loose at once, without the necessary preparation. But how does it happen that the moment they become free in this country, they are at once capable of self-government in Africa, without any further preparation. Surely if we, though "a corrupt class," would be good citizens, and capable of self-government in Africa, why should we not be equally so in America? But it must be acknowledged, by all sound, sober-thinking men, that however well those men may argue on other subjects, yet, on this subject, they seem to lose sight of all consistency. What man, endowed with a common share of talents, would have ventured to throw out to the scrutiny of the civilized world, such crooked and crippled-up logic as that of Daniel Webster's on the exclusion of slavery from California and New Mexico by the geography and climate of those territories. Suppose one of our "corrupt and dissolute class," had ventured to present to the enlightened pople of the United States, such silly and simple arguments as those of Daniel Webster's just referred to, what would have been said by a great majority of the people; why, "it is just like the reasonings of a thick-headed nigger, what else could we expect;" but, not so in this case, for this is the "great expounder of the Constitution." If Webster were to say that the city of Boston is in the State of Maine, there are those who would believe it, and who would say, All right; it must be so, Webster has said it.

But no, the free people of color, should be awake to all subjects of the day, pertaining to our weal or woe, and should endeavor to assume some position, and to act in accordance with reason and principle. But before I close, permit me to observe, that, in order to become anything in this country, we cannot too strongly enforce, nor too often remind our people of the necessity of cultivating our minds, and of leaving the large cities and towns and resorting to the woods. There is no use of disguising facts, for the truth is, we will have to come to this sooner or later, and we might as well make a break now, as at some future period. Every new arrival of emigrants from the Old World tends to hasten the period. Let us look to these things, and put forth our best effots in the matter, and trust in God for success.

Yours, as ever,

H. O. WagonerWagoner, Henry O.

One of Douglass’s most enduring friendships was with Henry O. Wagoner, Sr. (1816–1901). Born in Hagerstown, Maryland, to a formerly enslaved mother and a German father, Wagoner learned to read and write despite a lack of formal education. He spent most of his youth working on western Maryland farms, but fled to Ohio in 1838 out of fear that his Underground Railroad activities had roused suspicion. The following year he moved to Galena, Illinois, where he found employment as a newspaper typesetter and bill collector. He next worked for a newspaper and taught school in Chatham, Canada West, from 1843 until he relocated to Chicago in 1846 to run a profitable milling business. Wagoner met Douglass during one of the latter’s lecture tours in Illinois in the late 1840s and became an occasional correspondent for Douglass’s newspaper. Wagoner participated in abolitionist activities and aided John Brown in March 1858 by offering his mill as a hiding place for escaping Missouri slaves en route to Canada. During the Civil War, Wagoner recruited black troops for regiments in Illinois and Massachusetts. In 1865 he settled in Denver, Colorado, where he established a barbering business and quickly became a leader in the African American community. An active Republican, Wagoner campaigned for equal male suffrage as Colorado applied for statehood in the 18605, served as deputy sheriff of Arapaho County, Colorado, between 1865 and 1875, and received an appointment as clerk of the Colorado state legislature in 1876. With years of friendship between them, Wagoner and Douglass aided each other’s adult sons. In 1866 Wagoner hosted Frederick, Jr., and Lewis in Denver, teaching them typography. Eight years later Douglass returned the favor by helping to secure Henry O. Wagoner, Jr., a position as consular clerk in Paris, France. The younger Wagoner died while in Lyons, France, and upon the elder Wagoner’s request, Douglass looked for the grave during his 1886 European tour. NS, 18 February 1848, 24 August 1849; FDP, 11 December 1851; Denver Rocky Mountain News, 28 December 1901; Henry O. Wagoner to Douglass, 27 August 1866, 10 December 1873, 23 March 1878, 13 July, 13 October 1885, 19 August 1886, 1 September 1890, 17 August 1893, Henry O. Wagoner, Jr., to Douglass, 2 April 1874, 12 May 1877, Douglass to Lewis Douglass, 24 January 1887, all in General Correspondence File, reel 2, frames 197–98, 700–703, 733–36, reel 3, frames 122–26, 241–43, reel 4, frames 193, 217–19, 380–81, reel 5, frames 783–84, reel 32, frames 250–51, FD Papers, DLC; William Simmons, Men of Mark: Eminent, Progressive and Rising (Alexandria, Va., 1887), 679–84; Benjamin Quarles, Allies for Freedom: Blacks and John Brown (New York, 1974), 39, 59; Quintard Taylor, In Search of the Racial Frontier: African Americans in the American West, 1528–1990 (New York, 1998), 123. .