Wilmington, Jan. 25, 1849.

FRederick Douglass: — Though native of a different State, still in anything relating to our people, I am insensible of boundaries. The statement of Rev. H. H. Garnet which appeared in the North Star of the 19th inst., relative to the very wretched condition of thirty thousand of our people in your State, and your willingness to listen to suggestions from any one interested, has induced me to send you these lines, which I beg you to insert if you think worthy.

The picture he drew, sir, of thirty thousand, is a fair representation of many more thousands in this country. The moral and intellectual debasement portrayed, is true to the life. How, in view of everything, can it be otherwise? We bring a heavy charge against the church and people of this country, which they themselves can hardly deny; but have we not been, and are we not still, "adding fuel to the flame;" or do our efforts, to the contrary, succeed as we have reason to expect? We are not satisfied with the result in every way—may be we have reason for not being. With others, I have for some time doubted the efficiency of the means for the end. Do you not think, sir, that we should direct our attention more to the farming interest than hitherto? I suggest this, as concerning the entire people. The estimation in which we would be held by those in power, would be quite different, were we producers, and not merely, as now, consumers. He, sir, proposed a Convention without distinction of caste—a proposition which no doubt will be acceptable, because by exchanging views with those who have every advantage, we are materially benefitted. Persons likely to associate with our people in such manner, are generally educated people, and possessed of depth of sentiment. Their influence on us should not be lightly considered. We have been holding conventions for years—have been assembling together and whining over our difficulties and afflictions, passing resolutions on resolutions to any extent; but it does really seem that we have made but little progress, considering our resolves. We have put forth few practical efforts to an end. I, as one of the people, see no need for our distinctive meetings, if we do not do something. We should do more, and talk less. What intellectually we most need, and the absence of which we most feel, is the knowledge of the white man, a great amount of which, by intercourse in public meetings, &c., we could glean, and no possible opportunity to seize upon which should be allowed to escape. Should not the importance of his literature upon us, and everything tending to add to his influence, be forcibly impressed, and we be directed to that course? The great fault of our people, is in imitating his follies; individual enterprise and self-reliance are not sufficiently insisted upon. The influence of a corrupt clergy among us, sapping our every means, and, as a compensation, inculcating ignorance as a duty, superstition as true religion—in short, hanging like millstones about our necks, should be faithfully proclaimed. I am willing to be convinced to the contrary, if possible; but it does really seem to me that our distinctive churches and the frightfully wretched instruction of our ministers—their gross ignorance and insolent bearing, together with the sanctimonious garb, and by virtue of their calling, a character for mystery they assume, is attributable more of the downright degradation of the free colored people of the North, than from the effect of corrupt public opinion; for, sir, notwithstanding the cry of prejudice against color, some think it will vanish by a change of condition, and that we can, despite this prejudice, change that condition. The ministers assume to be instructors in every matter, a thing we would not object to, provided they taught, even in accordance with the age; but in our literature, they hang tenaciously to exploded customs, (as if we were not creatures of progress as well as others,) as they do in everything else. The course of some of our high priests, makes your humble servant, and many others, think money, and not the good of the people, is at the bottom.—The great aim of these gentlemen now, is secrecy in all affairs where our spiritual welfare is being considered. Our conferences, they say, are too public. The open-stated people and laymen learn, as they should not, the transactions in conference and sessions, of these men of God. Depend upon it, sir, "men love darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil." One thing is clear, this hiding the light under a bushel, is not, to those who dare think, very satisfactory; their teaching tends to inculcate submission to them in all things. "Pay no attention to your perishing bodies, children, but get your souls converted; prepare for heaven. The elective franchise would not profit you; a desire for such things indicates worldly mindedness."— Thus any effort to a change of condition by our people is replied to, and a shrinking, priest-rid people, are prevented from seeing clearly. The possibility of final success, when using proper means, the means to be used, the possibility of bringing about the desired end ourselves, and not waiting for the whites of the country to do so, should be impressed on the people by those teachers, as they assume to be the only true ones; or at least there should be no hindrance to their seeing for themselves.

Yours for a better condition,

M. A. ShaddCary, Mary Ann Camberton Shadd

Mary Ann Camberton Shadd Cary (1823–93) was born free in Wilmington, Delaware, to a family of prominent black abolitionists. She was educated at a private Quaker school and went on to teach at several schools for black children. After the passage of the Fugitive Slave Act in 1850, Shadd Cary became an outspoken advocate for voluntary immigration to Canada, and in the fall of 1851 she moved to Canada and opened a school. She married Thomas Fauntleroy Cary, and together they had two children. While in Canada, she partnered with Samuel Ringgold Ward to publish a newspaper, the Provincial Freeman, in Toronto. Her controversial opinions and forceful style earned her much criticism, her most notable feud being with Henry Bibb. She returned to the United States in 1863 to recruit soldiers for the Civil War. She studied law at Howard University after the war, receiving her degree in 1883. Throughout her life, she was active in many causes, including abolition, emigration, women’s rights, African American rights, and temperance. Jim Bearden and Linda Jean Butler, Shadd: The Life and Times of Mary Shadd Cary (Toronto, 1977); Rhodes, Mary Ann Shadd Cary; DCB (online); John A. Garraty and Mark C. Carnes, eds., American National Biography, 24 vols. (New York, 1999), 4:522–23. .