[Illegible] in American Min[illegible].

[...] I suggested that it was undesirable for a [illegible], formed for a [certain] object, to excommunicate its friends, [on the] ground of difference as to some other ob[illegible]. A perfect Church, however, embraces [illegible]y moral as well as spiritual reform: a[illegible] must rejoice to see ministers keeping [ ] people free from the corruptions of the world, and congregations supporting them in their purpose. We should all be glad to aid in the abolition of slavery in the United States; the only question is as to the means. If in our zeal for justice and brotherhood we forget, even in appearance, the rights of conscience, and that charity which thinketh no evil, we shall turn against our own side the sympathy which the good always feel for the injured.

When we wish to act upon those at a distance, it is desirable to avoid the sources of [illegible] understanding and to adopt those means [illegible]essing our feelings, which previous usage has rendered intelligible. If communion on the part of exclusive churches might be [interpreted] as approval, exclusion on the part of liberal churches might denote—something which we do not quite intend. Hitherto our church, being a non-subscribing one, with few laborers and a wide field, has made up for the smallness of its size by the largeness of its spirit. We use our own discretion, indeed, as to whom we admit to our pulpits; but we are not in the habit of putting ministers to the question as to their opinions—theological or philanthropical: and any formal resolution, giving a precedent for such a course, may excite a reasonable alarm in all who are conscious that their views are those of the minority. Unless we wish our denominational home to [be] converted into a prison on the solitary system, we must not allow independence to become repulsiveness; but as earnest freedom of thought is increasing our differences, we should lay additional stress on the great principles which unite us, and cherish the love which is the bond of perfectness.

The proposed innovation arises from a regard either to ourselves, or to the slaves and their friends in America, or to our brethren of the same faith.

It may be urged that it is necessary for ourselves; and that we expose our churches to corruption, or at least, indicate our indifference to it, if we permit Americans to preach for us, who have, it is asserted, countenanced slavery. Perhaps, however, there is no sufficient ground for fear, that they will strive to make us careless of wrong: their writings form a valuable part of our religious literature; we have had intercourse with some of them in this country, when their principles [were] the same as they are now, yet they warmed our hearts and quickened our consci[illegible], if the [illegible] of our body is what I have believed it to be, do we compromise our opinions by allowing our brethren at home, who hold different ones, occasionally to occupy our pulpits; still less by extending courtesy to brethren from abroad. Our body in America is on the same liberal basis. I preached in Slave States, where I certainly would not have accepted a permanent charge; and congregations listened to me, who as certainly would shrink from being supposed to share my sentiments as to abolition. Nor was I interrogated as to what I should preach; still less as to what I had preached at home. If it is suggested that they showed a liberality towards me which they have not universally exercised towards their countrymen, this does not seem an argument for our witholding from them a liberality which we have exercised towards our countrymen.

Another motive may be, a desire to show our sympathy with the slave, the fugitive, and the courageous advocates for freedom - a desire which all of us approve. But, in fact, we abandon this natural and honorable position—of sympathizing friends, when we set up to be judges in the controversy between them and some other party; for the English judge lays aside his sympathies: where there is doubt, he even gives the benefit of it to the accused, and as it were acts as his counsel. The evidence which is quite sufficient for an advocate, is not enough for a judge; he must hear both sides without favor. We must then reserve our sentence till we have ample and varied testimony on disputed points such as these:—the degree in which the Northern States are responsible for Southern slavery: the alterations made by the Fugitive Slave Bill, on the bearings of the previous question; and how far the Unitarian church is pro-slavery.

But as, for the sake of the Americans, we are introducing a new usage, and passing a sentence which we have never recorded against our own ministers, we must be further in a position to determine the excess of guilt in American slavery over other systems which we tolerate. Here again, we must forsake our position as warm-hearted friends of the oppressed, to cross-examine and scrutinize with the caution of judges. The evidence against slavery must be received in the same spirit as the evidence against the selfish systems at home. We must hear the Chartist and the Socialist, as well as the denouncer of war and intemperance, as candidly as we do the Abolitionist: and on the other hand we must hear those who dispute the completeness of the case made out against slavery, as dispassionately as do those who refuse to accept, without qualification, the complaints of the crushed and degraded in our own dominions; who deny that the horrors with which our papers, and the reports of commissioners, abound, are quite conclusive; and even intimate that the existence of unjust and cruel laws does not prove their general enforcement. Then, again, we must lend a patient ear to all the charges brought by eager reformers against some of our brethren at home; and whatever explanations we give in their behalf, we must be ready to offer for those who are not here to answer for themselves. No doubt in this process we shall gain a vast amount of knowledge, and shall become wiser and sadder men. But whether we can fix an early day for pronouncing judgment seems doubtful; for evidence on each side accumulates faster than we can dispose of it: it is one consolation, that the parties have not agreed to require our decision. Perhaps our attempt may enlarge our charities, whilst it increases our candor. We descend from the judgment-seat, and once more stand as advocates for the degraded and forsaken in both continents: and if we exclaim, "Let us not judge one another any more," we add, "but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling block, or an occasion to fall, in his brother's way."

My general impression of the Unitarian ministers in the United States was, that their influence was in favor of freedom. Some few there may be for whom public reforms have little interest; some others appeared the conservative on this question; but I could not doubt their sincerity. Many, who rest under suspicion in England, I could not but [illegible] of liberty; the [illegible] and self-[illegible] of others is well known to [illegible] desire that I should make the [illegible] acquaintance of those who [illegible] [painfully]. I trust that we shall not [illegible] our [illegible] fellow-laborers, from [illegible] welcome which England so [illegible] we give them an opportunity, by [illegible] intercourse, of explaining their own [illegible], we shall be enabled to show them [illegible] we think them in error, let us [illegible] truth by those methods which our [own exp]erience has found most efficacious. It [illegible] be good for them to observe how dear the [cause] of the slave is to us, how little the color of his skin repels us, how deeply his [illegible] moves us. Perhaps they will have it [illegible] season for us. Outward bonds and fetters are not the only ones which the air of England should corrode. Let us help all our visitors to return freer men. Let them learn that we respect the claims of brotherhood, and have no fear of bearing the plainest truths. Let us strive together to know the truth, and the truth shall make us free.

Yours faithfully,

R. L. CarpenterCarpenter, Russell Lant

The Reverend Russell Lant Carpenter (1816-92), a Unitarian minister, spent his childhood in Bristol, England. He attended Bristol College in preparation for a life of ministry, continued his studies at Manchester and York Colleges and was one of the first to graduate from London University in 1840. Carpenter became intensely involved in the temperance movement and subsequently quit his pastorate at Bridgwater, England, since part of the church's endowment came from taverns selling liquors. In August 18-19 he journeyed to the United States, where he spent a full year preaching from Montreal to St. Louis to Boston. His father, Dr. Lant Carpenter, was a well-known teacher whose Unitarian writings were already known to the antislavery men of the day. Thus, Carpenter became acquainted with Garrison, Douglass, and others. Having returned to England, he married in 1853 and continued his ministerial work there until his death. His works include Memoirs of Lant Carpenter (1842), Discourses and Devotional Services (1849), A Monotessaron (1851), and a biography about his brother, Philip, Memoirs of the Life and Work of Philip Pearsall Carpenter (1880). Carpenter also contributed frequently to the Inquirer and to other periodicals. London Inquirer, 30 January 1892. .

May 26th.