Letter from George C. Blanchard.

Frederick Douglass: Dear Sir:—We live in a time of great tergiversation and deception—in a time of great political and moral excitement! The love of honor, the love of money, which is truly "the root of all evil," cause men to go beyond the truth in their statements and charges. In the excitement which usually precedes an election, the character and principles of each of the great political parties of the day, are somewhat truthfully represented by each other.—The Whig press tells us of the rascality of loco-focoism, and the loco-foco press tells us of the rascality of Whiggery. By this paper warfare, we get possession of many important truths. Now, allowing either party to tell half the truth, which is, to say the least, charitable, that half is enough to prove us the basest, the most hypocritical politicians in the world! The greater part of those who are selected to fill the principle offices in the state or nation, what are they, allowing only half that is said of them to be true? Are they men to whom professors of Christianity should give their support? Is it fitting that they, who profess to be followers of Christ, should give their suffrages for men who set aside God's holy law whenever it suits their wicked purposes? Is this Christianity? Can a church be pure when most of its members are corrupt? Can men be pure in heart, can they be striving to be perfect, even as their Father in heaven is perfect, when they vote for men to rule over them who make, or approve law in opposition to the laws of God? Is it absurd to think such men mean

anything good by their profession. They wear only the garb of Christianity.

Are the ruling politicians of the day, men such as republicans should trust with office? Are they men who work for the people's welfare? Are they fit exponents of democracy? If they are, then wo[e] to this "republic!" If they are, then away with such republicanism, and give us tyranny at once! Such democracy is too great a burden for any republic to stagger under, and, as a consequence, must be crushed by it. When election approaches, rum-shops are thrown open far and wide. These hell-gates are often thrown open to all who may choose to enter. Their contents, liquid poison, are free for a time. They who get the offices, of course, foot the bill. Many church members disapprove this; but as a body, they do not act against it. How can they, says one, when the politician and rum-seller are members of the church? And as they do a cash business, they are much needed; for if they were dismembered, a loss to the minister, in dollars and cents, would be the consequence. In a church from which such members cannot be dispensed with, every virtuous man should withdrawn himself. The country has long been cursed by its support of the regular "nominations." The party which supports corrupt men for the sake of harmony, is not entitled to the confidence or support of any.

This supporting bad men for the sake of harmony is a miserable expediency, and ought to destroy it in a day. Thanks to an unshackled press, men are more and more beginning to understand their rights and their duties, and are preparing to act accordingly.

The influence of 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. , Daniel WebsterWebster, Daniel

Daniel Webster (1782–1852) was a lawyer and statesman known for his stirring oratory. As a lawyer, he successfully argued many cases before the Supreme Court, such as the 1816 Dartmouth College case and the 1819 McCulloch v. Maryland case, earning a reputation as a strong nationalist. During the War of 1812 Webster represented New Hampshire in Congress (1812–46). Then, in 1827, he was elected to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts, where he remained in service through most of his life. He continued to take strong nationalist positions in political debates, attacking Andrew Jackson’s 1832 veto of the Second Bank of the United States and opposing Nullification in 1832–33. Webster accepted appointment as secretary of state under William Henry Harrison and was the sole cabinet member from Harrison’s presidency to retain his office during John Tyler’s administration. In 1842 he negotiated the Webster-Ashburton Treaty with Great Britain, establishing the modern boundary between the United States and Canada, but resigned his post a year later and returned to the Senate in 1845. In 1848 Webster made an unsuccessful bid for the Whig presidential nomination, losing to war hero Zachary Taylor. In 1850 Webster once again left the Senate to act as secretary of state under Millard Fillmore, a move that placed him in a good position to bid for the presidency; but he lost the 1852 Whig nomination to Winfield Scott. Though not an abolitionist, he opposed the extension of slavery in the Missouri Compromise of 1820, the Mexican-American War, and the enforcement of the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law. Robert V. Remini, Daniel Webster: The Man and His Time (New York, 1997), 15–21; ANB, 22:865–68; DAB, 11:585–92. , and their like, is becoming magnificently less. Henry Clay's recent letter to a New York committee, proves him in his second childhood. I have been among those who delighted to honor him, but that day is past. New York is beginning to find she has a greater man in the person of 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. .

No man is justifiable in supporting demagogues for office. Temperance has been stayed in her sublime mission; thousands have been hurried to a drunkard's grave by the unholy efforts of corrupt men to obtain office. What friend of Temperance is not appalled at the very thought of election day? I, myself, have seen a deacon of a Dutch re-

formed church behind the bar on election day, dealing out to his neighbors while many were unable to keep their perpendicularity. Some "very good" men justify their support of bad men, on the ground of securing a canal enlargement or some other enlargement which will benefit the State. No circumstance can possibly arise in which it is the duty of a citizen to support corrupt men.—Better that the canal never be enlarged, than that we elect to office a single individual who is corrupt enough to sustain the Fugitive Slave Law. I know men of the church in good and regular standing, who say, religion has nothing to do with politics; meaning, when we come to the polls, religion must be left at home, and none need deny that the majority live up to the declaration. If our country is to be saved from the curse of all nations, it is quite time religion had something to do with polit[i]cs. Religion, such as Christ taught, would have saved France before Bonaparte became dictator. Religion, such as Clarkson, and Wilberforce, and Howard practiced, would preserve the union of these States; the want of it will, very likely, bring about disunion. The church of this country contains many good men; but as a church, it is wofully corrupt, for it is always ready to sneer at whatever is unpopular. It affects to despise every genuine reform which has for its object the good of the human race. It stands by the strong when they oppress the weak. It says slavery is wrong, for that is popular. It supports the Fugitive Law, and declares it will not change its sentiments in this respect any faster than it is necessary to do in order to keep pace with the people—that is, no faster than is necessary to keep on the popular side.—They mean the bible is anti-slavery, when the people or the majority of them say so, and not before.

The anti-slavery cause is wonderfully potential in drawing out the true character of men and bodies of men, and it has developed, in the church and out of it, a truly alarming amount of corruption. I have heard members of the church in the city of Washington, denounce some of the best men in New York, because they were abolitionists, calling them traitors, fanatics, &c. Why, Mr. Editor, many of them don't know enough to go home in a dark night, notwithstanding they have so long been under the shadow of the Capitol where Clay and Webster, and Calhoun have talked so eloquently. True religion has always been unpopular, and is so to-day. Yet "religion" in Washington is very popular. I have seen Henry Clay bow his head in the Representative Chamber, while a Union-saving preacher (Dr. Hawks, I think it was) was imploring blessings on the "glorious Union." Whoever thinks "religion" unpopular in Washington, is quite mistaken. I do not know that Webster or Clay reformed there, but most likely they both did, for Washington is well supplied with the gospel, and with gospel teachers. However, their religion is all of the compromise sort, and so requires little if any self-denial.

It is the religion which holds better than three millions of our own countrymen in bondage. Virtue and beauty, the weakness of youth and the feebleness of age, all are sacrificed by this religion. The peace and welfare of the country require it.

Every intelligent man knows—all history proves—that when individual men or governments disobey that holy law, "therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye unto them," evil is the consequence. If politicians would obey this law, it would be much better for our country. But our politicians are wiser than God, and so manufacture laws in direct conflict with His, and then would hang those who choose to obey Him who is the source of all law.—If a man does as he would be done by, he is a fanatic, a traitor, and in danger of the lower law. It is better and more safe to incur the punishment of the lower law than of the higher.

Obedience to the higher law is always safe. Judges and juries may cause the destruction of the body; but "the soul is immortal and will never die." We will fear not those who destroy the body, and after that have nothing more that they can do; but rather fear Him who hath power to destroy both soul and body. If we obey the Fugitive Law, we are unworthy of our ancestors; we are fit instruments for slaves ourselves—fit for nothing but servitude and chains. Whoever obeys it, is morally a coward, and deserves not that his age should secure him from insult. He deserves not that his name should live after him; it should be forever blotted from the memory of mankind! Whoever refuses obedience to it, is the truest man to his country, and will be so held by coming generations. "Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God." Hence, all good men, every true christian, will scorn obedience to a law so infernal, and fit to have existed only in the dark ages. Coming generations will be surprised to learn that in the year

1850, there was found in the Senate of the United States a majority in favor of a law for the capturing of slaves, or "fugitives from service," and returning them to bondage.—That Southern men should have voted for that law, abominable as it is, was to be expected; but that men, educated in the "Free States," should have stooped to so contemptible a work, is deplorable. But such men there were, and we are reaping the bitter fruit. These lower law men are a disgrace to the age. By passing the Fugitive Law, they have done much to weaken respect for all laws. Just in proportion as the people are virtuous, will they manifest hostility to it. No government can long exist which makes and obeys laws repugnant to justice. God intended government to protect the weak, not to oppress them! The world's history is pregnant with the ruinous effects of bad laws, which are most commonly an index of the nation's morals. If our rulers do not obey the laws of God, the people have no right to yield obedience to laws of their making. No body of men on earth, however perfectly they may be united, can legalize robbery. They cannot make it right for any one to rob a man of his clothes; how much less, then, can they make it right to take from a man his wife or child? No law is obligatory which tells me to assist in molesting a man guilty of no crimes. Where is the traitor to his country who says the individual that defendeth himself against the malacious attack of Gorsuch and his audacious confederates, was guilty of crime?

It is easier to make the charge than to prove it. The men who refused to be taken back to bondage on that occasion, were only acting out the spirit of one of Virginia's sons, when he said "Give me liberty, or give me death." That principle which Nature, the Common Parent, planted in the bosom of Henry, she seems also to have planted in the bosom [of some] others. If carrying out the principle is treason now, it must have been treason then. England said it was

treason, and we replied from the cannon's mouth, and refuted her. Nor was England alone; there were men among us who said Patrick Henry was guilty of treason, and the race has not yet died out, but is alarmingly on the increase. They have even got possession of the strong holds of government!—"Righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin is a curse to any people." and this nation is reaping the curse. This nation committed a great sin when it first compromised with slavery; and instead of making any atonement, we have kept adding insult to injury, and we have yet got to suffer for the injury we have inflicted on the African race in our midst. We can no more escape than other nations. Nations can be punished only on earth, but individuals hereafter. It will be no excuse for the individual that he obeyed the lower law. Laws in opposition to God's, have no binding force. The Stamp Act had no binding force. Why was that Act resisted? Simply because "Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God." God is unchangeable.—Justice is unchangeable. Hence, resistance to tyranny is as much our duty now as ever. We cannot obey the Fugitive Law and obey God. We cannot obey it and do humanity or christianity service. It does violence to every benevolent feeling planted within us by the all-wise Creator. We cannot obey it without debasing ourselves below the most detestable traitors on earth. Whoever will disobey God so much as to surrender a single fugitive, ought not to have a single foot of God's green earth on which to rest the sole of his feet! They who obey the Fugitive Law because they dislike to disobey a law of their country, would neglect to pray, only they dare not, thinking or acting on the principle that obedience is the thing necessary; as to feeling, that's no part of the business.—Obedience to the Fugitive Law is wrong to our country; for in proportion as we obey this law is our country disgraced. If we were wise, we would profit by the history of other nations. "Be wise now, therefore, O ye rulers; be instructed, ye that are judges of the earth. Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son least he be angry, and ye perish from the way."—Our rulers and judges are too much absorbed in lower law affairs to heed this injunction.—It needs no [seer] to foretell the destiny of our country. We shall yet be made to attone for our oppression of the colored race. The awfulness of that attonement, the future alone can reveal.

Geo. C. BlanchardBlanchard, George C.

George C. Blanchard (c. 1818–89) was a manufacturer and merchant who lived in Greene County, New York in 1850. By at least 1865, he was regularly conducting business in Beaufort, South Carolina and, by 1870, had moved to Virginia. Sometime between then and 1880, Blanchard removed to Hill County, Texas, where he died by 1889. His obituary calls him “Maj. George Blanchard,” but his service with the army remains a mystery. “Obituary,” Dallas (Tex.) Morning News, 13 September 1889; 1850 U. S. Census, Windham, Greene, New York; 1855 New York State Census, E.D. 1, Wallkill, Orange; 1865 New York State Census, District 01, Middletown, Orange; 1870 U. S. Census, St. Anne's Parish, Albemarle, Virginia; 1880 U. S. Census, Justice Precinct 8, Hill, Texas. .

Palenville, Nov. 25th, 1851.