Skip to main content

A Philo to Frederick Douglass, October 25, 1853

D6507_Page_1

MR.EDITOR:—I laughed heartily in read-
ing the communication from your corres-
pondent, Sister Charlotte K—; the name
as much as the matter was the cause of the
amusement. Do I know her ladyship? I
should. She is posted, and must have re-
sided near the "drug-shop in the Fifth
Ward," spoken of by her; not only so, but
she has, in all probability, like Jafet, been
thro' the "rudiments." This impression gains
strength from the following fact: She was
an early advocate of Bloomerism; of this I
am certain, for there was no one present at
the debate alluded to by her, when she was
present, but those who were pantaloons;
hence she may have been through the "rud-
iments;" for "woman's curiosity" sometimes
leads them into strange society.

I should think from her speech that she
had her origin in the "Jarseys," near Com-
munipaw.

Communipaw, Ethiop, and Philo, have, in
our turns, been through the rudiments.—Oh! you should have seen Communipaw, as
he was coming through. How pale he look-
ed; if it were possible, even more so, than
he did a few days ago, when he grappled in
with a huge snapping turtle, while on a
speculating expedition to Fort Hamilton.

Philo still entertains a regard for Odd-Fel-
lowship, as an institution whose principles
and legitmate tendencies are to unite, im-
prove and benefit out people. It is true
that it has been much abused; that events
have been attributed to it; but are they a
necessary sequence? No. Those Monday,
Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday,
Saturday and Sunday engagements were
only the pleasure, the voluntary acts of par-
ties, aside and independent of any obligation
to Odd-Fellowship. Those who were guilty
of the charge proferred by Sister Charlotte,
were soley responsible. Odd-Fellowship
should not be blamed.

The rule of the order was for each lodge
of the order to meet "once a fortnight." It
is true that Sister Charlotte's husband's
lodge broke through the rule, and met four
times a month, because they found it a pleas-
ant school for order and oratory, independ-
ent of the grand ends of the Society, viz: to
aid the brotherhood, to succor the sick and
dying, to see to the widows and orphans; but
the rule of the order was for each lodge to
meet twice a month, and to close at half-past
ten o'clock.

I must not be charged with a lack of char-
ity. If I intimate that Sister Charlotte must
have been a jealous dame, and a selfish one
at last, if she would not cheerfully consent
to her husband's absenting himself from
home two nights a month for charitable pur-
poses; and further, to his being subjected to
a semi-occasional call to administer at the
sick side of some one who might need the
sympathy or assistance of "a brother."

I think that there was some mistake about
Sister Charlotte's husband's Thursday night
engagements, for he was not a member of the
Council,
although he may be a member of the
newly organized National Council, which had
its origin in the late Rochester Convention.
I appreciate the remark of my Sister about
flannels.

Did the reason of 710 execute the "en-
graving" upon Sister Charlotte's memory?—Can Deacon White, of Swamp Regions, tell?
Was it Bris (k) toe (s) that run off with the
dispensation? A PHILO.

YORKVILLE, Oct.25.

N.B.— If you put this in your paper, I
will send further facts with perhaps a full
description of Communipaw returning from [missing text]

D6507_Page_2

Creator

Philo

Date

1853-10-25

Description

A Philo to Frederick Douglass. PLSr: Frederick DouglassP, 4 November 1853. Responds to Charlotte K—’s letter of 1 October; defends Odd Fellowship; criticizes Charlotte K—.

Publisher

This document was calendared in the published volume and has not been published in full before.

Collection

Frederick Douglass' Paper

Type

Letters

Publication Status

Unpublished

Source

Frederick Douglass' Paper