Shall we have a Convention?

FRIEND DOUGLASS:—As the question of
holding a Convention is now being mouted
among our people, and you desire to hear
from them on the subject, I wish to give a
few reasons why I think a Convention or
mass gathering is, to say the least, injudici-
ous.

First—the expenses necessarily incurred,
by a large attendance upon such gatherings,
are out of all proportion to the advantages
derived from them, which the Conventions
hitherto held will most abundantly attest.

Second—nine-tenths of the money thus
expended, as a general thing, goes into the
packets of white men—railroad, steamboat,
and hotel proprietors, many of whom refuse
to acknowledge the equality of colored men
the moment their fare is settled.

Third—I am most thoroughly convinced
that the elevation of the colored man de-
pends almost entirely upon individual effort,
which must infuse itself to the masses by
contagion or infection, not however for their
destruction, but for their elevation. It is a
proposition susceptible of the clearest de-
monstration, and which all history proves,
that great reforms seldom, if ever, commence
with the masses-our case cannot be an ex-
ception to the universal rule.

And, fourthly—when a Convention is set-
tled on, the people, the great body who do
not attend, are very apt to cherish high an-
ticipations which are never realized; and
after the Convention adjourns, a re-action
takes place which throws them back into
their former apathy and indifference, from
which nothing will arouse them, even tem-
porarily, but another Convention, which will
again create expectations that cannot be re-
alized; in a word, Conventions among us
may be aptly compared to a beautiful sky-
rocket that ascends, and, for a moment, il-
lumines the surrounding space, but soon
comes down, leaving all around wrapped in
darkness. As one of the people, I am upon
the whole opposed to a Convention.

Your friend,

J. W. RANDOLPH.

PHILADELPHIA, April 30th, 1853.