« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
Christian marriage, which requires the obedience of the wife, is slavery; and they would modify it, or destroy it. Land monopoly, they say, gives to property or capital a greater power over labor than masters have over slaves; hence, they very wisely and logically conclude, that land, like air and water, should be common property.
The Liberty party is composed of very able men-of philosophers and philanthropists. They have demonstrated, beyond a doubt, that slavery is necessary, unless they can get up a Millenium, or discover a new Social Science. The increasing crime and poverty of mankind, and the utter failure of all social experiments like those of Owen and others, indicate neither the advent of the one, nor the discovery of the other.
This Liberty party are the best allies of the South, because they admit, and continually expose, the utter failure of Free Society.
One of the most distinguished of this party thus writes to Wendell Phillips, Esq.:
“I cannot refrain from expressing, in this connection, my grief that many abolitionists have allowed their faith in the Bible to be shaken."
In my short trip to the North, I was struck with nothing so much as the avowed infidelity of many, and the Christianity melting into infidelty, of the great mass of the balance with whom I conversed. I have no doubt, however, that although such a state of things is too common at the North, yet my peculiar associations made the evil appear greater than it really is. The religious and conservative, like the lily of the valley, are silent and
secluded. As a specimen of this religion melting, as I think, into infidelity, I will give another extract from the letter to Wendell Phillips:
"You have been much censured for holding that the anti-slavery cause can reach success only over the ruins of the American government and the American church. Nevertheless, you are right. The religion which tolerates-nay, sanctifies-slavery, must necessarily be conquered ere the devotees and dupes of that religion will suffer slavery to be abolished. Again, so long as the actual government is on the side of slavery, the bloodless abolition of slavery is impracticable."
The author of the letter from which I quote, and Mr. Phillips to whom it is addressed, are gentlemen, scholars and christians. They are, besides, historical characters. We violate no privacy in holding up their opinions to public view and general criticism. Is their's not Christianity melting into infidelity? I have lately received a book, in two volumes, entitled "The Democracy of Christianity," from its author-William Goodell of New York, a member of the Liberty Party. The author evinces much ability, ingenuity and research. He is one of the millenial Christians-obviously pious and sincere. He sees no exodus from the appalling evils of Free Society, except that state of perfect equality, peace, happiness and security, that he, like the men of Cromwell's day, thinks is promised and predicted in the Bible. I cite the following passage from the conclusion of his work:
"Glance over again the items included in these predictions:-The general and permanent prevalence of peace -the result of justice, equity, security, and the actual possession, by each and every one, of his vine and fig
tree,' i. e. of soil sufficient to produce the needful fruits of the earth, or in some way, a supply of his physical wants."
If this state of things ever occur, God will bring it about without the help of abolitionists.
We do not deem it necessary to quote from the infidel agrarians and abolitionists, because their splendid promises and bloody and disastrous failures, have been matters of every day's history and of every day's occurrence, from the times of Marat and the guillotine to those of Lamartine and Cavaignac.
The Proletariat of France, the nomadic pauper banditti of England, the starving tenantry of Ireland, the Lazzaroni of Italy, and the half-savages of Hayti, are the admitted results of practical abolition. But, say the Liberty party, abolition has stopped half-way; abolish churches, law, government, marriage, and separate property in lands, and then the scheme will work charmingly.
Well, possibly it will; but as we are very happy, comfortable and contented in slave society, suppose you try the "experimentum in vile corpus." Begin at home, and if the experiment works well, we of the South will follow your example. You have a little Eden now near Lake Oneida. Some hundreds of Oneida perfectionists, living in primitive simplicity, among whom, there is no "marrying or giving in marriage," no separate property, all things enjoyed in common; and we suppose, neither
priest nor officer to disturb or mar the harmony of millenial society. "We but tell the tale as 'twas told to
Does it work well? If so, why not form all your institutions on that model?
You of the Liberty party seem to think that "passional attraction" and "attractive labor" will keep all men up to their duties, and dispense with the necessity of Church and State, Law and Religion, Priest and OffiYou think you follow nature, but in truth you are superficial observers of 'nature. Man, it is true, is a social and gregarious animal, but like all animals of that kind, he is, by nature, law-making and law-abiding. The ants and bees are ruled by despotic and exacting governments, and by laws and regulations, wise and less changeable than those of the Medes and Persians. But man is not only a law-making animal, but a religious one also. In remitting him to a state of anarchy and infidelity, you would not remit him to a state of nature, but one of continuous, exterminating warfare, such as France witnessed during the reign of terror.
I find, Messrs. Editors, that I am somewhat wandering from the subject with which I commenced, and will conclude--for the present, at least.
Very respectfully, your ob't serv't.
LETTER TO MR. HOGEBOOM.
Port Royal, Va., Jan. 14th, 1856.
To A. HOGEBOOM, Esq., Sheds Corners, Madison county, N. Y.
DEAR SIR:-Your letter reached this office during my absence from home. I embrace the earliest opportunity of replying to it, because I rejoice that public attention at the North may, by this means, be excited to the sub
ject of my book. I am sure I should not have been honored with your correspondence had you read the book and known its subject. That subject is the "Failure of Free Society." You have only read extracts from it, you say, in the Northern papers. Those papers will be slow to notice the facts, authorities and admissions which it cites, to prove the failure of their form of society. I send you the book and refer you particularly to the preface, to the second and third chapters, and to the "summing up" in the concluding chapter.
If this does not satisfy you that free society is a cruel. failure, read the history of the English Poor laws, and you will find that the laboring class of England have, every day since the emancipation of the villeins, been in a worse condition, morally and physically, than any slaves ever were. Read, also, two articles, the one in the North British Review, and the other in Blackwood for December, depicting the demoralized and starving condition of the whole laboring class of Great Britain. Read, also, Carlyle's Latter Day Pamphlets. If this does not convince you that the Little Experiment, (for it is a very little one, both in time and space,) is a disastrous and cruel failure, look at home! How comes it that your distinguished neighbor, Gerrit Smith, proposes to make land as free for the enjoyment of all as air and water? Confessedly, because the despotism of capital over labor is intolerable. Confessedly, because your form of society is found to be a failure in practice! Why does another distinguished abolitionist, Mr. Goodell, of New York, in his book, on the Democracy of Christianity, declare, that wealth now is more cruel, op