be followed by
amalgamation, at the option of the parties, would be reckless
wickedness. But lest he should misrepresent that gentleman, he would
turn to the paper, and quote the passage cited.
"I know that any abolition without the consent of the States
holding the slaves, is impossible; that to obtain this
consent on any terms, is very difficult;--that to obtain it
without the prospect of extensive removal by colonization, is
impossible; that to obtain it instantly on any terms, is the
dream of ignorance; that to expect it instantly with
subsequent equality, is frantic nonsense; and that to demand
it, as an instant right, irrespective of consequences, and to
be followed by amalgamation at the option of the parties, is
RECKLESS WICKEDNESS!"
All the alarm created on the subject of amalgamation was totally
unfounded. The views of the Abolitionists were simple and scriptural.
They held that there should be no distinctions on account of color.
That to treat a man with coldness, unkindness, or contempt, on
account of his complexion, was to quarrel with the Maker of us all.
They held that this prejudice should be given up, and the colored man
be treated as a white man, according to his intellect, morality, and
fitness for the duties of civil life. They did not interfere with
those tastes by which human beings were regulated in entering into the
nearest and most permanent relations of life. They confined themselves
to the exhibition of gospel truth upon the subject, and left it to an
overruling and watchful Providence to guard and control the
consequences springing from a faithful and fearless discharge of duty.
Mr. Thompson concluded, by observing, that he considered the readiest
way to make men curse their existence and their God, was to oppress
and enslave them on account of that complexion, and those
peculiarities, which the Creator of the world had stamped upon them.
* * * * *
Mr. BRECKINRIDGE said, he would commence with a slight allusion to two
references which had been made to himself by Mr. Thompson. And in
regard to certain passages which had been read from speeches of his,
he would only say, that he had never written or uttered a single word
on this subject, which he would not rejoice to see laid before the
British public. But he had a right to complain of the manner in which
these passages had been quoted. It was not fair, he contende
|