{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_25653/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_25653","id":"gutenberg_25653","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25653","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: History - American","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Politics","Slavery -- United States -- Controversial literature","Speeches, addresses, etc., American","United States -- Politics and government -- 1853-1857"],"text":"Produced by K. Nordquist, Richard J. Shiffer and the Online\nDistributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This\nfile was produced from images generously made available\nby The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)\n\n\n\n\n\n[Transcriber's Note: Every effort has been made to replicate this text\nas faithfully as possible, including obsolete and variant spellings\nand other inconsistencies. Text that has been changed to correct an\nobvious error is noted at the end of this ebook.]\n\n\n\n\nGREAT SPEECH,\n\nDELIVERED IN NEW YORK CITY,\n\nBY\n\nHENRY WARD BEECHER,\n\nON THE\n\nConflict of Northern and Southern Theories\n\nOF MAN AND SOCIETY,\n\nJanuary 14, 1855.\n\n\n\n\nROCHESTER:\n\nSTEAM PRESS OF A. STRONG & CO., COR. OF STATE AND BUFFALO STREETS.\n\n1855.\n\n\n\n\n Conflict of Northern and Southern Theories\n OF MAN AND SOCIETY.\n\n\nThe Eighth Lecture of the Course before the Anti-Slavery Society, was\ndelivered, January 14, 1855, at the Tabernacle, New York, by the Rev.\nHENRY WARD BEECHER. The subject, at the present time, is one of\npeculiar interest, as touching the questions of Slavery and\nKnow-Nothingism, and, together with the popularity of the lecturer,\ndrew together a house-full of auditors.\n\nThere were a number of gentlemen of distinction, occupying seats on\nthe rostrum--among whom were the Hon. Joshua R. Giddings, James Mott,\nof Philadelphia, and Mr. Dudley, of Buffalo.\n\nMr. Beecher was introduced to the audience by Mr. OLIVER JOHNSON, who\nsaid:\n\n_Ladies and Gentlemen_: The speaker who occupied this platform on\nTuesday evening last, in the course of his remarks upon the wide\ndegeneracy of the American Clergy on the Slavery Question, reminded us\nthat there was in a Brooklyn pulpit, A MAN. We thought you would be\nglad to see and hear such a _rara avis_, and therefore have besought\nhim to come hither to-night to instruct us by his wisdom and move us\nby his eloquence. I trust that, whatever you may think of some other\nparts of the lecture of WENDELL PHILLIPS, you will, when this\nevening's performance is over, be ready at least to confess that in\nwhat he said of the Brooklyn preacher he was not more eulogistic than\ntruthful.\n\nMR. BEECHER, on presenting himself, was received with loud and hearty\napplause. He spoke as follows:\n\nThe questions which have provoked discussion among us for fifty years\npast have not been questions of fundamental principles, but of the\n_application_ of principles already ascertained. Our debates have been\nbetween one way of doing a thing and another way of doing it--between\nliving well and living better; and so through, it has been a question\nbetween good and better. We have discussed policies, not principles.\nIn Europe, on the other hand, life-questions have agitated men. The\nquestions of human rights, of the nature and true foundations of\nGovernment, are to-day, in Europe, where they were with our fathers in\n1630.\n\nIn this respect, there is a moral dignity, and even grandeur, in the\nstruggles, secretly or openly going on in Italy, Austria, Germany, and\nFrance, which never can belong to the mere questions of mode and\nmanner which occupy us--boundary questions, banks, tariffs, internal\nimprovements, currency; all very necessary but secondary topics. They\ntouch nothing deeper than the pocket. In this respect, there would be\na marked contrast between the subjects which occupy us, and the\ngrander life-themes that dignify European thought, were it not for one\nsubject--_Slavery_. THAT is the ONLY _question, in our day and in our\ncommunity, full of vital struggles turning upon fundamental\nprinciples_.\n\nIf Slavery were a plantation-question, concerning only the master and\nthe slave, disconnected from us, and isolated--then, though we should\nregret it, and apply moral forces for its ultimate remedy, yet, it\nwould be, (as are questions of the same kind in India or South\nAmerica,) remote, constituting a single element in that globe of\ndarkness of which this world is the core, and which Christianity is\nyet to shine through and change to light. But it is _not_ a\nplantation-question. It is a national question. The disputes implied\nby the violent relations between the owner and the chattel may only\n_morally_ touch us.--But the disputes between the masters and the\nGovernment, and between the Government, impregnated with Slavery, and\nthe Northern citizen, these touch us sharply, and if not wisely met,\nwill yet scourge us with thorns! Indeed, I cannot say that I believe\nthat New England and the near North will be affected _locally_, and\nimmediately by an adverse issue of the great national struggle now\ngoing on. But the North will be an utterly dead force in the American\nnation. She will be rolled up in a corner, like a cocoon waiting for\nits transmigration. The whole North will become provincial; it will be\nbut a fringe to a nation whose heart will beat in the South.\n\nBut New-England was not raised up by Divine Providence to play a mean\npart in the world's affairs.\n\nRemember, that New-England brought to America those principles which\nevery State in the Union has more or less thoroughly adopted.\n\nNew-England first formed those institutions which liberty requires for\nbeneficient activity; and from her, both before and since the\nRevolution, they have been copied throughout the Land. Having given to\nAmerica its ideas and its institutions, I think the North is bound to\nstand by them.\n\nUntil 1800, the North had distinctive national influence, and gave\nshape, in due measure, to national _policy_, as she had before to\nnational institutions.\n\nThen she began to recede before the rising of another power. For the\nlast fifty years, upon the national platform have stood arrayed two\nchampions in mortal antagonism--New-England and the near\nNorth--representing personal freedom, civil liberty, universal\neducation, and a religious spirit which always sympathises with men\nmore than with Governments.\n\nThe New-England theory of Government has always been in its\nelement--first, independent men; then democratic townships; next\nrepublican States, and, in the end, a Federated Union of Republican\nStates. All her economies, her schools, her policy, her industry, her\nwealth, her intelligence, have been at agreement with her theory and\npolicy of Government. Yet, New-England, strong at home, compact,\neducated, right-minded; has gradually lost influence, and the whole\nNorth with her.\n\nThe Southern League of States, have been held together by the cohesive\npower of Common Wrong. Their industry, their policy, their whole\ninterior, vital economy, have been at variance with the apparent\nprinciples of their own State Governments, and with the National\nInstitutions under which they exist. They have stood upon a narrow\nbasis, always shaking under them, without general education, without\ngeneral wealth, without diversified industry. And yet since the year\n1800, they have steadily prevailed against Representative New-England\nand the North. The South, the truest representation of Absolutism\nunder republican forms, is mightier in our National Councils and\nPolicy to-day than New-England, the mother and representative of true\nrepublicanism and the whole free North.\n\nAnd now it has come to pass that, in the good providence of God,\nanother opportunity has been presented to the whole North to reassert\nher place and her influence, and to fill the institutions of our\ncountry with their original and proper blood. I do not desire that she\nshould arise and put on her beautiful garments, because she is my\nmother, and your mother; not because her hills were the first which my\nchildhood saw, that has never since beheld any half so dear; nor from\nany sordid ambition, that she should be great in this world's\ngreatness; nor from any profane wish to abstract from the rightful\nplace and influence of any State, or any section of our whole country.\nBut I think that God sent New-England to these shores as his own\nmessenger of mercy to days and ages, that have yet far to come ere\nthey are born! She has not yet told this Continent all that is in her\nheart. She has sat down like Bunyan's Pilgrim, and slept in the bower\nby the way, and where she slept she has left her roll--God grant that\nshe hath not lost it there while she slumbered!\n\nBy all the love that I bear to the cause of God, and the glory of his\nChurch, by the yearnings which I have for the welfare of the human\nkind, by all the prophetic expectations which I have of the destiny of\nthis land, God's Almoner of Liberty to the World, I desire to see Old\nRepresentative New-England, and the affiliated North, rouse up and do\ntheir first works.\n\nIs it my excited ear that hears an airy phantasm whispering? or do I\nhear a solemn voice crying out, \"_Arise? Shine? thy light is come, and\nthe glory of the Lord is arisen upon thee!_\"\n\nI am quite aware that the subject of Slavery has been regarded, by\nmany, as sectional; and the agitation of it in the North needless, and\ninjurious to our peace and the country's welfare. Whatever may have\nbeen the evils, the agitation has only come _through_ men, not _from_\nthem. It is of God. It is the underheaving of Providence. Mariners\nmight as well blame _you_ for the swing and toss of their craft when\ntides troop in or march out of your harbor, as us, for heaving to that\ntide which God swells under us. Tides in the ocean and in human\naffairs are from celestial bodies and celestial beings. The conflict\nwhich is going on springs from causes as deep as the foundations of\nour institutions. It will go on to a crisis; its settlement will be an\nera in the world's history, either of advance or of decline.\n\nI wish to call your patient attention to the real nature of this\ncontest. It is,\n\n_The conflict between Northern theories and Southern theories of man\nand of Society._\n\nThere have been, from the earliest period of the world, two different,\nand oppugnant, doctrines of man--_his place, rights, duties and\nrelations_. And the theory of man is always the starting point of all\nother theories, systems, and Governments which divide the world.\n\nOutside of a Divine and Authoritative Revelation, men have had but one\nway of estimating the value of man. He was to them simply a creature\nof time, and to be judged in the scientific method, by his\n_phenomena_. The Greeks and the Romans had no better way. They did not\nknow enough of his origin, his nature, or his destiny, to bring these\ninto account, in estimating man. Accordingly they could do no better\nthan to study him in his developments and rank him by the POWER which\nhe manifested. Now if a botanist should describe a biennial plant,\nwhose root and stem belong to one season, whose blossom and fruit\nbelong to another, as if that were the whole of it which the first\nyear produced, he would commit the same mistake which the heathen idea\nof man commits in measuring and estimating a being whose true life\ncomes hereafter, by the developments which he makes in only this\nworld.\n\nFrom this earthly side of man springs the most important practical\nresults. For the doctrine of man, simply as he _is in this life,\nlogically deduces Absolutism and Aristocracy_.\n\nIf the _power of producing effects_ is the criterion of value, the few\nwill always be the _most_ valuable, and the mass relatively,\nsubordinate, and the weak and lowest will be left helplessly\nworthless.\n\nAnd the mass of all the myriads that do live, are of no more account\nthan working animals; and there is, no such a theory, no reason, _a\npriori_; why they should not be controlled by superior men, and made\nto do that for which they seem the best fitted--Work and Drudgery!\nOnly long experiment could teach a doctrine contrary to the logical\npresumption arising from weakness. There could be no doctrine of human\n_rights_. It would be simply a doctrine of human _forces_. _Right_\nwould be a word as much out of place as among birds and beasts.\nAuthority would go with productive greatness, as gravity goes with\nmass in matter. The whole chance of Right, and the whole theory of\nLiberty, springs from that part of man that lies beyond this life.\n\nAs a material creature, man ranks among physical forces. Rights come\nfrom his spiritual nature. The body is of the earth, and returns to\nearth, and is judged by earthly measures. The soul is of God, and\nreturns to God, and is judged by Divine estimates. And this is the\nreason why a free, unobstructed Bible always works toward human\nrights. It is the only basis on which the poor, the ignorant, the\nweak, the laboring masses can entrench against oppression.\n\nWhat, then, is that theory of man which Christianity gives forth?\n\nIt regards man not as a perfect thing, put into life to blossom and\ndie, as a perfect flower doth. Man is a _seed_, and birth is\n_planting_. He is in life for cultivation, not exhibition; he is here\nchiefly to be _acted on_, not to be characteristically an agent. For,\nthough man is also an actor, he is yet more a recipient. Though he\nproduces effects, he receives a thousand fold more than he produces.\nAnd he is to be estimated by his capacity of receiving, not of doing.\n_He has his least value in what he can DO; it all lies in what he is\ncapable of having done TO him._ The eye, the ear, the tongue, the\nnerve of touch, are all simple receivers. The understanding, the\naffections, the moral sentiments, all, are primarily and\ncharacteristically, recipients of influence; and only secondarily\nagents. Now, how different is the value of ore, dead in its silent\nwaiting-places, from the wrought blade, the all but living engine, and\nthe carved and curious utensil!\n\nOf how little value is a ship standing helpless on the stocks--but\nhalf-built, and yet building--to one who has no knowledge of the\nocean, or of what that helpless hulk will become the moment she slides\ninto her element, and rises and falls upon the flood with joyous\ngreeting!\n\nThe value of an acorn is not what it is, but what it shall be when\nnature has brooded it, and brought it up, and a hundred years have\nsung through its branches and left their strength there!\n\nHe, then, that judges man by what he can do, judges him in the seed.\nWe must see him through some lenses--we must prefigure his\n_immortality_. While, then, his _industrial_ value in life must depend\non what he can do, we have here the beginning of a _moral_ value which\nbears no relation to his _power_, but to his future destiny.\n\nThis view assumes distinctness and intensity, when we add to it the\nrelationship which subsists between man and his Maker.\n\nThis relationship begins in the fact that we are created in the divine\nimage; that we are connected with God, therefore, not by Government\nalone, but by nature.\n\nThis initial truth is made radiant with meaning, by the teaching of\nChristianity that every human being is dear to God: a teaching which\nstands upon that platform, built high above all human deeds and\nhistories, the advent, incarnation, passion, and death of Christ, as a\nSavior of men.\n\nThe race is a brotherhood; God is the Father, Love is the law of this\ngreat human commonwealth, and Love knows no servitude. It is that\nwhich gilds with liberty whatever it touches.\n\nOne more element to human liberty is contributed by Christianity, in\nthe solemn development of man's accountability to God, by which\ncondition hereafter springs from pure character here.\n\nHowever heavy that saying is, every one of us shall _give an account\nof himself_ before God--in it is the life of the race.\n\nYou cannot present man as a subject of Divine government, held\nresponsible for results, compared with which the most momentous\nearthly deeds are insignificant, plied with influences accumulating\nfrom eternity, and by powers which though they begin on earth in the\ncradle, gentle as a mother's voice singing lullaby, go on upward,\ntaking every thing as they go, till they reach the whole power of God;\nand working out results that outlast time and the sun, and revolve\nforever in flaming circuits of disaster, or in sacred circles of\ncelestial bliss; you cannot present man as the center and subject of\nsuch an august and eternal drama, without giving him something of the\ngrandeur which resides in God himself, and in the spheres of\nimmortality!\n\nWho shall trifle with such a creature, full bound upon such an errand\nthrough life, and swelling forth to such a destiny? Clear the place\nwhere he stands?--give him room and help, but no hinderance, as he\nequips for eternity!--loosen the bonds of man, for God girds\nhim!--take off all impediments, for it is his life and death and\nstruggle for immortality!\n\nThat this effect of accountability to God was felt by the inspired\nwriters, cannot be doubtful to any who weigh such language as this:\n\n\"So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. Let us\nnot, therefore judge one another any more, but _judge this rather,\nthat no man put a stumbling block, or an occasion to fall in his\nbrother's way_.\"\n\nBy making man important in the sight of God, he becomes sacred to his\nfellow. The more grand and far-reaching are the divine claims, the\ngreater is our conception of the scope and worth of being. Human\nrights become respected in the ratio in which human responsibility is\nfelt. Whatever objections men may hold to Puritanism--their theory\nsince the days of St. Augustine has constantly produced tendencies to\nliberty and a prevalent belief in the natural _rights of man_--and on\naccount of that very feature which to many, has been so offensive--its\nrigorous doctrine of human accountability. Here, then, is the idea of\nman which Christianity gives in contrast with the inferior and\ndegrading heathen notions of man. He is a being but _begun_ on\nearth--a seed only planted here for its first growth. He is connected\nwith God, not as all matter is by proceeding from creative power, but\nby partaking the divine nature, by the declared personal affection of\nGod, witnessed and sealed by the presence and sufferings of the\nworld's Redeemer. He is a being upon whom is rolled the responsibility\nof character and eternal destiny! Of such a creature it were as\nfoolish to take an estimate, by what he _is_ and what he can _do_ in\nthis life, as it would be to estimate by an eagle's egg, what the old\neagle is worth, with wings outspread far above the very thunder, or\ncoming down upon its quarry as the thunder comes! It is the Future\nthat gives value to the Present. It is Immortality only that reaches\ndown a measure wherewith to gauge a man. If a heathen measures, the\nstrong are strong, and the weak are weak: the rich, the favored, must\nrule, and their shadow must dwarf all others. If a Christian measures,\nhe hears a voice saying: \"_There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is\nneither bond nor free; there is neither male nor female; for ye are\nall one in Christ Jesus._ Whosoever shall do the will of my Father,\nwhich is in heaven, the same is my mother, and sister, and brother.\"\n\nThese are the things that give value to man.\n\nIt is not to be said that there is no difference between men; that one\nis not more powerful than another; that one is not richer in genius\nthan another; that one is not more valuable to _society_ than another;\nthat education, refinement, skill, experience, give no precedence over\ntheir negatives. But God takes up the _least_ of all human creatures,\nand, declares, \"inasmuch as ye have done it unto the _least of these_,\nye have done it unto me.\" In a household, a babe is vastly less than\nthe grown-up children. But who dare touch it, as if it were as\nworthless as it is weak?\n\nSo God pleads his own relationship to the meanest human creation, as\nhis protection from wrong; as the evidence of his rights, as the\nreason of his dignity! There is something of God in the meanest\ncreature. He is sacred from injury! In these truths we find the reason\nwhy Christianity always takes _hold so low down_ in human life. Things\nthat have got their root need little from the gardener; but the seeds,\nand tender sprouts, and difficult plants, require and get nurture.\n\nA Christianity that takes care of the rich, the strong, the governing\nclass, and neglects the poor, and ignorant, and the unrefined, as the\nantitype of Christ.\n\nIt is in this direction only, that the declaration of man's equality\nis true. No heathen nation could say that \"all men are born free and\nequal\"--for in more earthly respects it is false. But it is a truth\nthat stands only and firmly in those grand relations which man\nsustains _to God, to Eternity, and to future dignity_--all are equally\nsubjects of these. Man is ungrown. All his fruit is green. If he must\nstand by what _he is_, how surely must he be given over to weakness,\nto abuse, to oppressions. The weak are the natural prey to the strong,\nand superiority is a charter for tyranny.\n\nBut if he be an heir, waiting for an inheritance of God, eternal in\nthe heavens, woe be to him that dare lay a finger on him because he is\na minor!\n\nI dwell the longer upon this view because it carries the world's heart\nin it. We must deepen our thinkings of man, and bore for the springs\nof liberty far below the drainings of surface strata, down deep,\nArtesian, till we strike something that shall be beyond winter or\nsummer, frost or drouth.\n\nI do not believe that there is a doctrine of individual rights nor of\ncivil liberty that can stand outside of Christianity. They are to be\nseen revealed in nature, but there is none to interrupt them with\nauthority. Christ is the World's Emancipator, for he hath declared\nthat men belong to _Him_; and an oppressor thus becomes a felon, a\nrobber, and a wronger of God, in the person of every poor and wretched\nvictim!\n\nA Christianity that tells man what his origin is--of God; his destiny,\nto God again; his errand on earth, to grow toward goodness, and make\nthe most of himself--this Christianity is rank rebellion in\ndespotisms, and insurrection on plantations. It cannot be preached\nthere.\n\nThese two radical theories of man--man, a physical creature to be\njudged by effects produced in Time; or man, a spiritual creature, to\nbe judged by the development to which he is destined, are at the root\nof all the antagonisms between the spirit of northern and southern\ninstitutions: northern policy and southern policy. In the North, it is\nthe public sentiment of the people, that all men are born free and\nequal; that every man has an inalienable right to life, liberty and\nthe pursuit of happiness, forfeited only by _crime_. The North believe\nthat personal and political liberty are not only _rights_ of man, but\ntheir _necessity_, that man cannot thrive nor develop, with the true\nproportions of manhood, without liberty. It is the northern sentiment\nthat a man must be prepared for liberty, and that the act of _birth_\nis that preparation; that no creature lives which is the better for\noppression, and who will not be the better for freedom, which is the\nnatural air appointed for the soul's breathing. The North disdains\nevery pretense that men are injured by sudden liberty. A famished man\nmay injure himself by over-feeding; but that is an argument not\nagainst food, but against famine. It is the northern sentiment, and\njustly deduced from the Christian theory of man, that society should\nredeem all its own children from ignorance, should secure their\ngrowth, equip them for citizenship, make all the influences of society\nenure to the benefit of the mass of men. The southern sentiment is the\nreverse of this. It holds that all men are not born free and equal;\nthat men have not an inalienable right to life, liberty and the\npursuit of happiness; and that men are not in their very constitution\nfitted for liberty, and benefited by it. They hold that liberty is an\nattribute of power; that it is a blossom which belongs to _races_, and\nnot to mankind; that a part were born to rule, and a part were\nordained to serve; that liberty is dangerous to the many; that\nservitude, the most rigorous, is a blessing; that it accords with the\ncreative intent of God, and with his revealed institutions; that a\nnation cannot be homogeneous, and should not aim at it; that there is\na law and scale of gradation, on which the top is privilege and\nauthority, the bottom labor and obedience. _These are the radical\ntheories of the respective sections of the land._ Men often are\nprofoundly ignorant of the principles which control their policy, as a\nship is unconscious of the rudder that steers her. Many are found,\nboth North and South, whose conduct over-rules their theory, and who\nare better or worse than their belief. There are southern men who are\nmore generous than their theory, and there are northern men who are\ngrossly untrue to the northern theory, which, with their lips, they\nprofess. There are southern men with northern consciences, and there\nare northern men with southern consciences. But, in the main, these\nrespective theories reign and regulate public procedure. There is not\na man so poor in the North, or so ignorant, or souseless, as not to be\nregarded as a Man, by religion, by civil law, and by public opinion.\nSelfishness and pride, avarice and cunning, anger or lust, may prey\nupon the heedlessness or helplessness of many. Society may be full of\nevils. But all these things are not sequences of northern doctrines,\nbut violations of them. If sharks in great cities consume the too\ncredulous emigrant; if usurers, like moths, cut the fabric of life\nwith invisible teeth; if landlords sack their tenements and pinch the\ntenant--all these results are against the spirit of our law, against\npublic feeling, and they that do such things must slink and burrow.\nThey are vermin that run in the walls, and peep from hiding-holes, and\nwe set traps for them as we do for rats or weazels. But, in the South,\nthe subordination of man, to man, in his earnings, his skill, his time\nand labor--in his person, his affections, his very children--is a part\nof the theory of society, drawn out into explicit statutory law,\ncoincident with public opinion, and executed without secrecy. A net\nspread for those guilty of such wrongs against man, would catch\nStates, and Legislatures, Citizens, Courts, and Constitutions.\n\nIn the North the most useless pauper that burdens the Alms-House--the\nmost uncombed foreigner that delves in a ditch--the most abject\ncreature that begs a morsel from door to door, _is yet a man_; and\nthere is, not in theory only, but in the public sentiment, a\nsacredness of rights, which no man, except by stealth, can violate\nwith impunity. There is no other law for the Governor of New-York or\nof Massachusetts, than for the beggar in your streets. That which\nprotects the dwelling and the property of the rich man, belongs just\nas much to the hovel of the beggar. God sends but one sun, and it is\nthe same light that kindles against the roof of a mansion, that dawns\nupon the thatch of a hut. The same air comes to each, the same\nshowers, the same seasons, summer and winter. And as is Nature, so in\nthe North, is law, and the distributive benefits of society. They\nbathe society from top to bottom! The rich, the learned, the refined,\nthe strong, may know how to make a better use of the air, but they\nhave no more air of privilege to breathe, than the poorest wretch.\n\nIn the South, exactly the reverse is true, not by stealth, not by\nneglect of a recognized principle, but as the result of men's ideas,\nand by organized arrangements. Touch a hireling's wages, in the North,\nand the Law stands to defend him and beat you down! Take the laborer's\nwages in the South, and the law stands to defend you, and beat him\ndown.\n\nBeat a man, in the North, for a private wrong done, and the law will\nstrike you. But in the South, it is the right of the white,\nunquestioned and unquestionable to beat every third person in the\ncommunity.\n\nLet the proudest mill-owner break but the skin of the poorest\noperative in Lowell or Lawrence, and both law and public sentiment,\nalike, would grasp and punish him!\n\nBut in the South the law refuses to look at any degree of cruelty in\nchastisements upon the universal laborer, short of maiming or death,\nand public sentiment is but little better than the law.\n\nThe laborer in the North answers to a tribunal; in the South, to a\nmaster, incensed, passionate, vindictive in justice executed upon all\nsymptoms of resisting manhood!\n\nIn the North, nothing is more sacred than a man's family and his\nchildren. It would not be possible for a man to do public violence to\na family circle without vindictive penalty. Let him separate a mother\nfrom her daughters, let him employ a hireling ruffian to carry off the\nboys into the country and parcel them out there--let him scatter the\nflock, and leave the children motherless, and the parents childless,\nand what do you think would become of _him_?\n\nIn the South it is a part of the civil rights of men to do these\nthings whenever they please. And though public sentiment is better\nthan law, yet as no public sentiment on earth is a match for legalized\nlust, or avarice, or the grip of misfortune, these things are\ncontinually done, and remorselessly. Cruelty, chastity, virtue, do not\nmean the same things in the South as in the North. A man is not\nblemished by deeds and indulgencies, upon a plantation, among slaves,\nwhich in the North, would strike him through with infamy and house him\nin the penitentiary.\n\nIn the South, there are many roads leading from the top of society to\nthe bottom, but not _one_, not ONE from the bottom to the top.\n\nIn the North, if the citizen chooses to walk in it, _there is a road\nfrom every man's door_ up to the Governor's chair or the Presidential\nseat!\n\nIt needs no words, now, to convince you, that out of such different\ntheories of men, there will exist in the North and in the South,\nextremely different ideas of Society, Government, and Public Policy.\n\nIn the North, first in order of consideration is man, the individual\nman; next the family, made of those of common blood, and by far the\nstrongest, as it is the most sacred of all institutions. Then comes\nthe township, which presents the only spectacle of an absolute\npolitical democracy. For, here only, do citizens assemble in mass and\nvote, directly and not by representation. Next comes Society at large,\nor the mass of citizens grouped into States. And in Society, in the\nNorth, there are no classes except such as rise out of spontaneous\nforces. Wealth, experience, ability set men above their fellows. There\nthey stand as long as there is a _real_ superiority. But they stand\nthere, not by legal force, nor to exercise any legal power, or to have\none single privilege or prerogative, which does not belong just as\nmuch to every citizen clear down to the bottom. All that a class\n_means_ in the North is, that when men have shown themselves strong\nand wise men give them honor for it. Death levels it all down again.\nTheir children inherit nothing. They must earn for themselves. There\nis no division of society into orders, by which some have privilege\nand some have not, some have opportunity and advantages which others\nhave not.\n\nIn the South, society is divided into two great and prominent\nclasses--the ruling and the obeying--the thinking and the working. The\nlabor of the South is performed by three million creatures who\nrepresent the heathen idea of man.\n\nAll the benefits that have accrued to man from Christianity, are\nappropriated and monopolized by the white population.\n\nHere is a seam that no sophistry can sew up. Here is a society\norganized, not on an idea of equal rights, and of inequalities only as\nthey spring from difference of worth, but on an idea of permanent,\npolitical, organized inequality among men. They carry it so far that\nthe theory of Slave law regards the slave not as an inferior man,\ngoverned, for his own good as well as for the benefit of the society\nat large, but it pronounces him, in reiterated forms, not a man at\nall, but a chattel.\n\nWhen a community of States, by the most potential voice of Law, says\nto the whole body of its laboring population, Ye are not _men_ and\nshall not be; ye are chattels--it is absurd to speak about kind\ntreatment--about happiness. It is about cattle that they are talking!\nOur vast body of laboring men do not yet feel the force of such a\ntheory of human society. But, if that political system, which has\nopenly been making such prodigious strides for the last fifty years,\nand effecting, secretly, a yet greater change in men's ideas of\nsociety and government, shall gain complete ascendancy, they, in their\nturn, and in due time will know and see the difference between a\nRepublican Democracy and a Republican Aristocracy?\n\nOut of such original and radical differences, there must flow a\nperpetual contrast and opposition of policies and procedures, in the\noperation of society and of business. We will select but a few, of\nmany, subjects of contrast, Work, Education, Freedom of Speech and of\nthe Press, and Religion.\n\n\nI. WORK. Among us, and from the beginning, Work has been honorable. It\nhas been honorable to dig, to hew, to build, to reap, to wield the\nhammer at the forge, and the saw at the bench. It has been honorable\nbecause our people have been taught that each man is set to make the\nmost of himself. The crown for every victory gained in a struggle of\nskill or industry over matter is placed upon the soul; and thus among\na free people industry becomes education.\n\nIt is the peculiarity of Northern labor, that it _thinks_. It is\nintelligence working out through the hands. There is more real thought\nin a Yankee's hand than in a Southerner's head. This is not true of a\nclass, or of single individuals, or of single States. It pervades the\nair. It is Northern public sentiment. It springs from our ideas of\nmanhood. These influences, acting through generations, have been\nwrought into the very blood. It is in the stock. Go where you will a\nYankee is a working creature. He is the honeybee of mankind. Only Work\nis royal among us. It carries the sceptre, and changes all nations by\nits touch, opening its treasures and disclosing its secrets.\n\nBut with all this industry, you shall find nowhere on earth so little\n_drudging_ work as in the North. It is not the servitude of the hands\nto material nature. It is the glorious exercise of mind upon nature.\nThey vex nature with incessant importunities. They are always prying,\nand thinking, and trying.\n\nIn California, gold is found in quartz formations. But in New England,\nand the free inventive North, in the geology of industry, gold is\nfound everywhere--in rye straw and bonnets, in leather and stone, in\nwool, felts and cloths; in wood, in stone, and in very ice. It is\nwrapped up in the beggar's raiment, which unroll in our mills into\npaper--yesterday, a beggar's feculent rags; to-day, a newspaper,\nconveying the world's daily life into twenty thousand families. And so\ngreat are the achievements of labor that everybody honors it. It\nstands among us as an invisible dignity. Four spirits there are that\nrule in New England--religion, social virtue, intelligence, and\n_work_; and this last takes something from them all, and is their\nphysical exponent. So that not only is work honored and honorable, but\nthe want of it is an implied discredit. The presumption is always\nagainst a man who does not labor.\n\nIn the South, the very reverse is true, as a general proposition.\n\nIt is true, because labor is the peculiar badge of Slavery. It does\nnot stand, as with us, a symbol of intelligence, but a symbol of\nstupid servitude. It is the business of those whom the law puts out of\nthe pale of society and accounts chattels, and who, by the opinion of\nsociety, are at the bottom, and under the feet of respectable men. To\nwork is, therefore, _prima facie_ evidence of degradation. It is\nranking oneself with a slave by doing a slave's tasks; as eating a\nbeggar's crust with him would be a beggar's fellowship.\n\nBut this is not the whole reason, nor the chiefest and more potent\nreason of the difference between public feeling about WORK, North and\nSouth.\n\nThe ideas of men in the South do not inspire any such tendency. Men\nare judged there not by what they are and are to be, but by what they\n_can now do_. Only such things as have an echo in them, that\nreverberate in the ear of public opinion, that produce an effect of\nnotice, honor, advancement _in the_ OPINIONS of men, are relished. In\nthe North, men are educated to _be_ something--in the South to _seem_\nsomething. The North tends to _doing_--the South to _appearing_. And\nboth tendencies spring from the root of opposite theories of men and\nnotions of society.\n\nAnd it is this innate, hereditary indisposition to work that, after\nall, is the greatest obstacle to emancipation. Laziness in the South\nand money in the North, are the bulwarks of Slavery! To take away a\nplanter's slaves is to cut off his hands. There is where he keeps his\nwork. There is none of it in himself. And it is this, too, which leads\nto the contempt which southern people feel for northern men. They are\nworking men, and work is flavored to the Southerner with ideas of\nignominy, of meanness, of vulgar lowness. Neither can they understand\nhow a man who works all his life long can be high-minded and generous,\nintelligent and refined.\n\nNot only is there this contrast in dignity of work, but even more--_in\nrights of industry_. Work, in the North, has responsibilities that are\nprodigious educators. We ordain that a man shall have the fullest\nchance, and then he shall have the results of his activity. He shall\ntake all he can make, or he shall take the whole result of\n_indolence_. It is a double education. It inspires labor by hope of\nfruition, and intensifies it by the fear of non-fruition. The South\nhave their whole body of laborers at work without either\nresponsibility. They cut it off at both ends. They virtually say to\nthe slave, in reality, \"_Be lazy_, for all that you earn shall do you\nno good; be lazy, for when you are old and helpless we are bound to\ntake care of you.\"\n\nIt is this apparent care for the helplessness of slaves, that has won\nthe favor of many northern men, and of some who ought to have known\nbetter the effect of taking off from men the responsibility of labor,\nin both ways, its fruition and its penalty. Once declare in New York\nthat Government would take care of poverty and old age, so as to make\nit honorable, and it would be a premium upon improvidence. With us, it\nis expected that every man will work, will earn, will lay up, will\ndeliver his family from public charity. There is, to be sure, an Alms\nHouse to catch all who, by misfortune or improvidence, fall through.\nBut such is the public opinion in favor of personal independence\nspringing from industry, that a native-born American citizen had\nrather die than go to an Alms-House. Foreigners are our staple\npaupers. Our charity feeds the poor wretches whom foreign slavery has\ncrippled and cast upon us. But the whole South is a vast work-house\nfor the slave while young, and a vast alms-house for him when old, and\nneither young or old, is he permitted to feel the responsibility for\nlabor. And this, too, explains the _apparent_ advantage which the\nSouth has over the North in the matter of pauperism and distress. The\nnorthern system intends to punish those who will not work. It it not a\nsystem calculated for slaves nor for lazy men. If indolence comes\nunder it, it will take the penalty of not working. And nowhere else in\nthe world is the penalty of indolence, and even of shiftlessness, so\nterrible as in the North, as nowhere else is the remuneration of a\nvirtuous industry so ample and so widely diffused.\n\n\nII. There is just as marked a contrast upon the subject of education,\nand especially of Common Schools. In the North we have COMMON Schools.\nThis is more than a School. It is more than a public school. It is a\n_Common_ School, in distinction from a _select_, or class school. It\nis a public provision for bringing together, upon a perfect equality,\nthe children of the rich and the poor, the noble and ignoble, the high\nand the low. It is a provision of our institutions, by which every\ngeneration is led to a line and made to start equal and together.\nThere will be inequality enough as soon as men get into life. Some\nshoot ahead; some, like dull sailors in a fleet, are dropped behind,\nand men are scattered all along the ocean. But the _Common_ School\ngathers up their children and brings them all back again to take a new\nstart together. Thus our schools are not mere whetstones to the\nintellect; they are institutions for evening up society; they resist\nthe tendency to separation into classes, which grows with the\nprosperity of a community; they bind together, in cordial sympathy,\nall classes of citizens. For nothing is more tenacious than schoolday\nremembrances, and the last things that we forget are playmates and\nschoolmates.\n\nThe South may have schools. But never _Common_ Schools. The South has\nno _common_ people. There can be States, there, but never\n_Commonwealths_. There is no _common_ ground, where the theory of\nsociety grades men upon a perpendicular scale. It is a society of\n_classes_, and a society of _classes_ can never be a _community_. When\nthe whole labor of a State is performed by a degraded class, that are\nnot included in the State as citizens or social beings, it is\nimpossible but that the class next above them should feel the force of\nthose theories and ideas which have produced such a state of things.\nIt is so. The poor white population of the South is degraded. They are\nignorant--they are not fertile in thought or labor. They are not so\nlow as the slaves, nor so high as those who own slaves. There are\nthree classes--the top, the middle, and the bottom; and two of these,\nthe top and bottom, being fixed and legal, the middle is modified by\nthem both.\n\nIn such a Society, there cannot be a _Common School_, in any such\nsense as we mean it. Indeed, there cannot be _general education_ in\nany State where ignorance is the legal condition of one-half the\npopulation, as is the case in many Southern States. Ignorance is an\ninstitution in the South. It is a political necessity. It is as much\nprovided for by legislation and by public sentiment, and guarded by\nenactments, as intelligence is in the North. It must be. The\nrestrictions which keep it from the slave will keep it from the\nwhites, excepting, always, the few who live at the top. There cannot\nbe an atmosphere of intelligence. Slaves would be in danger of\nbreathing that. There cannot be a common public sentiment, a common\nschool, nor common education. Knowledge is power, not only, but\npowder, putting the South in the risk of being blown up, by careless\nhandling and too great abundance.\n\n\nIII. Closely connected with this, and springing from the same causes,\nis a contrast between the North and the South, in respect to free\nspeech and open discussion by lip and by type.\n\nThe theory of the North is, that every man has the right, on every\nsubject, to the freest expression of his opinions, and the fullest\nright to urge them upon the convictions of others. It is not a\npermission of law; it is the inherent right of the individual. Law is\nonly to protect the citizen in the use of that right.\n\nIt is the theory of the North that society is as much a gainer by this\nfreedom of discussion as is the individual.\n\nIt is a perpetual education of the people, and a safeguard to the\nState. There is the utmost latitude of speech and discussion among our\ncitizens. The attempt to abridge it would be so infatuated that the\nmost dignified Court that ever sat in Boston would become an object of\nuniversal merriment and ridicule, that should presume to arrest and\ncause to be indicted any man for free speaking in old Faneuil Hall.\nMerriment, I say, for who would not laugh at a philosopher who would\nset snares for the stars, and fix his net to catch the sun, and\nregulate their indiscreet shining. Darkness and silence are excellent\nfor knaves and tyrants; but the attempt to command the one or the\nother in the North, changes the knave to an imbecile and the tyrant to\na fool.\n\nBut should any power, against the precedents of the past, the spirit\nof our people, the theory of our civil polity and the rights of\nindividual man succeed, and make headway against free speech, and put\nit in jeopardy, it would convulse the very frame-work of society.\nThere would be no time for a revolution--there would be an _eruption_,\nand fragmentary Judges, Courts and their minions would fly upward\nathwart the sky, like stones and balls of flame driven from the\nvomiting crater of a furious volcano! No. This is a right like the\nright of breathing. This is a liberty that broods upon us like the\natmosphere. The grand American doctrine that men may speak what they\nthink, and may print what they speak--that all public measures shall\nhave free public discussion--cannot be shaken; and any party must be\nintensely American that can afford to destroy the very foundation of\nAmerican principle that public questions shall be publicly discussed,\nand public procedure be publicly agreed upon. Right always gains in\nthe light, and Wrong in the dark. An owl can whip an eagle in the\nnight!\n\nThe South, holding a heathen theory of man--an aristocratic theory of\nsociety,--is bound to hold, and does hold, a radically opposite\npractice in respect to rights of speech and freedom of the press.\n\nThere is not freedom of opinion in the South and there cannot be.\n\nMen may there talk of a thousand things--of all religious doctrines,\nof literature, of art, of public political measures--but no man has\nliberty to talk as he pleases about the structure of southern society,\nand apply to the real facts of southern life and southern internal\nquestions that searching investigation and public exposure which, in\nthe North, brings every possible question to the bar of public\nopinion, and makes society boil like a pot!\n\nYes, you may speak of Slavery, if you will defend it; you may preach\nabout it, if you shingle its roof with Scripture texts; but you may\nnot talk, nor preach, nor print abolition doctrines, though you\nbelieve them with the intensity of inspiration!\n\nThe reason given is, that it will stir up insurrection. And so it\nwill. It is said that free speech is inflammatory. So it is. That it\nwould bring every man's life in the South into jeopardy; that, in\nself-defence, they most limit and regulate the expression of opinion.\nBut what is that theory of Government, and what is the state of\nsociety under it, in which free speech and free discussion are\ndangerous? It is the boast of the North, not alone that speech and\ndiscussion are free, but that we have a society constructed in every\npart so rarely, wisely, and justly, that they can _endure_ free\nspeech; no file can part, but only polish. We turn out any law, and\nsay, _Discuss_ it! that it may be the stronger! We challenge scrutiny\nfor our industry, for our commerce, for our social customs, for our\nmunicipal affairs, for our State questions, for all that we believe,\nand all that we do, and everything that we build. We are not in haste\nto be born in respect to any feature of life. We say--probe it,\nquestion it, put fire to it. We ask the _experience of the past_ to\nsit and try it. We ask the ripest _wisdom of the present_ to test and\nanalyze it. We ask enemies to plead all they know against it. We\nchallenge the whole world of ideas, and the great deep of human\ninterests to come up upon anything that belongs, or is _to_ belong, to\npublic affairs. And then, when a truth, a policy, or a procedure comes\nto birth, from out of the womb of such discussion, we know that it\nwill stand. And when our whole public interests are rounded out and\nbuilt up, we are glad to see men going around and about, marking well\nour towers, and counting our bulwarks. May it do them good to see such\narchitecture and engineering! And it is just this difference that\ndistinguishes the North and the South. We have institutions that will\nstand public and private discussion--they have not. We will not _have_\na law, or custom, or economy, which cannot be defended against the\nfreest inquiry. Such a rule would cut them level as a mowed meadow!\nThey live in a crater, forever dreading the signs of activity. They\nlive in a powder magazine. No wonder they fear light and fire. It is\nthe plea of Wrong since the world began. Discussion would unseat the\nCzar; a free press would dethrone the ignoble Napoleon; free speech\nwould revolutionize Rome. Freedom of thought and freedom of\nexpression! they are mighty champions, that go with unsheathed swords\nthe world over, to redress the weak, to right the wronged, to pull\ndown evil and build up good. And a State that will be damaged by free\nspeech ought to be damaged. A King that cannot keep his seat before\nfree speech ought to be unseated. An order or an institution that\ndreads freedom of the press has _reason_ to dread it. If the South\nwould be revolutionized by free discussion, how intensely does that\nfact show her dying need of revolution! She is a dungeon, full of\ndamps and death-air. She needs light and ventilation. And the only\nobjection is, that if there were light and air let in, it would no\nlonger be a dungeon.\n\n\nIV. There is a noticeable contrast between Northern and Southern ideas\nof Religion.\n\nWe believe God's revealed word to contain the influence appointed for\nthe regeneration and full development of every human being, and that\nit is to be employed as God's universal stimulant to the human soul,\nas air and light are the universal stimulants of vegetation.\n\nWe preach it to arouse the whole soul; we preach it to fire the\nintellect, and give it wings by which to compass knowledge; we preach\nit to touch every feeling with refinement, to soften rudeness and\nenrich affections; we build the family with it; we sanctify love, and\npurge out lust; we polish every relation of life; we inspire a\ncheerful industry and whet the edge of enterprise, and then limit them\nby the bonds of justice and by the moderation of a faith which looks\ninto the future and the eternal. We teach each man that he is a child\nof God; that he is personally one for whom the Savior died; we teach\nhim that he is known and spoken of in heaven, his name called; that\nangels are sent out upon his path to guard and to educate him; we\nswell within him to the uttermost every aspiration, catching the first\nflame of youth and feeding it, until the whole heart glows like an\naltar, and the soul is a temple bright within, and sweet, by the\nincense-smoke and aspiring flame of perpetual offerings and divine\nsacrifices. We have never done with him. We lead him from the cradle\nto boyhood; we take him then into manhood, and guide him through all\nits passes; we console him in age, and then stand, as he dies, to\nprophesy the coming heaven, until the fading eye flashes again, and\nthe unhearing ear is full again; for from the other side ministers of\ngrace are coming, and he beholds them, and sounds on earth and sights\nare not so much lost as swallowed up in the glory and the melody of\nthe heavenly joy!\n\nNow tell me whether there is any preaching of the Gospel to the slave,\nor whether there can be, and he yet remain a slave? We preach the\nGospel to arouse men, they to subdue them; we to awaken, they to\nsoothe; we to inspire self-reliance, they submission; we to drive them\nforward in growth, they to repress and prune down growth; we to\nconvert them into men, they to make them content to be beasts of\nburden!\n\nIs this _all_ that the Gospel has? When credulous ministers assure us\nthat slaves have the means of grace, do they mean that they have such\nteaching as _we_ have? Or that there is any such _ideal_ in preaching?\nThe power of religion with us is employed to set men on their feet; to\nmake them fertile, self-sustaining, noble, virtuous, strong, and to\nbuild up society of men, each one of whom is large, strong, capacious\nof room, and filled with versatile powers.\n\nReligion with them does no such thing. It doth the reverse.\n\nWith them it is Herod casting men into prison. With us it is the\nangel, appearing to lead them out of prison and set them free! In\nshort religion with us is emancipation and liberty; with them it is\nbondage and contentment.\n\nIt is very plain that while nominally republican institutions exist in\nboth the North and South, they are animated by a very different\nspirit, and used for a different purpose. In the North, they aim at\nthe welfare of the whole people; in the South they are the instruments\nby which a few control the many. In the North, they tend toward\nDemocracy; in the South, toward Oligarchy.\n\nIt is equally plain that while there may be a union between Northern\nand Southern States, it is external, or commercial, and not internal\nand vital, springing from common ideas, common ends, and common\nsympathies. It is a union of merchants and politicians and not of the\npeople.\n\nHad these opposite and discordant systems been left separate to work\nout each its own results, there would have been but little danger of\ncollision or contest.\n\nBut they are politically united. They come together into one Congress.\nThere these antagonistic principles, which creep with subtle influence\nthrough the very veins of their respective States, break out into open\ncollision upon every question of national policy. And, since the world\nbegan, a republican spirit is unfit to secure power. It degenerates it\nin the many. But an aristocratic spirit always has aptitude and\nimpulse toward power. It seeks and grasps it as naturally as a hungry\nlion prowls and grasps its prey.\n\nFor fifty years the imperious spirit of the South has sought and\ngained power. It would have been of but little consequence were that\npower still republican. The seat of empire may be indifferently on the\nMassachusetts Bay or the Ohio, on the Lakes or on the Gulf; if it be\nthe same empire, acting in good faith for the same democratic ends.\n\nBut in the South the growth of power has been accompanied by a marked\nrevolution in political faith, until now the theory of Mr. Calhoun,\nonce scouted, is becoming the popular belief. And that theory differs\nin nothing from outright European Aristocracy, save in the forms and\ninstruments by which it works.\n\nThe struggle, then, between the North and the South is not one of\nsections, and of parties, but of _Principles_--of principles lying at\nthe foundations of governments--of principles that cannot coalesce,\nnor compromise; that must hate each other, and contend, until the one\nshall drive out the other.\n\nOh! how little do men dream of the things that are transpiring about\nthem! In Luther's days, how little they knew the magnitude of the\nresults pending that controversy of fractious monk and haughty pope!\nHow little did the frivolous courtier know the vastness of that\nstruggle in which Hampden, Milton and Cromwell acted! We are in just\nsuch another era. Dates will begin from the period in which we live!\n\nDo not think that all the danger lies in that bolted cloud which\nflashes in the Southern horizon. There is decay, and change, here in\nthe North. Old New-England, that suckled American liberty, is now\nsuckling wolves to devour it.\n\nWhat shall we think when a President of old Dartmouth College goes\nover to Slavery, and publishes to the world his religious conviction\nof the rightfulness of it, as a part of God's disciplinary government\nof the world--wholesome to man, as a punishment of sins which he never\ncommitted, and to liquidate the long arrearages of Ham's everlasting\ndebt! and avowing that, under favorable circumstances, he would buy\nand own slaves! A Southern volcano in New-Hampshire, pouring forth the\nlava of despotism in that incorrupt, and noble old fortress of\nliberty! What a College to educate our future legislators!\n\nWhat are we to think, when old Massachusetts, the mother of the\nRevolution, every league of whose soil swells with the tomb of some\nheroic patriot, shall make pilgrimages through the South, and, after\nsurveying the lot of slaves under a system that turns them out of\nmanhood, pronounces them chattles, denies them marriage, makes their\neducation a penal and penitentiary offence, makes no provision for\ntheir religious culture, leaving it to the stealth of good men, or the\ninterest of those who regard religion as a currycomb, useful in making\nsleek and nimble beasts--a system which strikes through the\nfundamental instincts of humanity, and wounds nature in the core of\nthe human heart, by taking from parents all right in their children,\nand leaving the family, like a bale of goods, to be unpacked, and\nparceled out and sold in pieces, without any other protection than the\ngeneral good nature of easy citizens; what shall be thought of the\ncondition of the public mind in Boston, when one of her most revered,\nand personally, deservedly beloved pastors, has come up so profoundly\nignorant of what we thought every child knew, that he comes home from\nthis pilgrimage, to teach old New-England to check her repugnance to\nSlavery, to dry up her tears of sympathy, and to take comfort in the\nassurance that Slavery, on the whole, is as good or better for three\nmillions of laboring men as liberty. He has instituted a formal\ncomparison between the state of society and the condition of a\nlaboring population in a slave system and those in a free State, and\nleft the impression on every page that Liberty works no better results\nthan servitude, and that it has mischiefs and inconveniences which\nSlavery altogether avoids.\n\nRead that book in Faneuil Hall, and a thousand aroused and indignant\nghosts would come flocking there, as if they heard the old roll-call\nof Bunker Hill. Yea, read those doctrines on Bunker Hill--and would it\nflame or quake? No. It would stand in silent majesty, pointing its\ngranite finger up to Heaven and to God--an everlasting witness against\nall Slavery, and all its abettors or defenders.\n\nAt this moment, the former parties that have stood in counterpoise\nhave fallen to pieces. And we are on the eve, and in the very act, of\nreconstructing our parties. One movement there is that calls itself\nAmerican. Oh, that it were or or would be! Never was an opening so\nauspicious for a true American party that, embracing the _principles_\nof American institutions, should enter our Temple of Liberty and\ndrive out thence not merely the interloping Gentiles, but the\nmoney-changers, and those, also, who sell oxen, and cattle and slaves\ntherein.\n\nIt is not the question whether a Northern party should be a party of\nphilanthropy, or of propagandism, or of abolition. It is simply a\nquestion whether, for fear of these things, they will ignore and rub\nout of their creed every principle of human rights!\n\nI am not afraid of foreigners among us. Nevertheless, our politicians\nhave so abused us through them, that I am glad that a movement is on\nfoot to regulate the conduct of new-comers among us, and oblige them\nto pass through a longer probation before they become citizens. In so\nfar as I understand the practical measures proposed and set forth in\nthe Message of the Governor of Massachusetts, I approve them.\n\nBut I ask you, fellow-citizens, whether the simple accident of birth\nis a basis broad enough for a permanent National party? Is it a\n_principle_, even? It is a mere fact.\n\nOught we not to look a little at what a man is _after_ he is born, as\nwell as at the place where? Especially, when we remember that Arnold\nwas born in Connecticut and La Fayette in France.\n\nIf then, a party is American, ought it not to be because it represents\nthose principles which are fundamental to American Institutions and\nto American policy? principles which stand in contrast with European\nInstitutions and policy!\n\nWhich of these two theories is the American? The North has one theory,\nthe South another; which of them is to be called _the American_ idea?\nWhich is American--Northern ideas or Southern ideas? That which\ndeclares all men free &c., or that which declares the superior races\nfree, and the inferior, Slaves?\n\nThat which declares the right of every man to life, liberty, and the\npursuit of happiness--or that which declares the right of strength and\nintelligence to subordinate weakness and ignorance?\n\nThat which ordains popular education, freedom of speech, freedom of\nthe press, public discussion--or that which makes these a prerogative,\nyielded to a class but denied to masses?\n\nThat which organizes Society as a Democracy and Government, and\nRepublic--or that which organizes Society as an Aristocracy, and\nGovernment as an Oligarchy?\n\nWhich shall it be--that of organized New England townships, schools,\nand churches--that resisted taxation without representation--that\ncovered Boston harbor with tea, as if all China had shook down her\nleaves there--which spake from Faneuil Hall, and echoed from Bunker\nHill; or that policy which landed slaves on the Chesapeake--that has\nchanged Old Virginia from a land of heroes into a breeding-ground of\nslaves--that has broken down boundaries, and carried war over our\nlines, not for liberty, but for more territory for slaves to work,\nthat the owners might multiply, and the Aristocracy of America stand\non the shores of two oceans, an unbroken bound all between?\n\nIf _a National_ American party is ever formed, by leaving out the\nwhole question of Human Rights, it will be what a man would be--his\nsoul left out!\n\nAn American National party--Liberty left out!\n\nAn American party--Human Rights left out!\n\nGentlemen, such a party will stink with dissolution before you can get\nit finished. No Masonry can make it solid--no art can secure it. No\nanchor that was ever forged in infernal stythy can go deep enough into\npolitical mud to hold it!\n\nIf you rear up an empty name; if you take that revered name American,\nall the world over radiant and revered, as the symbol of human rights\nand human happiness--if you sequester and stuff that name with the\neffete doctrines of despotism, do you believe you can supplicate from\nany gods the boon of immortality for such an unbaptized monster? No.\nIt may live to ravage our heritage for a few days, but there _is_ a\nspirit of liberty that lives among us, and that shall live. And\naroused by that spirit, there shall spring up the yet unaroused hosts\nof men that have not bowed the knee to Baal--and we will war it to the\nknife, and knife to the hilt.\n\nFor, IT SHALL be; America _shall be free_!\n\nWe will take that for our life's enterprise. Dying, we will leave it a\nlegacy to our children, and they shall will it to theirs, until the\nwork is done, our fathers' prayers are answered, and this whole land\nstands clothed and in its right mind--a symbol of what the earthly\nfruits of the Gospel are!\n\nIf a National party is now to be formed, what shall it be, and what\nshall its office be?\n\nIt shall be a peacemaker, say sly politicians. Yes, peace by war. But\nan American party, seeking peace with the imperious Aristocracy by\nyielding everything down to the root--one would think no party need be\nformed to do that. Judas did as much without company. Arnold did that\nwithout companions.\n\nAn American National party must either be a piebald and patched-up\nparty, carrying in its entrails the mortal poison of two belligerent\nschemes, former legendary disputes, and agitation, and furious\nconflict; or, to be a real national party, it must first be a\n_Northern_ party and _become_ national. We must walk again over the\ncourse of history. Here in the North Liberty began. Its roots are with\nus yet. All its associations and all its potent institutions are with\nus. Having once given forth this spirit of liberty, now fading out of\nour Southern States, the North should again come forth and refill the\npoisoned veins that have been drinking the hemlock of Despotism with\nthe new blood of Liberty! Let us give sap to the tree of Liberty, that\nit may not wither and die!\n\nWhen Hercules was born, but yet a child, the jealous Juno sent two\nserpents to his cradle to destroy him. Hercules or the serpents must\ndie. Both could not lie in the same bed. He seized them and suffocated\nthem by his grip, while his poor brother, Iphiclus, filled the house\nwith his shrieks. An infernal Juno, envious of the destined greatness\nof this country, hath sent this serpent upon it! What shall we do?\nShall we imitate Hercules or Iphiclus? Shall we choke it; or shall we\nform a timid _National_ party and _shriek_?\n\nGentlemen, you will never have rest from this subject until there is a\nvictory of principles. Northern ideas must become American, or\nSouthern ideas must become _American_, before there will be peace. If\nthe North gives to the Nation her radical principles of human rights\nand democratic Governments, there will be the peace of an immeasurable\nprosperity. If the South shall give to the country a policy derived\nfrom her heathen notions of men, there will be such a peace as men\nhave overdrugged with opium, that deep lethargy just before the mortal\nconvulsions and death! All attempts at evasion, at adjourning, at\nconcealing and compromising are in vain. The reason of our long\nagitation is, not that restless Abolitionists are abroad, that\nministers will meddle with improper themes, that parties are\ndisregardful of the country's interest. These are symptoms only, not\nthe disease; the effects, not the causes.\n\nTwo great powers that will not live together are in our midst, and\ntugging at each other's throats. They will search each other out,\nthough you separate them a hundred times. And if by an insane\nblindness you shall contrive to put off the issue, and send this\nunsettled dispute down to your children, it will go down, gathering\nvolume and strength at every step, to waste and desolate their\nheritage. Let it be settled now. Clear the place. Bring in the\nchampions. Let them put their lances in rest for the charge. Sound the\ntrumpet, and _God save the right_!\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe latter portion of the lecture was frequently interrupted by\nboisterous applause.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nAfter Mr. Beecher had taken his seat, there were loud calls for Mr.\nGIDDINGS, whereupon that gentleman came forward and said that he had\nnot come to make a speech, but, like a good Methodist brother, he\nwould add his exhortation to the excellent sermon of his clerical\nfriend. In conclusion, Mr. Giddings besought all to enter heartily\ninto the contest for Freedom--to trust in God and keep their powder\ndry! [Loud applause.]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n[Transcriber's Notes:\n\nEvery effort has been made to replicate this text as faithfully as\npossible, including obsolete and variant spellings and other\ninconsistencies.\n\nThe transcriber noted the following issues and made changes as\nindicated to the text to correct obvious errors:\n\n   1. p.  4, \"lees\" changed to \"less\"\n   2. p.  4, \"themother\" changed to \"the mother\"\n   3. p.  5, \"Revleation\" changed to \"Revelation\"\n   4. p.  5, \"oppugnent\" changed to \"oppugnant\"\n   5. p.  5, \"prodncing\" changed to \"producing\"\n   6. p.  5, \"weekness\" changed to \"weakness\"\n   7. p.  6, \"Cristianity\" changed to \"Christianity\"\n   8. p.  6, \"Chris',\" changed to \"Christ,\"\n   9. p.  6, \"unto the \"least\" changed to \"unto the least\"\n  10. p.  7, \"sprours\" changed to \"sprouts\"\n  11. p.  7, \"Cristianity\" changed to \"Christianity\"\n  12. p.  7, \"southren\" changed to \"southern\"\n  13. p.  7, \"aud\" changed to \"and\"\n  14. p.  7, \"fouud\" changed to \"found\"\n  15. p.  8, \"breath\" changed to \"breathe\"\n  16. p.  8, \"choses\" changed to \"chooses\"\n  17. p.  8, \"Govenor's\" changed to \"Governor's\"\n  18. p.  9, \"agaih\" changed to \"again\"\n  19. p. 10, \"achievments\" changed to \"achievements\"\n  20. p. 10, \"feculant\" changed to \"feculent\"\n  21. p. 10, \"inate\" changed to \"innate\"\n  22. p. 13, \"grapsits\" changed to \"graps its\"\n  23. p. 14, \"llke\" changed to \"like\"\n  24. p. 15, \"Junot\" changed to \"Juno\"\n\nEnd of Transcriber's Notes]","title":"Conflict of Northern and Southern Theories of Man and Society: Great Speech, Delivered in New York City","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":11837}