^ NJ^MV& BRryofcongress lilllllllllililill ''"^ >r> > » > yl>. »^^>> --y'w^^mn-^ :»T>> va*- P'^«S>'%''%''^'^'^'*"''* <*S''^*«>'%.'S'^^''S!''^'^'!®i@ L».> ^ ^ J^ Ml LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. I » -^^^ (^ 4^ U»:> :»:-> *> ."^^ >' 3?3* f UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, f s^> >> > ^ >^ *^^ ^^ ^^^ ^?^r >^^-^!30^ ~ ? v> >> j>,^ ■ J>^ -^ :> >> ->> t > . '» >> j^ ''» >> ^> ■> > >■ > > » >v3^ *» « > >;o :^x>T'-^ :>_^!;■^-' ^>'^1>') s» >> >- = . .>j>i > - , ,5) >-0 ' ,;- mm ":»■■■■■> ~r^ >3» 7>» >-3L^r«: ' -£>■ CHRISTIAN INVESTIGATOR, Number 8. Whik^oro, N. "Y., Sepiemb^r 1843. THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS RHODE ISLAND. BY WILLIAM GOODELL. ^ INSTITUTE PRESS. COPY RIGHT SECURED. (H^HT' Four sheets periodical. — Postage, under TlOO miles 6 cents, over 100 miles, 10 cents. V 6 ^ A- i^^i Rights and Wrongs of Kliode Island, " The question now is, What can ive do, and what ought we to do, in order to obstruct and check the growth and spread of .... ARBITRARY POWER atnong eur churches, and ASPIRING ECCLESIASTICS?" Emmons, Vol. I, p. 36, In answer to the above question of the late Dr, Emmons, we would suggest that the very first thing to be done, is to convince the people that their liberties are in danger from that quarter. And the story of the actual subversion of liberty and law, and the establishment of " arbitrary power" in Rhode Island, through the influence and by the aid of " aspiring ecclesiastics," seems weU suited to that object. LIBERTY AND LAW, RELIGION AND RIGHTS, IN RHODE ISLAND. Great events are transpiring. They must be studied and un- derstood. The Rliode Island controversy is no mere local con- cernment. It touches vitally, and harshly, the great interests ot liberty and lavi', of religion and rights, not only in Rhode Island, but in the whole country. By neglecting or mistaking the facts and principles involved, the American people may vuiconsciously rivet their own fetters, and the American churches and ministry, instead of interposing a barrier against oppression and disorgani- zation, may only swell and hasten the rising tide of destruction. This, the story of Rhode Island will make manifest. Civil and political liberty have been violently subverted in that State, and a military despotism enthroned on the ruins (though in the abused name) of constitutional " laiv and order." The People — the only lawful sovereign, under God, of a free civil govern- ment, have been overawed, and deposed, by aristocratic usurpa- tion. The manv, with the right on their side, have been crushed by the compnrativnlv few, on wliosc side there was wcnl!l),and 4 . THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS Station, and influence, and arms, and Presidential favor, and cleri- cal sanction. A State government, regularly and peacefully con- stituted ;ind organized, has been overturned by insurrection, with the aid and countenance of the Federal Executive, whose object, as his own official Gazette assures us, was the support of South- ern slavery. The successful accomplishment of all this, is cele- brated by public thanksgivings in the city churches ; anthems are chanted, and discourses jeplete with the dogmas of despotism are delivered and published, by prominent ministers of the chief religious sects ; and public journalists, political and religious, to a fearful extent lend their sanction. MISREPRESENTATIONS. Those who know human nature, and study human history, un- derstand, that in .an age like the present, such icsiiits could not have been reached, without the aid of misrepresentations, false colorings, wrong statements, unjust charges. As in all similar cases, the crushed friends of freedom' are vilified, traduced, cari- catured, wronged. Thus prejudices are engendered, and the public ear, to some extent, is closed against all appeals in their ifivor. Thus it has been with the friends of the enslaved, and thus ii is with the, disfranchised of Rhode Island. In the present case, we count it needful to notice briefly, some of the misapprehensions afloat, before we attempt 4,o discuss, in order, the main points involved in the controversy. To be heard with prejudiced ears, is sometimes worse than not to be heard at all. TREATMENT OF THE COLORED PEOPLE. The friends of human rights abroad, are told that they ought not to sympathize with the suffrage men in Rhode Island, nor plead their cause, because, in their efforts to obtain their rights, they di-d not include the people of color. — Whatever the facts of the case may be, the principle of the objection is false, and to practice upon it wovild be fatal. On such a principle, no message of mercy could ever have reached our lapsed race. It is the same plea made by those who would blunt our sympathies for the Africans, because they enslave each other at home. On this principle, we should have withheld our sympathies and aid from Cinque, and such of his comrades on board the Amistad as had been engaged in the slavetrade. If abolitionists may stand aloof from the oppressed VDhite men of Rhode Island, because they, and their friends in other States, stand aloof from the oppressed colored men of the country, then may the oppressed whites of R. island, and their friends, on the same principle, stand aloof from therflbrtsof abol lionists, on the gf^eund that they do not care, OF RHODE ISLAND. equally, for the rights of the poor and wronged whites. Such a prejudice against, abohtionists lias extensively existed, from the beginning, because, it has been said, there are aristocrats in their ranks. How much occasion there has been for this objection, re- mains, perhaps, to be ascertained. If abolitionists can see white liberty crushed in Rhode Island^ without alarm and sympathy, the objection will acquire vast force. A " liberty party" for th& benefit of colored men only, would become, as ridiculous as a. " democratic party" for the exclusive benefit of the ivhites. If w& would be men of principle, and have the credit of being such, wo must apply our principles impartially, and every where. As we do not cease to demand the political rights of the free people of color, though the majority of them do not join with us in pleading for the enslaved, so, likewise, we must not omit to demand iho political rights of the disfranchised whites on account of their in- justice to the people of color. The cause of liberty is one, and if its friends can not seek its unity, they might as well surrender, first as last, especially, since it has become manifest that the North- ern and Southern aristocracy, hitherto rivals, have confederated for their overthrow. Abolitionists have long predicted that the Slave Power would crush Northern freedom, and they have hop- ed that the first instance that should occurj would rouse the free North. Shall they now acquiesce, or be silent, or neutral, while their predictions are fulfilling ? But the facts of the case have been misrepresented. Until within a few days, we hare not, ourselves, got hold of the whole truth. It is not true tha.' the suffrage men of R. Island (howev- er deficient) have wholly forgotten or neglected the claims of the colored man. Still less is it true, that, in this respect, they have been behind their opponents. The chief leaders of tiie free suf- frage movement were, from the first, in favor of making no distinc- tion of color, and they have not yielded their object. This fact was seized upon bv their opponents, and no pains spared to preju- dice the public against them, on that ground. As two-thirds of the people of the State were disfranchised, there can be no question that such a weapon was found available, since prejudice against color exists every where. In the Convention by whom their Con- stitution was formed, it was deemed advisable, by the majority, to insert the word " ivhite''^ among the qualifications of voters, but at the same time, they provided, in another clause, that the pro- position to st7'ike ovt that word " white" should be submitted to the people, at the first annual election after the first session of the Legislature under the Constitution, and there is no doubt it would have been stricken out, if their government had not been forci- bly overlurned. Their opp(i])i''nts, the landholders, in framing O THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS their rival Constitution, (which was defeated, on the question of Its adoption, by the votes of the suffrage party,) inserted, hke- wise, the same word " white;' but they did not provide any means by which the people could strike it out. On the contrary, their proposed Constitution, as will be shown, would have been,' :n all its provisions, out of the reach of amendment by the ma- jority of the people. So that the colored people would have now been without even the prospect of relief, if the suffrage parly had accepted the landholders' Constitution, which they are so much blamed for not having done. Yet they did wrong, in not shaping their own otherwise excellent Constitution, as it should have been, in their own Convention. Up to May last, as we know, the suffrage party were hooted at, fur wishing to admit " the loiu Irish and the niggers'' to the polls. This we heard on the spot. But the tunc has turned, now. When the contest came lately, to the sword, the city aristocracy were willing to have the help of the colored people, the most of whom were their dependents, their laborers, their coachmen and their domestics. They en- rolled them then as firemen, and admitted some of them into the mihtary. And in the now pending experiment of giving the peo- ple a Constitution, under the terrors of the " Algerine law," and while citizens are flying from the State to escape imprisonment merely for having voted under the new Suffrage Constitution, and for having defended it in argument,— and while the call for the appointment of delegates to the coming Convention is so appor- tioned as to throw the power into the hands of the aristocratic minority, — the admission of the dependent colored people to vote, as well as to fight, and the boast of their support, answers their selfish purposes, and is impudently trumpeted to their praise. That such facts should occur, only proves what every body should have known before, viz : that servility is not confined to color, and that any aristocracy under heaveri will as soon wield the power of the colored people to suppress the liberty of the whites, as the power of the whites to hold the colored people in bondage, whenever it suits their convenience. VIOLENCE — LAWLESSNESS — BAD CHARACTER. " But then the suffrage party were so headlong and reckless — so violent and mobocraiic— so blood-thirsty and ferocious ! '— " They were such low and base characters— such plunderers and infidels" ! By whose testimony do vou learn this ? Suppose you hear both sides, and suspend judgment till you know the facts of the case ? There are reckless and bad men in all sects and parties. 1 here were infidels in the councils and armies of the Americaa OF RHODE ISLAND. 7 Revolution. And did this decide the merits of the controversy with Britain, or make it proper to desert the cause of freedom ? What if there has been lawlessness and disorganization 1 These are the natural results of despotism — the almost unfailing signs of its existence. How shall they be cured without removing their causes ? Our story will show that the suffrage party have been remark- able for their forbearance — that they peacefully and lawfully adopted a Constitution and organized a State government, after all prospect of obtaining their rights through the Charter autho- rities had failed — that in this they had the sanction of American Constitutional law — that they look up arms only in defense of the lawful and Constitutional government from insurrection — that the charges against them, of incendiary designs and of purposes of plunder, are infamously truthless — that they have done nothing mobocratic, unless the military defense of civil government (which, by the bye, we disapprove) be always to be accounted of that character. Their military movements we regret, as being, in our view, bad policy, as well as wrong in principle. But they only took up arms to support the Rights and to support Consti- tutional " law and order," after their opponents took \ip arms against both. Their opponents had taught from the pulpit the duty of maintaining civil government by arms, and they did no- thing worse than to practise that doctrine. As to the characters of the suffrage men, we speak deliber- ately and on hitelligent advisement, when we challenge a com- parison between them and their opponents. Take the leaders of the two parties, or take them in the masses. Search for infidels, or licentious, or profane, or dishonest, or Sabbath-breaking, or immoral men — or, on the other hand, select temperance men, abolitionists, men of acknowledged piety in the churches, to be found in the two parties, and in either case the suffrage cause need not shrink from the scrutiny. But suppose it were otherwise ? How would that affect the merits of the case ? It is a question of inalienable human rights. Is infidelity to be cured by Christian oppression ? Will you in- vade men's rights to teach them honesty and good morals ? Must Honesty and Humanity blush to be found redressing hu- man wrongs, because the victims are dishonest and vicious ? So thought the Pharisees, but so thought not the Savior. The slaves, it is said, are so thievish and vicious, that the good should not seek their freedom. It would be strange if there were no bad men among the majority of the people of Rhode Islari. But shall liberty therefore be crushed ? Shall despot- ism rule the earth, so long as it can plead the vices of the peo- 8 THE IlIGHTS AND THE WRONGS ])le ? Is iiol despotism itself one of the giant vices, the ])arcnt of vices, that needs to be rennoved, before the world can be re- formed ? Those who have been most forward 'to blacken the characters of the suffrage men, 1o heap upon them the most opprobrious epi- thets, and represent them as a low rabble, have nevertheless made *ome very remarkable admissions. Dr. Tucker, in his discourse, p. 16, says: — "The evil has infected the churches" "Sad divisions have taken place — friend has been arrayed against friend, brother against brother — lines of alienation have run through families and firms of business." — And Dr. Wayland says their movements " have been fostered and abetted, in some cases, by the civil magistrates, and yet more, in some instances, by men wIk) have been nurtured among us, who have sat at our ta- bles, and been warmed by our fire-sides." — (Disc. p. 8.) And again, — " I have been informed that a considerable number of professing Christians, in this city, liave been deluded into a par- ticipation in these transactions." — (p. 30.) And yet again : — '' This has been done, [i.e. leading citizens have been ' denounced or whom, for any cause they desire to get rid of, or whom, in the words of the law, 'they shall determine to be an unsuitable person 10 become an inhabitant' of their town, to give notice to that per- son, (he not being a freeman,) to depart out of the town within a certain period, on penalty, if he fail to go, of being hound for one year into servitude, to any citizen op the united states !* Very plainly, by this Statute, any new resident, not a free- liolder, might be " bound out into slavery at the South ! What a ])ara!lel have we here to those infamous laws by which free col- ored citizens are sold into slavery ! Another section of the same Act " renders it imperative on all who entertain strangers, to re- port them within seven days, to the President of the Town Council."* religious liberty outraged. Under shelter of the enactments just mentioned, Official Town Dignitaries and others have, ever and anon, annoyed and insulted with the threat of banishment, itinerant and transient Mission- aries, Agents, and others, who have sojourned temporarily in the 8tate. In so doing, they have treated with utter contempt that clause of the U. S. Constitution that guaranties to the citizens of each State the right of free and peaceful sojourn in every other JState, Here, again, we trace the close resemblance between the lawless despotism of the slave States, and that of the Charter Government of Rhode Island. That Anti-Slavery lecturers should have had the terrors of this law held over them, need ex- cite no surprise. But it is not, perhaps, so commonly known that others have fallen under the same ban, A single specimen may suffice. Rev. William Fuller, a respectable minister of the gos- pel, [as "regularly educated and ordained" as the most fastidious could desire,] was preaching, about ten or twelve years ago, at Washington Village, in Rhode Island,. in a house erected by the (contributions- of Christians, many of whom were disfranchised. His services were highly appreciated by a portion of the inhabit- tants. But his faithful testimony against rum-selling, made him obnoxious to a number of "the free-holders," by whom he was A M( mber of the Boston B:ir," in Review of " W;i\land's Discourse. OF IIHODF. ISLAND. IT) formally nDiified ibat he should be banished from ihc lowii, nnlcss he altered his style of preaching. He pursued the even tenor of his way, until the threat was literally fultillcd. Either by order of the town authorities, or else by vote of the "freemen"' in open •t6wn meeting, (we are not positive which,) he was aulhorititaveJy «nd officially ordered to leave the town, with which order he peaceably complied, and left the town and the Stale, lie had previously been an ordained minister in another town in Rhode Island — was afterwards settled at or near River Head, on Long Island, and has since supplied, for some time, the pulpit of the First Presbyterian Church in Ulica. We are thus minute, to show that R. Island legislation, under the Charter, is not a dead letter, and that the persons recently described as low vagabonds arid rebels, are not its only victims. The banishment of a minister of the gospel, under authority of the Charter Government, for no crime but preaching against the sins of the " free-holders," is a precious comment upon the boast- ed guaranty of " freedom in matters of religious concernment," in the land of Roger Williams, showing how little any such guar- anty is worth, under a government irresponsible to the people, and undefined by a Constitution. Another specimen of the tone and style of Town Meetings of the "//-ecynen," may be found in the resolution adopted and en- forced, in Providence, a few years since, excluding all persons except themselves from the Town House, during Town Meetings'. rOPULAll 3I0VEMEKTS AGAI?;sT DESrOTISM. Not long after tlie State of Rhode Island assented to the Federal Constitution, in May 1790, there began to be movements in favor of a State Constitution, an extension of the suffrage, and an equalized representation. The petifions for this object became so impor- tunate and so numerous, that, about the year 1797 or 8, the Charter Assembly felt constrained to call a Convention, not of the People, however, but of the privileged free-holders. This Convention framed a Constitution, (if our information be correct,) which was submitted to the free holders, and rejected hy ihem.. These particulars we have from a clergyman, who was a member of the College in Providence at the time. In 1811, the effort was renewed, but with similar want of success. From 1819 to 1822 inclusive, a period of four years, the State was agitated with the same discussion, but with no visible effect on the Charter Government. In 1824 the Assembly called a Convention of the "freemen,'' to form a Constitution. This Convention recommended an equalized representation atnon^ the '• freemen," but a motion to extend the saf- frage received but three votes. The proposed Constitution was re- jected. 16 TH1-; raGiiTs and the wnoxGa In 1829, ufter an nnimaled and elaborate newspaper discussion of two vearsr', petitions were presented to the Assembly lor an extension of (lie .suffrage. They were referred to a Committee, who reported an insulting reply to the petitioners, *• describing them as a degraded portion of tlie communit}-, and reminding them that if they were dis- ^^atistied with the instilntions of the State, they were at liberty to leave it ! The Report was received, and printed, and considered, with much exnitation, as the most effective rebuke ever adminis- tered to the advocates of liberal suffrage in R. Island."* This was the courtesy extended by the Charter Assembly to two- thirds of the adult male population of Rhode Island, including proba- bly seven-eighths of all of them who are and have been the efficient and consistent friends of temperance, moral reformation, human lib- erty and social improvement in that State. These characteristics have only made the extension of tiie suffrage the more difficult there, because such qualifications are the last that the conservators of aris- tocratic misrule in Rhode Island would wish to see coming to the polls. There is no " Liberty Party" in Rhode Island, because the ma. terials for such a party are disfranchised. We have in our mind's eye a very prominent individual, now deceased, who for many years notoriously controlled the oligarchy of the State, whose known hos- tility to common and Sunday schools was generally attributed to his fear of the effect of popular intelligence upon his political influence, at a time when no small number even of the " free-holders" and their *' oldest sons" could neither read nor write. It is undeniable that the progress of learning, among the people, has been accompanied with a rising demand for a free government. If, (as Pres. Wayland claims,) some of the conservators of the Charter have befriended common schools, it only proves them less discerning than the politician just described. The tone of the Legislative Report of 1829 has been but too faith, fully echoed by the presses of R. Island, with few exceptions, from that time to the present. The majority', including the most moral and patriotic portion of the people, have been charged with the foulest crimes, and blackened by every epithet of abuse. The cry of treason ngainst the abolitionists, in 1834-5-6, in that State, was only an in- cidental form of the same policy. And the same Mr. Hazard, who drew up the insulting Report just adverted to, was likewise the ad- vocate of penal enactments against anti-slavery discussions, the draftsman of a Bill for that object, which, as Chairman of a Commit- tee on that subject, he introduced into the General Assembly of R. Island : a measure first proposed and recommended by a regular town meeting of the " freemen" of Newport. Thus identified, at every step, are the enemies of northern and of southern freedom. In 1832 another effort in favor of an extended suffrage met the fate of its predecessors. * Vide Gov. Dorrs Message. OF RHODE ISLAND. ' 17 In 18;il the cdbrt was renewed, in the shape of a rcgulnrly organ- ized political party. But what could a political party do without voters ? The very object of the party was to obtain the iVanchise ! A few only of the "freemen" coidd be induced to join in the move- ment, though, as in the former struggles, great pains were taken to difluse light, and show the benefits of a free government in contrast with the abuses existing in R. Island. At first, the Assembly showed some symptoms of alarm, and, as on former occasions, assurances- were given by influential politicians, that something eflicient should be done. The Assembly went so far in 1834 as to call a Conven- tion — not of the People — but of the "freemen^' — the landocracy. In this Convention, a proposition to extend the suffrage received only seven votes, and the members dropping off, one after another, the Con- vention dispersed, for want of a quorum ! Yet the fVee suffrage par- ty struggled on, four years, when it became extinct, without having made any perceptible degree of change in the minds of the " free- men," who seemed determined never to yield their monopoly of power. This brings down the history until 1838. An entire gene- ration had thus melted away in the fruitless endeavor to recover their inalienable, God-given rights. Among them were many soldiers of the Revolution, who died without obtaining the liberties for which they fought, or learning the practical value of the far-famed " Decla- ration" which, on every returning fourth of .Tuly, was subjected to the mockery of a pompous reading, amid the roar of cannon, and the senseless huzzas of the unreflecting. THE EIGHTH GENERAL STRUGGLE. Seven distinct struggles for liberty in Rhode Island, within less than fifty years past, we have already recorded. The people per- haps began to think themselves entitled to a Jubilee. But they did not expect it, without another struggle. It came. It was severe, but it was successful. In the latter part of 1840, an Association of mcclianics, chiefly non-free-holders, was organized in Providence, and similar x\ssocia- tions were soon formed throughout the State. Once more, in Jan- uary 1841, petitions were sent to the Old Charter Assembly. " Tiiei/ 7ve7'c insultingly ■passed by, wltlioul any notice or action.''' Congres.s had set the precedent of excluding petitions for the laborers of tiio South. The Rhode Island Assembly knew no difTerencc between th» laborers of the South and of the No'rth. They seem to have profited by the hints of McDufiie and Calhoun, of Pickens and Leigh. They had learned how to deal with "^^the white slaves of the North." But a petition was presented from' the town of Smithfield, in favor of a more equal representation among "fkeemen." Tiiis was acted upon Feb. 6, and a resolution adopted, requesting the ''freemen'' to chooso delegates to a Convention to be held in November, 1841. rOXJMATION OF A STATE CONSTITUTION. The disfranchised non-ficc-lioldcrs, well knowing that (he conlcm- 18 THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS plated Convention of '■'■freemen^'' was not intended to d^o any thing effective for tliem, invited a Mass Convention of the people at Provi- dence, April 17th, 1841, " to consider their rights, grievances and remedies." " A second Mass Convention was held at Newport, May 5th : and a State Committee was appointed, with power to call a Convention of the people at large, for the formation of a Republican Constitution. But this call was delayed until the. June session of the Charter Assembly, at which Mr. Atwell, a free suffrage member, in- troduced a Bill to admit tax-fayers to vote with the '■^ freemen,^^ in the choice of delegates to the November Convention, appointed by the Assembly. Ten votes only, out of sixty-two, were given in favor of this motion, proving clearly that the People had not mistaken the objects of that Charter Assemhly^s Convention. On the 5th of July, therefore, their Mass Convention assembled again at Providence, and instructed their State Committee to issi»e forthwith, their call. This was accordingly done. Delegates were duly chosen, according to an equal ratio, and in doing it moderators and clerks were chosen, in the primary meetings, held in nearly all the towns in the State, and the business was transacted according to customary usages in Rhode Is- land. A large majority of the delegates assembled in Convention at Providence, Oct. 4th, 1841, formed a plan of a Constitution, and ad- journed till the next month, that the plan might be submitted to the public scrutiny, and be discussed among the people. They re-assem- bled in November, made several amendments of their plan, passed upon the Constitution, and submitted it to the people for their adop- tion or rejection. " The adult male population, who were citizens of the United States, and had their permanent residence, or home, in the State," were invited to vote upon this question of adoption or rejec- tion. This was done, agreeably to appointment of the Convention, Dec. 27th, 28th and 29th, 1841, and the result was the adoption of the Constitution " by a vote of 13,944, being more than three-fifths of the entire male population of Rhode Island." These votes were duly returned to the People's Convention, examined and counted, and the Constitution declared to be adopted. " The report of the Count- ing Committee was transmitted to the Charter Assembly, at its Janu- ary session, 1842, and a motion made (by Mr. Atwell) in that body, for a Committee to examine the return, which was negatived by a large majority." So the Charter Assembly refused to inquire whether or no the People had adopted a Constitution ! CONVENTION OP THE LANB-HOLDERS — WRINGING AND TWISTING. In the mean time, the Landholders' Convention, by invitation of the Charter Assembly, had assembled, the first Monday in November 1841, and " proceeded to draft a Constitution. On the question of the extension of the suffrage, the Convention « Voted, to exclude the eldest son of freemen, and admit such white male adult citizens as possessed taxable property to the amount of five hundred dollars.' " The Convention then adjourned to meet again the 15th day of Feb- OF RliOEE ISLAND. 19 ruary following. This they did without formally passing a vote upon the plan of Constitution, as a whole. This circumstance, together with the subsequent abandonment of this five hundred dollar qualifica- tion, at their adjourned session in February, {after the adoption of the People's Constitution,) has been made the basis of an evasion, by means of which the impression has been successfully and extensively made, abroad, tliat no such property qualification was ever intended. The^ac^, nevertheless, remains, as above stated, and had there been no such event as the adoption of the Free Suffrage Constitution, by the people, it is manifest that no such favorable change in the Constitu- tion of the " Freemen's" Convention would have been witnessed. This is evident, by the testimony of their own defenders. A. C. Barstow, in his Letter in the Emancipator of July 21st, in answer to Wm. Goodell, and speaking of this period, Nov. 1841, says : " But little interest was taken in the matter, [i. e. the free suffrage movement,] up to this time. The legal party always looking upon it as Si farce, never opposed, nor took any notice of it." Of course, then, they had no intention of enacting the " farce" of free suffrage, in which they pretend the people themselves took " but little interest" ! And since they " took no notice of" this " farce" of the people's petitioning for the franchise, it follows that the pretense of this same Mr. Barstow, in a previous paragraph, that " the pray- er'' (of the free suffrage men) " to the Legislature was answered," (instead of the prayer of the " freemen" of Smithfield, for an equal- ized representation,) is proved to be without a shadow of foundation. Equally explicit is the Discourse of President Wayland, p. 14, where he says : — " It is proper to add, that until very lately, it has been really doubt- ful whether a change was actually desired by any large nuuiber of our citizens. Petitions on this subject, were, it is true, several times presented, but they never seemed to arise from any strong feeling, nor to assume a form that called for immediate action. It has really been matter of surprise to me, that the question awakened so little atteU' tion." [/ / /] Who will believe that, with these views, any " immediate action" would have been taken by the holders of power, had not the people themselves asserted the sovereignty which God, and reason, and the Declaration of Independence, had awarded lo them ? How amazing is the eff'iontery of these men ! In no possible way no — not by nearly a half century of exertion, (so they tell us,) could the least im- pression be made upon them, that the petitioners were in earnest — or at least *• any larse number of them" — not enough of them to cause any alarm, and therefore, "immediate action was not called for!" The disfranchised of Rhode Island had presented themselves before the Charter Assembly, about as many times, by their petifions, as Moses and Aaron, on behalf of the liebicws, and on a similar errand, had 20 THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS presented fliemsclves before Pharaoh ; they liad waited many years longer than did the Hebrews, for the granting of their petitions — but (he Assembly thought it " really doubtful whether any change was ac- tually desired, by any large number of the citizens" ! The petition- ers had. adopted the plan of" carrying this object into effect by means of voluntary assDciations." So says President VVayland, and he inti- mates their dangerous strength and power. Yet he saw no evidence in them of '-any strong feeling," and was "quite surprised that the question awakened so little attention" ! A political party had been organized — a newspaper had been established and patronized — money had been expended — immense Mass Conventions, the largest gather- ings ever witnessed in the State, had been held at Providence and Newport, and marched in proce^ision through the streets — measures adopted for forming a Constitution — delegates to the Convention ap- ])oin'.cd in nearly all the towns in the State — but " the legal party aU ways holed upon it as a farce !"— (precious proof of the clearness of their vision !) and, (without ever imagining that they had already granted the prayer of^ the disfranchised, and had, therefore, called a Convention of the '^freemen,'') they " TOOK NO NOTICE" what- ever of all that was passing around them. Ijut no sooner had the people taken the additional step of acting upon their lights, than-^behold ! the tables are, at once, turned, and now, forsooth, the people have been so disorganizing and rebellious, (hat a fair pretext is found for their subjugation by martial law ! Yes ! And then they try to make the nation believe they were about to give thcrn all they asked; had it not been for their insubordination to Jaw ! But we anticipate the discussion. We must patiently record the facts. We must finish the history of this landholder's Constitution. We have noticed the refusal of the Charter Assembly, at its June ses- .sion, to admit the tax-payers to vote, with the freemen, in choosing delegates to their Convention. We have seen also, the disposition, up to November, to establish a strong property qualification. We have seen, that, up to that time, they regarded the whole movement a •' farce." But the successful adoption of a State Constitution by the people, had begun to convince them that something more than " a iarce" was in progress — that the long-neglected and spurned petitions had arisen from " strong feeling," on the part of " a large number of the citizens." — What now could l)e done, to prevent the Constitution just adopted from going into operation ? We shall presently see what they attempted to do. Yet other facts must be recorded in theia* order. WISDOM AND EQUITY. At the session of the Charter Asseml)ly, in January 1842, Mr. At- well, a member of that body, and also a member of the People's Con- vention, introduced an Act, reciting the doings of that body, and re- quiring the Asscmijiy to yield up its authority to the new government, which was to be organized -under the Constitution. TIte Bill was re- OF miODE ISLAND. , 21 fected. "Mr. Atwell Ihen moved for an inquiry into the number of qualified voters who had cast their ballots for the new Constitution. This, too, was negatived, and the entire subject treated with marked contempt. Having thus refused to make the inquiry, tiie Charter Assembly tacitly admitted that the " asserted majority" was a true and real one — they evinced their conviction of the fact, and all cavil and controversy on that point, on their jiart, was thus forever fore- closed — and their position, in this respect, they well understand. Something, however, had been gained. The Landholders' Conven- tion was to meet again in February, and the Charter Assembly, now, for the first time, consented to humor the people, by passing an Act which authorized all persons who would be allowed to vote under the Constitution that should be formed in February, to vote on the ques- tion of the ado])tion or rejection of that Constitution, in the framing of which they liad not been permitted to participate. They insulted the people and common sense, at the same time, by passing another Act, declaring the People's Constitution, that had just been adopted, "an assumption of the powers of government, a violation of the rights of the existing government, and of the rights of the people at large V^ That is to say, " the people at large" had violated their own rights, by doing their own business, and asserting their own supreme authority ! CONSERVATIVE KNAVERY, AND POPULAR SAGACITY. Rejection of the Landholders^ Constitution — and why ? — The Land, holders' Convention completed, at its February session, its draft of a Constitution, which was submitted to the people, on the 21st, 22d and ■23d of March. It was rejected, by a majority of nearly 700. This rejection is one of the facts never disputed by either party, and may fairly be considered as a virtual ratification or re-adoption of the People's Constitution of the December previous. What further de- monstration of the will of the majority could the Charter Assembly ask? They and their opponents, each in turn, had tried their hand, in framing a Constitution for the people. Their opponents had ob- tained an overwhelming majority for theirs — and they had sustained an acknowledged defeat — a rejection of theirs. How could they then with any pretension to fair dealing, or regard to " law and order," liold out in the controversy any longer? But it has been said that this Convention of the landholders was "defeated by the eflbrts of ambitious and designing men"! Who is it, that has authority to say that, and to nullify the sovereign people's acts on that ground? What a "disorganizing" doctrine have we here ? By this rule, any President or Governor might hold his seat, after the election of his successor, upon a similar plea. An examination of the landholder's Constitution will show the grounds of its rejection. Ii was obno.\ious to the people, in the fol- lowing particulars : — 1. It did not provide for that grand safeguard of electoral indepen- dence, that .terror of tyrants — that dread of demagogues — the vote 22 THE RIGHTS AND THE WjRONGS BY BALLOT witJioiit the name of the voter on the ticket. The mode is left to the dictation of the General Assembly, and the people had rea- son to apprehend that a mode would be adopted, which, instead of conferring real, available power, on the operatives of the manufac- turing districts, (dependent as they are, on their employers, and sub- jected as they might be, to their scrutiny and dictatorship,) would on- Jy tend to swell tlie already overgrown power of the capitalists. 2. It di-d not destroy the freehold caste, nor the peculiar qualifica- tion of the freeholder's oldest son. These stood in the same position as they did before, but the franchise was farther extended by admit- ting white native American citizens, twenty. one years of age, who had resided in the State two years, and in the town six months. Free- holders and their eldest sons could vote after a residence of one year. 3. Of course, it left all except freeholders without that right of ju- ry trial by their peers so essential to their security, and even to their protection from persons claiming them as slaves. 4. It did not place naturalized citizens on a level with the soil-born, but required of them three years residence, in addition to the five re- quired by the United States, and that they should own real estate in the town where they might vote. This would prevent a large num- ber of operatives in the factories from voting at all. Many more would forfeit the right, by moving to another village for employment. And nearly all of them would hold the elective franchise, if at all, at the pleasure and good will of their employers. Thus, they might be- come the tools of the capitalists, instead of becoming independent freemen. 5. No provision was made enabling the people to strike out the word " white" and tlius extend the suffrage to the colored population, 6. It did not recognize the inalienable rights of man, nor the sov.e- reignty of the People, nor their right to frame, alter and abolish gov- ernments at their pleasure. Many other defects might be enumerated. But two positive abom- inations, each one, of itself, sufficient to insure ils reJ3ction by a peo- pie who understood their rights, or regarded fundamental equity, de- serve special attention. First. Its apportionment of representation was so unequal, that, under its operation, the State would have been still governed, as hith- erto, BY A MINORITY ! It threw the control of the Assembly into the hands of towns and districts containing less than one-third of the in- habitants ! Second. The Assembly, thus constituted and governed, was to hold, in its own hands, virtually, the question of amendment or non- amendment, of this defective and unjust Constitution. All move- ments in the direction of change, were to originate with the Assembly elected by a minority of the people. If they proposed amendments, and the people concurred, and if — after the people had approved them, the Assembly still agreed to it, then, but not otherwise, the Constitution could be amended ! This mode of amendment will ap- or RHODE ISLAND. 23 pear in its frue colors, when it is added thnt tlicre was no provision mado for a new apportionment of tlie representation, already unequal, and likely to grow into a still greater inequality, in a few years. So that the landholders' Constitution, at'ter all, was a knavish trap, to cheat the people with a show of sovereignty, and never put thetn in real possession of it, no — not even for a single hour. More than this, it was a dishonest trick to gull them into a ratification, an agree- ment, to many of the same abuses which now exist only as sheer usurpations, without a show of popular or constitutional sanction. — On the whole, the people knew very well, that if the}'' adopted this Constitution, they would be in a worse position to assert their rights, than they were, under the Charter. As its framing, both in the man- ner and matter of it, was an insult to the people, so its rejection by them was a proof of their discrimination and foresight. " They saw the hook through the bait," and avoided it.' In the language of a ner- vous writer — " After all, it was to be the LAND that was to govern, and not MAN. The free suffrage party were solemnly bound to re- ject that Constitution, and they would have been false to themselves and to their principles, if they had done otherwise." And he shows, by a detailed statement of particulars, how, ere long, the representa- tion in the Senate, would have become as objectionable as under the Charter, and how "this landed majority in tiie Senate, could always prevent the passage of any Act for the amendment of the Constitu- tion." How provoking, that the people would not rivet their own fetters! That they would not give up their own Constitution for that of the landholders! They must be rebels and disorganizers, of course! THE STATE CONSTITtlTION — ITS JIAJOKITY ADOPTION. Of the People's Constitution, we have heard no complaint, that could befit republican or Christian lips, except the insertion of the word "white" which, it was believed, would be stricken out by the people, as proposed. We will now attend to some objections that have been urged — not against the charade?', but against the valid' ity of this Constitution. It has been contended by individuals, (never by the Charter Gov- ernment) that there is no evidence of its adoption by the majority. — This plea is evidently resorted to, as an after-thought — a mere pre- text, to cover the real ground of objection — its republican features — • its recognition of popular sovereignty — its adoption without leave of the Charter Assembly. Nevertlieless, we will look at it. We have already noticed that the Assembly have never dared to inquire into the returns. That fact, of itself, should be decisive, unless it be pleaded that the Assembly planted themselves solely upon the position that no Constitution adopted without their sanction could be binding ! If this be their ground, let them abide the issue on that ground, and let their advocates be as silent as they arc, on the subject of the major- ity adoption. 2i THE RIGHTS ANI> THE WRONGS But is it credible that a majority of the people, who are dislVan. chimed, did not vote in favor of a Constitution that recognized their riglits — and at a time, too, when they had every reason to believe that no Constitution would be ofl'ered by the landholders' Convention, that would not contain the property qualification of 5^500? A condition vvhicli would still disfranchise a great portion of them ? If it be said that very many of them possess this property qualifi- cation, and therefore were not in favor of the Constitution — and if to this plea be added the very novel estimate of Mr. A.C. Barstow, that a majority of the people are landholders, and that therefore, they could not be supposed to be in favor of the People's Constitution — how, we demand, does this duplicate pfea agree with the other very novel dis- covery of Mr. Barstow and others, viz., that the people of the State are almost unanimously in favor of free suffrage, and have beer?, from the beginning of the present ditficulties ? It is remarkable that President Wayland and others, who have la- bored to create a suspicion or doubt on this majority question, have labored likewise to prove that the expressed will of the majority is not binding, and that such a principle would be despotic in its nature ! — Mr. Barstow says explicitly — " If it [the Constitution] was voted for, by a majority of the male citizens, still it can not be the fundamental law of the land." And Dr. Wayland says that in such a despotism of the majority " society would be worse than solitude." Why then do ihey seek to create a belief that this despotism of the majority is on their side ? Why not stick to the old doctrine that the minority ought to govern ? But to the facts. The Committee of the People's Convention, by whom the returns were received and counted, reported " that as near- ly as could be ascertained, the number of males in the State, over the age of twenty-one years, who could be voters under the People's Con- stitution, was 23,142 ; that 11,572 were a majority of that number, and that the People's Constitution was approved by 13,944, being a plurality of 4,756 and a majority of 2,372 votes." So that more than three-fifths of the whole number voted for the Constitution. Another calculation shows likewise, that the Constitution was adopted by a majority, even of the ^^ freemen" under the Charter. Thus : The largest number of votes ever polled, under the Charter, was 8,662, a majority of whom would be 4,332. And the "returns" showed that 4,927 of the votes in favor of the Constitution were given by " free- men," {[or their votes were separately registered) making a majority of freemen of nearly six hundred. " Every challenge that was made, at the election, was received, and the votes excluded from the count. Every voter wrote his name on the face of his ticket, and these tickets are preserved for the scrutiny of the Charter Assembly, together with the registers kept of the per- sons voting." " As to any unfair dealings, or spurious votes, the ^s- semhhj have never dared, though solicited by the liberal members, to make the inquiry.'''' Where then, is the room for controversy ? OF EIIODE ISLAND. 25 To make an iniprcssion abroad, it has been objocted tiiat votes were fjiven hy proxy, that is, tickets, duly authenticated, were sent in by individuals not present in parson. Also that the moderators of the town meetings were not j)iit under oath. But in both these particu- lars, the people followed the customary usages, and even, in the case of votinji by proxy, the statute laws of Illiode Island. For what hon- est object, then, are the.se objections trumpeted through the land ? Et?.- ])ecially 'when ths number of proxy votes were so kw that if thcv were al! cast out, the result would not be materially varied ? An effort has been made to discredit the majority returns of the Convention, by alledging that, in a subsequent vote for Governor, un- der this Constitution, in April, there was not quite half as many votes as were claimed for the Constitution. But what does this prove? — There was an occasion for a rally on the vote for the adoption of the Constitution. But in the election of Governor, there was no oppos- ing candidate, and why should the people rally in their strength ? — The aristocratic minority would not, of course, vote, under the Con- stitution, the validity of which they denied, and were preparing, by force of arms, to overthrow. A ballot-box rally, therefore, was not needed, to meet them. The Charter Assembly, too, had passed a law. forbidding, on penalty of fines and imprisonment, the holding of meet- ings to vote under the People's Constitution, or standing as candid- ates ; and declaring it frcaso/i to accept and '• assume to exercise" any State office, under the Constitution ! What can exceed the ef- frontery of men who can adopt measures like these, to keep the peo- ple from voting, and then claim that the diminished vote is an evi- dence of their having abandoned their object ! And yet, after all. the State officers, under the Constitution were chosen by a vote ol' nearly 1,600 more than those under the old Cliarter \'^ President Wayland, in his discourse, first repeats, and then, very adroitly, reverses the argument. After laboring to discredit the re. turns of the December vole, in favor of the Constitution, he turns a somerset, and bases an argument on the truthfulness of those returns, to prove that >' more than one half" of those who voted for the Con- stitution in December, " Itad abandoned''^ it in April ! For how did he know that, without assuming that tlie December returns were trust- worthy ? The honesty of this double argument is m keeping with the * The votes for " the officeri; under this Constitution" are stated by President "Wayland, to be 6,417. The Charter Assembly, as its proceedings are recorded ii\ the Providence Journal of May 5, reported the vote for S. W. King, as Gover- nor to be 4,864, and for the opposing candidate, T. F. Carpenter (a suffrage man ■who has since been arrested lor treason)2,211. Scattering; 3. This gives Gov. Dorr, by their own account, 1,553 more 'votes than S. W. King, whom the Charterists support as Governor of the State. And it shows that out of the 13,492 ,votes gtven fur Governor, under h/yfk organizations, only 4,864, or a little iTiore than one-third were giveti lor the man who afterwards governed the State by mllitan/ law, (!) while, by their own statements, 8,628 votes were cast for two randidales (Dorr and Carpenter) both of whom arc charged with treasou against the government of the 4,861 " V-giliwoics!" 4 26 THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS logic that assumes, (as his evidently does,) that the people abandon a Constitution, and thereby make it a nullity, by neglecting to rally a majority of their whole number (or as many as voted to adopt it,) at every election that takes place under it ! And this from a learned teacher who deprecates " disorganization" and capricious and irregu- lar change ! If any thing were needed to corroborate the returns of the votes, such efforts to get rid of thesn would be a sutlicient guaranty of their correctness. Another corroboration of a main item, in the estimate of the Convention, is inadvertently furnished by another opponent. Mr. Barstow's estimate of the number of persons in Rhode Island " entitled to vote in States where suffrage is most extended" is 22,000, or 1,142 less than the estimate of the People's Convention. This makes the majority in favor of the People's Constitution 571 inore than they made it. For this unexpected service,"from Mr. Barstow, the friends of the Constitution will be obliged. " Howbeit, he meant it not so, neither did his heart think so." He was intent on the ac- countable object of making out his new discovery that the horribly dangerous power of the majority, (as President Wayland hath it,) is in the hands of the landholders ! This point, to his own satisfaction, he made out, by ah additional stretch of his powers at guessing, which we need not examine. If he chooses to have it that, udih a majority of landholders, the People's Constitution was adopted by a majority of 571 more votes than they ever claimed, we shall not labor to con- fute him. And here we drop, for the present, the subject of the Constitution's majority adoption, with the obvious remark that if the people had a right to adopt a Constitution, without the sanction of the Charter Government, then they had a right to prescribe the manner of doing it, and of appointing the officers to do it — and their report of the re- suit is to be accredited by all conscientious sticklers for " law and or- der," and for the " correct way of doing business." Otherwise there is an end to all decisions by majorities, and the fiction of Pres. Way- land, as applied to the Constitutionalists, becomes a reality in the case of himself and his partisans. If " individuals" may trample on a Constitution of the sovereign People, duly declared by their appoint- ed officers to have been adopted, because they choose to doubt the cor- rectness of the count, thus claiming for themselves " a majority as- certained by no forms of law," then indeed may they " overturn the whole fabric of existing institutions" — a work which, it would seem, they are determined to do. CONSTITUTIONAL "LAW AND ORDER." We come then, to the grave inquiry whether the Constitution of jRhode Island was adopted in conformity with ^'law and ordet?" Or whether, as is claimed by the Charter Government, it was a violation of " law and order" for the People to form a Constitution, without leave of the Charter Assembly — insomuch that the legality and va- lidity of their Constitution is thereby destroyed. OF RHODE ISLAND. 27 The Declaration of Independence — that corner stone of all our American Constitutions — that grand exposiior and father of Con- stitutional law — that authenticated definition of "a republican form of government" and directory of "the manner'''' of establishing free institutions, according to fundamental " law and order" — is remarka- bly explicit, and direct to the point in hand. All governments " derive their just powers froin the consent of the governed." — " Whenever any form of government becomes destruc- tive of the ends for which it was instituted, it is the right of the peo- ple to alter, or to abolish it, and institute a new government." Twenty-five State Constitutions, in this Union, we might quote, to the same effect. And as to " the manner," the Constitu- tion of Vermont says — " The community hath an indubitable, ina- lienable, and indefeasible right, to reformer alter government, IN SUCH MANNER, as shall be by that coinmunity, judged most condu. cive of the public weal." Pennsylvania says, " The people at all times have an inalienable, and indefeasible right to alter, reform, or abolish their government, IN SUCH MANNER as they think proper." Vir- ginia says, " A majority of the community hath an indubitable, ina- lienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter or abolish government, IN SUCH iMANNER as shall be judged most conducive to the pub- lie weal." Every Constitution of Government in the American Un- ion, (unless we quote the rejected landholders' Constitution of R. Is- land, from which it was carefully excluded !) contains in its Bill of Rights the assertion of the same principle. We cite these specimens not merely as expressions of correct prin- ciples, but as authentic quotations of Constitutional " law and order" in America. Now for a few commentaries upon that "law and order." Washington, in his Farewell Address, says : "The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to MAKE and alter their form of government." Judge Wilson, of Pennsylvania, one of the framers of the U. S. Constitution, says : — " The people may change the Constitution'?, whenever, and HOWEVER they please. This is a right of which no positive institutions can ever deprive them." " In our governments, the supreme, absolute, mcontrollable power remains in the people ; as our Constitutions are superior to our legislature, so the people are su- perior to our Constitutions." [Judge Wilson's Works. Vol. III. page 292. 3d Philad. ed. 1804.] Again, the same writer says, .the people have the " right of abolishing, altering or amending this Constitution, at whatever time, and in WHATEVER MANNER they may choose." [Vol. I. page 17.] Ha3iilton, who was never suspected of ultra democratic predilec- tions, says : " The fabric of the American empire ought to rest on the solid basis of the consent of the people. The streams of national power ought to flow immediatply from that pure, oiiginal fountain of •all legitimate autiiority." [Federalist, No. 22 ] 28 THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS Others. — But the time would fail us to quote Mr. Rawle. and Judges Patterso:\, Iredell, Marshall and Story, of the U. S. Supreme Court, the latter of whom sa) s expressly, that the Declara- tion of Independence, which contains the doctrine, is not to be re- garded meiely as a practical fact, but " in a legal and Constitutional view of the matter, by courts of justice." [Story's Commentaries, pp. 198, 199 ] THE rULriT — AS IT ONCE WAS. The f/e/^'caZ expounders of " law and order" in R, Island, (who boast, by the bye, their neglect and contempt of political concern, .ments,) may be properly reminded that their predecessors, of Revolu- tionary times, who devoted earnest attention to civil matters, held exactly opposite views, and confronted the British and high tory di- vines of the day, (the Way lands and Vintons and Tuckers of their times,) with the assertion of the same doctrines just quoted from our chief jurists and statesmen. They led the way, indeed, in shaping and promulgating the very doctrines now contended for by the Con- stitutionalists of Rhode Island, and on account of which they are pro- scribed as disorganizers. President Stiles, of Yale College, wrote a book in defense of the people's Judges, by whom Charles I. was deposed and sentenced to death ; and abundantly maintains the doctrines against which Presi- dent Wayland contends. Dr. Emmons, though a Federalist of the old school, and jealous of the ultra democratic writers, both French and American, very clearly asserts the doctrine now in dispute : "The highest, as well as the lowest civil rulers, under the gospel dispensation, derive all their authority from their fellow men, and not from God, [i. e. not by direct appointment,] and therefore those who gave them authority, may tahe it away, and refuse to obey them, when they make laws which are unscriptural, unjust, oppressive and ty- rannical." [Emmons' Sermons, Vol. V. p. 439.] Of course, the people must judge^for themselves. In a sermon on " Obedience to Magistrates," under the administra- tion of the elder Adams, of whom he was a zealous supporter. Dr. Emmons, nevertheless, carefully'disclaims the doctrine now held by the Charterists of R. Island. He says : — " Volumes have been written in favor of passive obedience and non-resistance* to the higher powers, and volumes have been written m opposition to this absurd and detestable doctrine." [Vol. II. p. 140.] * This term was then used to designate — not the doctrine of the (Quakers, nor the doctrine of Anti-Civil-Governmenl — but the doctrine of the high tory party in England, who held the divine right of kings — or of existing governments, and denounced anathemas a^'ainst popular sovereignty, as the Charterists of Rhode -Island now do. OF RHODE ISLAND, -29 OTHER AUTlIORITIEi?. Madison. After the Constitution of the United States had been framed and adopted, an objection, it seems, was raised, " in respect to the powers oi' the Convention.'' "'It is asked." says Mr. Madison, " by what authority this bold and radical innovation was undertaken." And Mr. Madison devotes a paper to the question *' whether the Con- vention were authorized to frame" it. No writer on the Constitu- tion, and on American Constitutional law, is regarded as higher au- thority than Mr. Madison. Let us hear him : " They [the members of the Convention] must have reflected that in all great changes of established governments, forms ought to give way to the substance ; that a rigid adherence, in such cases, to the former, would render nominal and nugatory the transcendent and pre- cious right of the people to abolish or alter this government, as to them shall seem most likely to effjct their safety and happiness. Since it is impossible for the people spontaneously and universally to move in concert towards their object ; and it is THEREFORE ES- SENTIAL that such changes be instituted by some INFORMAL and UNAUTHORIZED propositions, made by some patriotic CITI- ZEN, or NUMBER of citizens. They must have recollected that it was by this irregular and assumed privilege of proposing to the people plans for their safety and happiness, that the States were first united against the danger with which they were threatened by their ancient government ; that Committees and Congresses for concen- trating their eflbrts, and defendmg their rights, and that Conventions were elected in the several States for establishing the Constitutions under which they are now governed. Nor could it have been forgot- ten, that no ill timed scruples, no zeal for adhering to ordinary forms, were any where seen, except in those who loished to indulge, under these masks, their secret enmity to the substance contended for. ^^ * * "They must have borne in mind, that as the plan to be framed and proposed, was to be submitted to the people themselves, the disappro- bation of this SUPREME authority would destroy it for ever ; its ap- PROBATION BLOT OUT ALL ANTECEDENT ERRORS AND IRREGULARI- TIES." [Federalist, No. 40.] If Mr. Madison had been writing a Review of " Dr. Wayland's Discourse on the Affairs of Rhode Island," he could not have hit the mark with greater precision. But perhaps the Doctor and his friends would prefer quotations from some modern statesman, one whose views of "law ana order" in R. Island, are more in accordance with their own. We will accommo- date them, with pleasure. Henry Clay, in his late speech at Lexington, Ky., touched upon Rhode Island affairs, and expressed great sympathy with the Charter- ists, and horror at the attempts of the Constitutionalists. Yet we will prove from this speech of Mr. Clay, that the Constitution of Rhode 30 THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS Island was regularly and lawfully framed and adopted ; that it is as valid and binding as any Constitution in the United States. Mr. Clay concedes that the Rhode Island Constitution "being sub- mitted to the People, an apparent majority voted for it." And, instead of stopping to question the count, he contends that " the major parV must not be permitted to govern ! Why ? Because it was contrary to " precedent ?" No ! He admitted that it was according to " pre- vhose moral character would stand the test as his has, and he has shown himself to be a man of superior abilities. I think God is pre- paring him to act no unimportant part in the world. You can hardly imagine what mortal hatred exists against him. It is said there are many who would shoot him if they had a chance." That the Chief Magistracy of Rhode Island should be counted so high a prize by a man of the talents and standing in society of Mr. Dorr, that he should be willing to run the risk of private assassina- tion or of public conviction for high treason, to obtain it, and amid scenes of carnage, seems a little paradoxical ; especially when a little compliance and compromise of the people's riglits, on his part, would secure the favor of the aristocracy, who would be ready to reward him with any office in their power. Yet, no less a man than Presi- dent Wayland could pen the sentence that follows — •• So dire is the lust of office, so blind the rage of political ambition, that I fear there are men among us who look at nothing as crime which will put them at the head of the strongest." Had he said this of Samuel VV. King, the Governor of the Charter Minority, a man enlisted in such a cause ,11:3 his, and urging it at the expense of. the first principles of Arncricarj OF RHODE ISLAND. 37 Constitutional law — "the basis" (as Washington affirmed) "of our political systems," there might have been something more intelligible in the statement. As it is, we can only conclude that the President of Brown University considers a contest for man's inalienable rights too great a " farce" to elicit any " strong feeling," or to prompt to any hazardous service — and that " the lust of office" is the only motive that could be a sufficient cause of such an effect. It is to be lamented greatly that his associations should have been such as to have given him no conceptions of the possibility of a higher motive of political action in times that try men's souls. The great merits of the controversy, we know, are not to be tested by minor circumstances like these. But since, (to give another direc- tion to the words of President Wayland) ''the movement" [of the Charterists] "has been fostered and sustained by a series of most as- tonishing falsehoods" — it is but a necessary act of justice that the particulars should be known. THE CONSTITUTIONAL ASSEMBLY. The State Officers and Legislature, under the Constitution, having been chosen by the people, the first session was held at Providence, and the Message of Gov. Dorr was delivered, the 3d of May. The document is before us, and it is one which would do honor to any State in the Union. Nothing of the kind, or comparable with it for states- manship and dignity has ever before emanated from a Governor ot Rhode Island. (Seldom indeed, if ever, has any thing deserving the name or taking the form of a Message been communicated on the opening of their sessions.) It recapitulates the past and recent his- tory of the State with great perspicuity, and argues the great princi- ples involved with much force and clearness. Its decorous and cour- teous bearing towards the Old Charter Governor, the minority As- sembly and the opposers of the Constitution, by whom he was wrong- fully charged with high treason, while they were the insurgents against Constitutional " law and order" themselves, will for ever re- main an imperishable monument of his magnanimity, contrasting, as it does, with the low vituperation and abuse, with which he was con- stantly assailed. The Providence Journal of May 5th is so stupid as to deride it, and (fortunately for posterity) describes it as " nothing but a patchwork of his own speeches and the articles in the New Age on the Sovereignty of the People" — "in the regular style of the Town House orators" — the " speeches of Mr. Parmenter," &;c. &c. The future readers of the Message will tiierefore have the benefit of the Journal's testimony that the so-called " agrarian" and "disorganiz- ing" meetings and speeches alluded to, were of the sauie character as the Message of Gov. Dorr, of which they can judge for themselves. As the State House was held and guarded by the adherents of the Old Charter, the People's Legislature peacefully met in a large build- ing commonly occupied as a foundry, and the circumstance furnished 'additional matter of derision in the £tunts of the aristocracy, with 38 THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS whom the apparent connection between mechanical labor and legis- lation became fresh proof that popular sovereignty was "farce" and " treason" combined ! Legislation in a "foundry .'" What further witness did they need, that Dorr was a traitor, that his adherents were " a low rabble" — the "fag end of society"* — seeking " a divi- sion of property" — ready to " seize upon the government, and sub- ject the city to pillage and plunder"')' — impelled by the "lust of office" to places of power, through scenes of carnage — that " disor- ganization" was their object, " anarchy" their creed, and their watch- word " revenge !" But what proof did Gov. Dorr, and the People's Legislature, exhi- bit, of these tendencies ? Were they found in the following ? EXTRACTS FROM GOV. UORr's MESSAGE. " Your attention will be required to the force law and Resolutions recently adopted by the General Assembly, for the suppression of the Constitution. Laws like these, which violate, in some of their pro- visions, the well known privileges enjoyed by the subjects of the Brit- ish Monarchy, could hardly find favor in the land of Roger Williams. These enactments have been regarded by the considerate men among our opponents as most impolitic and unjust, and by the people as null and void, because conflicting with the paramount provisions of the Constitution. — Military preparations have been made by direction of the Assembly, and the people have been consequently put on the de- fensive. But this is not the age nor the country, in which the will of the people can be overawed or defeated by measures like these," * ****** " We are assembled in pursuance of the Constitution, and under a sacred obligation to carry its provisions into effect. Knowing the spirit which you have manifested throughout this exciting controver- sy, the moderate but detemined course which you have pursued, your love of order, and respect for all Constitutional laws, and for the rights of all other persons, while engaged in the acquisition of your own, I hardly need remind you of your duty to cast behind you all in- juries and provocations, and leave them to the retributive justice of public opinion, which will ultimately appreciate every sincere sacri- fice to the cause of truth, of freedom, and of humanity. Entertain, ing the deep and earnest consideration that we are engaged in such a cause, and conscious of our own imperfections, let us implore the fa- vor of that Gracious Providence which guided the steps of our an- cestors, upon this our attempt to restore and permanently secure the blessings of that well ordered and rational freedom here established by the |)atriotic founders of our State. "The provisions of the Consfitution relating to the securitj^ of the right of sufiVage against fraud, and to the registration of voters, will require your immediate action. The State demands of its gov- » Vide Providence Journal. t Wavland's Discourse. OF RHODE ISLAND. 39 ernment an economical administration of aflliirs, and will justly com- plain ot^ any increase of its expenses, at tlie present period. " 1 can not more appropriately conclude tiiis communication than in the words of the Constitution, which declares that no favor or dis- favor ought to be shown toward any man, or party, or society, or re- ligious denomination. The laws should be made, not for the good of the few, but of the many, and the burdens of the State ought to be fairly distributed among its citizens." Thomas W. Dori?. Providence, R, I. May 3, 184;3. Our readers, we can assure them, are now in possession of a fair specimen of the tone and temper of the Message. If these extracts are not inflammatory, disorganizing, incendiary, and treasonable, the Message contains nothing that can be justly obnoxious to those charges. THE CONTRAST PROSPECTS OF " PILLAGE !" Let it be borne in mind, now, that this Message was. delivered by Gov. Dorr, under the full and well grounded conviction that he was the legally elected Governor of the State, under a Constitution regu- larly framed and adopted by a great majority of the people, who, un- til now, had been wickedly deprived of their just rights, that the en- tire movement on their part and his own, had been an orderly and peaceful restoration of those rights — that the action of the old Char- ter Assembly was legally and Constitutionally as well as morally null and void — that they were a minority of insurgents against the State, who had undertaken to put down the People's Constitution and the lawful Government by intimidation and force, and thus perpetuate their despotic usurpation and the abuses which, up to their April ses- sion, they had stubbornly refused either to remove or to abate — that he, himself, was the special object of their vindictive hate, that ha was at that moment, under their treasonable interdict of treason, for no crime or fault but his fidelity to liberty, human rights, the sove- reignty of the people, and the fundamental principles and time hon- ored maxims of American Constitutional " law and order," as repeat- edly expounded by the Washingtons, the JefFersons, the Madisons, and all the principal jurists and statesmen of the republic, and as es- sentially acted out in the adoption of all our National and State Con- stitutions, particularly in the case of Michigan, so recently sanction- ed by our Congress and President — let all these considerations be borne in mind, and then contrast the Message of Gov. Dorr with the language and the actions of his opponents. Instead of recommending a retaliatory proclamation and interdict of treason, he simply recommends a repeal, by the legitimate authorities, of their unauthorized and unjust legislation, a measure rendered ne- cessary by the fact that under the recently adopted Constitution, all the laws of the Old Charter Assembly remained in force until regu- larly repealed by the Constitutional Assembly — (another comment, by the bye, upon the allcdgcd revolutionary, and disorganizing, and 40 THE RIGHTS AND THE VVEONGS reckless " movements of the Dorr party.") Instead of exciting to re- venge and pillage, lie exliorts tl>e jieople to " cast behind them all in- juries and provocations.*' So far from arrogating to himself and his party the attributes of infallibility and exclusive right to govern — in- stead of branding his opponents with opprobrious epithets, instead of deriding them as " the fag end of society," and charging them with incendiary designs, he sj)eaks of himself and his associates as "con- scious of their own imperfections." Instead of " urging men to pil- lage and murder" — instead of hinting at " a division of property" — as President Wavland would lead us to infer the leaders of the party had done, we have a citation, from the Constitution, of the maxims of rigid impartiality, equal legislation, laws for the good of the many, not the i'ew, irrespective of sect, association or party — ^^and a fair dis- tribution of the State burdens among the citizens. WHAT THE AKISTOCRACY MEAN BY "PLUNDER." Are these the exhortations and maxims, which, when they fall on the ears of a hitherto privileged caste, with whom the monopoly of power has come to be regarded as a sacred and inviolable vested right, remind them instantly of " pillage and plunder" — a " division of property," and " the overthrow of the lawful government ?" So it would seem ? For the Editor of the Providence Journal is horrified at Gov. Dorr's Message. He sees in it nothing but a harsh and grating repetition of the current treason — a new edition of "Town House speeches," and of the lectures of " Mr. Parmenter." And we know that, in Rhode Island, those speeches and lectures arc currently represented as being of the same character described in the above extracts from President Wayland. The very words he uses are those bandied about the city, as descriptive of those meetings. And it has been well remarked of Wayland's Discourse, that its facts and principles, its arguments, and even its phrases, are evidently taken, at random, from the parlorsxof his city patrons and friends. PROOFS OF " pillage" AND "INFIDELITY." But perhaps it may be asked whether there was not some radical ilefect or startling heresy in the Constitution which had been adopted, and which justified the charge of " pillage and plunder" — " division of property" — leveling — agrarianism — atheism — infidelity — anarchy — insecurity of rights — contempt of " venerable laws and usages,"* &;c. «Scc. of which such loud outcry, from the pulpit and the press, has been sent forth, over the land. Let us examine. For the sake of convenience, in comparing, we will place the paragraphs, (so far as we can find them.) recognizing the Divine Government, the binding authority of the Divine will, the inalienable tenure of human rights, inclXiding the rights of property, &c. side by side, and sec how they compare. * Vide Dr, T'lckcr's Diicoursc, p, 14, OF RHODE ISLAND. 41 TII3 SCFFRAGE CONSTITUTION. Adopted, Dec. 1841. Preamblb. " We the people of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, grateful to Almighty God, for his blessing vouchsafed to the ' live- ly e.vperimeni' of religious and politi- cal freedom ' held forth' by our ve7icr- atcd ancestors, and earnestly imploring the favor of his graciods Providence toward this our attempt to secure, vtpon a permanent joundation, the advantages of well-ordered and rational liberty, and to enlarge and transmit to our successors the inheritance that we have received, do ordain and establish the following Constitution, I'or the governmtnt of the State." " Article I. Declaration of princi- ples and rights. 1. "In the spirit and words of Roger WiLLi.AMs, the illustrious founder of this State, and of his venerated associ- ates, we declare 'that this government shall be a democracy, or government of the people,' by the 'major consent of the same,' ' only' in civil things.' The will of the people shall be expressed by rep- reisenlatives freely chosen, and return- ing at fixed periods to their constitu- ents. This Suite shall be, and for ever remain, as in the design of its founder, sacred to ' soul liberty,' to the rights of conscience, to freedom of thought, of expression, and action, as hereinafter set forth and secured," 2. " All men are created free and equal, and are endowed by their Crea- tor with certain natural, inherent, and inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, the acquisitio/i of properly, and the pursuit of happiness. Govern- ment can not create or bestow these rights, udiich are the gift of God, but it is instituted for the siionger and surer defense of the same, that men may safe- ly enjoy the rights of life and liberiy, and securely possess and transmit ^^rop- crtii, and, so far as laws avail, may be successful in the pursuit of happinesi;." [Unusual, if not unprecedented care is here taken (o specify ihe " aequisi- firn.," the possession, and the tra'!S}!:is- sinn of proprrftf, as among ihc inviola- 5 the landholder's constitution. Rejected, March 1842. Preamble. " We the people of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, do ordain and- establish this Constitution, for the government thereof" [Significant brevity ! Here is no recognition of God, no gratitude expressed for the blessings of religious and political freedom — no supplication of divine favor on the pre- sent undertaking, nor on the future des- tinies of the State ] " Article I. Declaration of certain constitutional rights and principles. In order effectually to secure the religious and political freedomestablished hereby our venerated ancestors, and to preserve the same to their posterity, vfe do declare, that the inherent, essential and unques- tionable rights and principles hereinaf- ter mentioned, among others, shall be establij^hed, maintained and preserved, and shall be of paramount obligation, ia all legislative, judicial and executive proceedings." [No mention of" Roger Williams" ■ nor of a "democracy" — nor of " gov- ernment of the people"— nor " major consent" — nor of "soul liberty." "Cer- tain co7islitutional rights" are to be enu- merated, and they are to be secured to "t/ie 2)osieritii" of " our venerated an- cestors'" ! The " posterity" of other peo- ple are not mentioned !] [In the landholder>' Constitution, we have been unable to discover any rc- cogniiion of the inherent, inalienable, God-given ri2hts of man, or any thing that looks like it, unless it be what is copied above! There is noth-ing which recognizes those rights as " the gift of God" — and in strict consistency with this, there is nothing denving ihe right, of civil government to take them away'. —nothing aflirming that the rights ot properly, or any other human rights, have any higher origin than the per- mission of government ! And so the boasted conservators of " property"— h would seem, after all— could find no place, in fieii- Consiilution, to recng- ni/c ihc " natural, inhrrpnt, inalicnablr- 4a THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS ble rights of men, which civil govern- ment can not create, or destroy, but on- ly protect! Strange anarchists and le- velers, these ! Remarkable symptoms of "pillage and plunder !"] 3. " All political power and sove- reignty are originally vested in, and, of right, belong to the people. All free governments are founded in their au- thority, ana are established for the greatest good of the whole number. The People have, therefore, an ina- lienable and indefeasible right, in their original, sovereign, and unlimited ca- pacity, to ordain and institute govern- ment, and, in the same capacity, to al- ter, reform, or totally change the same, whenever their safety or happiness re- quires." 4. " No favor or disfavor ought to be shown in legislation, to any man, or party, or society, or religious denomi- nation. The laws should be made, not for the good of the few, but of the ma- ny, and the burdens of the State ought to be fairly distributed among its citi- zens." 5. " The diffusion of useful know- ledge and the cultivation of a sound MORALITY, IN THE FEAR OF GOD, being of the first importance, in a Republican State, and indispensable to the mainten- ance of its liberties, it shall be the im- perative duty of the Legislature to pro- mote the establishment of free schools, and to assist in the support of public education." right" to the " acquisition of property" — " to secnre]y possess and transmit pro- perty" ! ! ! And how could they, with- out a recognition of those inalienable, God-given rights, against which they were contending 1] [The landholders' Constitution con- tains no recognition of the sovereignty of the people, except what is implied in the above Preamble — " We the people," etc., and which they could not easily avoid using. — This accords with that feature of the Constitution, which al- most, if not wholly, puts its amendment out of the power of the people. And very plainly, a recognition of the right of the people to make and change their government, would have been a relin- quishment of their controversy with the Constitutionalists.] [In the landholders' Constitution we find nothing corresponding to the 4th section of the Suffrage Constitution — opposite.* Perhaps they thought of the Old Charter " party"— of " the few" that they intended should govern — or perhaps they remembered that above half the real estate in R. Island would have fallen into the hands of the Banks before now, had it not been for the principles of equality and anti-monopo- ly squinted at in the Suffrage Constitu- tion, drawn up (peradventure) by the " destructive" Thomas W. Dorr, whose assertion of the same principles had shorn the Banks of their exorbitant power.] "■Op Education. Section 1. The diffusion of knowledge, as well as vir- tue, among the people, being essential for the preservation of their rights and liberties, it shall be the duty of the Gen- eral Assembly," etc. etc. [Here, instead of the definite and ri- gid term "sound morality," which might squint significantly at ' te-total-- ism,' ' moral relorm,' and other radical fanaticisms of the times, we have only the graceful and vague term " virtde," to which an ancient heathen or a mod- ern bacchanalian would not strenuous- ly object — and nothing at all is said of " THE pear of God," which is the " be- ginning of wisdom."] ♦ Perhaps the clause prohibiting lotteries will be pleaded as an exception, as they are notoriously for the benefit of" the few, and not of the many." But this ."^OF RHODE ISLAND, 43 A declaration of the People's Constitution concerning religious lib. erty is copied, almost or quite verbatim, into the landholder's Consti- tution, with only the omission of this very guarded and careful termi» nation of the People's, viz. " and that all other religious rights and privileges of the people of this State, as now enjoyed, shall remain in- violate and inviolable." This was a sufficient guaranty, one would think, of all the rights and privileges of the Rev, Dr. Tucker and his friends, who were horrified, it seems, at the prospect that, under this Constitution, they should become " hewers of wood and drawers of water !" How it happened that the landholders omitted this guaranty in their Constitution, \Ve are not informed. In only one place, in the landholders' Constitution have we discov- ered the name of God. And this is in the clause concerning religious liberty, as copied from the People's. It was in a position where it could not well be omitted — " Whereas, Almighty God hath created the mind free," &:c. The People's Constitution provided that none but tax payers should vote on the question of taxation or expenditures, or hold the office of Mayor, Alderman, or Common Council-man in cities. This was co- pied, essentially, into the landholders' Constitution. It should be remembered that the People's Constitution was framed in November, and adopted by the people in December ; whereas the landholders' was not framed in Convention till February, and rejected by the people in March. So that the landholder's Constitution was drawn up and deliberated upon by those who had, no doubt, the Peo- ple's Constitution before them, and it is evident that the landholders took no small pains, both in shaping and recommending their Con- stitution, to make the people believe that the difference between the two Constitutions was trifling. The boast that they did this, is con- tinued to the present time. The differences between them, as above exhibited, therefore, as well as in the points previously specified, were not accidental. And the variations were not made, without reasons, of some sort. A SUPrOSITION, ^ " Indeed! says the lavnjer, that alters the case!'' Suppose now the case reversed. Suppose the landholders had pub- lished their Constitution in November, and suppose it had contained the same high tone of moral and religious sentiment, and the same careful recognition of human rights, including the rights of property that now characterizes the Constitution of the suffrage men. Sup- pose, next, that the suffrage party, with that Constitution before them, (and apparently adopted by 13,944 out of the 23.142 adult male citi- zens of Rhode Island) had held their Convention, in February, and plea will only show more clearly the unwillingness of the landholder's Conven- tion to copy that feature of the People's Constitution which forbids all monopo- lies and class legislation, standing, as they do, in this respect, on the same moral Isvel with lotteries. 44 THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS drafted a form of a Constitution, which should have differed from the former Constitution, just as that of the landholders now differs from that of the People ! Dropping (except in one place, where they could not well get rid of it,) the very name of the Supreme Being, express- ing to Him no gratitude for the past, imploring from Him no direction for the present, or protection for the future — striking out " the fear of plunder" I So the State monopolist regards it. They seek a change in t!ie laws, aye, and the power of assisting in making them, too. Does not this squint at a '• division of property ?" For what other purpose could such men wish to change or to make laws? Who, among a monied aristocracy, ever heard of any use for laws but to get and make money ? Earthlings who never dreamed of any lawful authority but wealth, nor of any legislative object but " plunder," become the easy and willing dupes of the ambitious anddesigning. The cry of " irillage and 2)limder^' mul- tiplies and is re-echoed. The alarm reaches the nursery and the bed- chamber. Matronly AfTection is in tears, and Nervous Excitability in hysterics. The panic becomes epidemic, and doctors fatten upon fe- vers. Guilty Knavery, with its eye on its money-bags, is " in great fear where no fear was.^' Cheated Cupidity puts off its coward phiz and plucks up courage enough to shoulder a rusty musket rather than be robbed of its cankered silver. " Respectability and Standing," ever ready to mob down righteous liberty, are alarmed at the prospect of a riot, and become the conservators of " la:w and order." Miserly Money-Love and Spendthrift Prodigality come into close contact and becoming brotherhood, now. Shoulder to shoulder they are paraded and "dress to the right" or "left," just as Military Lordliness, with' its epaulettes and plumes (strutting in stateliness or prancing prettily,' the Grand Marshal of the day,) finds it graceful to give out the word of command. But all must be done lawfully, and law expositors are not wanting. Partisan Pettifoggery, skilled in sophistry and profound in precedent, scents a cash client and a fat fee. Its honest shilling it must earn. So it puts on its spectacles, and becomes wise. The government that Jias reigned, and that does reign, it counts the " lawful government'' of course, for possession is nine points of the law, and the tithe, as its name denotes, stands for the tenth, and that makes up the tally. So its declaration is soon filed, its argument summed up, its verdict record- ed. The minority are the sovereign, the majority the subjects. Hoary abuse is lawful government, and Constitutional righteousness and liber- ty are treason. Stupidity listens, and is satisfied. Fashion espies where the " respectability" clusters, and lisps her silken assent. Mam- mon calculates the probable effect on the public stocks and the mo- hey market. Bloated Wealth, from under its bulkv bales, and Gouty 43 THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS Satiety, at Us table, gorged to excess, groan out in sympliony their apo. plcctic approbation. SpeciilatioTi, on tiptoe, signifies its horror at recklessness and lawlessness, by lending its trustworthy endorsement, and hastens on to the exchange or the auction. Sharp-sighted Thrift, from behind its counter or at its desk, 'mid delicious dreams of coming customers, its decisions turned bv as small a weight of merchandise as its own avoirdnpoise balances, arsd its soul eclipsed by a sixpence, finds no great diftioulty in deciphering^ the merits of the case on ifs interest:, hoard. And Servile Sycophancy, too, but yesterday from the kennel, aping its betters, and eager to earn a footing among the right honora- bles, ddes the dirty work of alternate aspersion and adulation for which it is constitutionally fitted. Thus backed and s\ipported, the Reigning Power reads the riot act, and commands Popular Sovereignty to disperse. The more timid comply, for men who love liberty and know their rights, are not al- wa3's solicitous to be massacred or imprisoned, decapitated or hanged. But before (under all these embarrassments,) a people can be fully sab- jugated by an aristocratic minority, two other things must commonly be done — the aid of two other auxiliaries must be secured. Some princely despot, and a distant on 3 is to be preferred, with a standing army, (that unfailing antidote to freedom,) must be induced to inter- fere. From such an armament, no sympathetic yearnings after liber. ty and humanity may be feared. Oppression is not more true to it. self than is an organized military estalishment to it. The soldier of the standing army has become an exile from the family circle, an alien to the family of mankind. He has become a machine. He is en- slaved, and worse than that — unlike the chattel slave of the plantation, he has commonly lost the conception and the appetency of freedom. But besides and above all. One thing, more essential than even the military despot himself is needed- As all must be done lawfully, so all must be done religiously, too. For man will have a religion of some sort, nor can he wholly divest himself of the consciousness that even in his political acts, he must have the sanction of something that he can call, and that is called, a religion. Not least, then, in the bad procession, comes Priestly Imposture, in canonicals — with or without its surplice, as the fashion ecclesiastical may prescribe. With the abused and holy Book of benign but blasphemed Christianity in its sacrilegious hands, with its Satanic quotations of Scripture against its Author — arraying the letter against the spirit — the symbol against the thing signified — it craftily contrives to read " peace and safety" to oppressors, and denunciations to the oppressed. It consigns to perdition those who refuse to obey man rather than God. It exhorts the military minions of despotism to do their foul and bloody work, secure of the divine favor. It stands ready to chant its Tc Deums and pronounce its apostolical benedictions, whenever the butchery is performed, and the subjugation completed. This does the work that nothing else earthly could do, and gives (o all other despotic doings fheir sanctity and (heir power. Saintly Subtlety, in unity with its OF RHODE ISLAND. 49 Teacher, performs llic pastoral ofl'icc, and whenever the true worship- ers assemble toL^ether, comes also among them. Too pious to meddle with State matters, save when its help is needed to crush freedom, it deprecates the '* dirty waters of politics," and warns the brotherhood to stand aloof from them. Securing their confiding promise of neu- trality, it steps complacently into the public proces.sion of the oppres- sor, on whose side there is power, Pseudo Piety sympathizes with its pattern, and with its slippery faith pinned on clerical sleeves, glides Irom ttie altar to the armory, exciianges its Bible for a Uiyonet, sur- mounts its cannon with a crucifix, and n)umbling its prayers, or thumb- ing its rosary, girds itself, secure of priestly indulgence and absolu- tion, to the Piiaraoh-like ex|)edition of smottiering in blood " the right of the poor of the people" — in the name of the " Prince of Pence" — the " Refuge of the oppressed" — and of biu'ying itself in the depths of the Red Sea, Infidelity, with ghastly grin, feasts on the prospect, and plants itself on either side, or on both — where it can best corrupt Freedom or disgrace Christianity, or set thein at suicidal warfare with each other. Surrounding communities that ought to snufF oppression in the breeze, and read iheir own coming doom in the daily Gazettes, are quieted by two twin ambassadors of Tyranny, ever present at their cabinets and altars : — these, namely ; Worldly Wisdom, with Cain-like countenance, counseling non-interference with other peo- ple's concerns; and Spurious Spirituality, dreading contaminatiou with the profaneness of politics. Seated between tiiese, Carnal Se- curity waves her magic scepter, and cries " peace, peace," when thervi is no peace — and so the world slumbers, and wears fetters. Thus has liberty been smothered, and Christian Institutions pressed into the service of tyianny — thus (with few and brief" exceptions, sup- ])lying the only breathing seasons of freedom) has religion been dis- graced, its author insulted, humanity sufTocated, and human rights crushed, fVom the days of Constantine to the present hour, 'i'hus it is, and has been, in Europe. And thus it was, and is, in Riiode Island. ,, Ijr:CAPITULATION. — STA^^D-I'OINT. We approach the winding up of tiie drama — or rather, of the Act of it that has already been performed. To understand it, we must bear in mind the facts we have now ascertained. We have seen the just causes of discontent with tije people of Rhode Island — their grievances — the long history of their peaceful and pa- tient efforts for redress. We have seen the complicated arts resorted to, in order to thwart and cheat them out of their liberties, during the last two years — the efforts to deceive — to overawe — to intimidate — to prevent them from exercising their inalienable and Constitutional rights. — We have witnessed, nevertheless, their regular, hiwfut and peaceful organization of a (lonstilutional State government — a gov- ernment every way superior, in its tnoral character, as well as in its aiithorifv, its legality and its order, to (he usurped miiiorily govern- 7 50' THE RI&'HTS AND THE WRONGS ment, under the Old Charter. We have seen tlie government not only organized, but in healthful and appropriate operation, and we have witnessed the mildness, the moderation and the magnanimity, as well as the equity of its acts. Up to the period now under review, May 1842, all was peaceful and quiet in Rhode Isiiind, so far, at least, as the action of the majority, the Constitutionalists, was concerned. And nothing was wanting but a quiet and orderly acquiescence, on the part of the minority, according to their own favorite doctrine of " submission to the powers that be." All they had to do was to re- spect Constitutional " law and order," and there was nothing to dis- turb the public peace. They could not say that any one of their rights was invaded. All the change that had been efiected, was the guaranty of the same rights to the rest of the community. And what more could they ask ? They knew, or ought to have known, that it is lawful, and regular, and Constitutional, and orderly, according to parchments, as well as according to first principles, in America, for the people to change, to alter their governments at their pleasure — that this principle was the "BASIS of all our political systems" — that for a minority to contro- vert that principle, by an armed force, was to attempt a National as well as a State revolution. And they knew, too — they could not help knowing — that a Consti- tutional government had been organized in Rhode Island, and that the majority of the people had participated in the act, and were opposed to their course, in attempting to thwart their designs. But they were unwilling to submit. Such was their " lust of power" — and of unjust, unlawful, unconstitutional power too, that ra- ther than not possess it, they preferred to light the torch of civil war ! This is proved by their early application to President Tyler for aid. And the same act proves that they knew the majority of the people of Rhode Island were against them, and in favor of the Con- stitution. AID OF THE SLAVE POWER. What could be more congruous and befitting than that the Chak- TERiSTS of Rhode Island should seek and obtain the aid of the Slave Power, to subdue jvorthern freemen '! Gov. M'Duffie had pre- dicted their subjugation, within twenty. five years. Six years out of the twenty.five had elapsed. The efforts to extend slave law over Massachusetts and Rhode Island — aye, and over New York, loo — had failed. What could be done ? Opportunities were not to be disre- garded. Sympathetic minds, northern and southern, watched with deep interest the progress of things in Rhode Island. Congressional speeches in favor of popular subjugation, irrespective of latitude and complexion, had not been lost, on northern ears. The application was made. It was successful, of course. How could it be otherwise? The agents selected for the mission could not have been better chosen. One of them was John Whipple, of Provi- I'ence, intimately connected with the South, the well known ally of OF RHODE ISLAND. 51 Harrison Gray Otis, in the attempt to prove abolitionists guilty of treason against tlie Constitution.* And Gov. Dorr was an abolition- ist. It needs no letter-writer from Washington, to tell us how the nego- tiation was conducted, and what were the arguments used. All was anticipated by popular rumor, at the North, beforehand — confirmed by southern Journalists, afterwards. The argument was a short and di- re-A one. If popular sovereignty was permitted at the North, the pre- celent would be dangerous to the South. If the disfranchised ma- jority of Rhode Island could form a Constitution without leave of their masters, the disfranchised majority of S. Carolina might do the same, and the " peculiar institution" would be overtlirown. The northern laborer must therefore be put down, lest the southern labor- er should rise.f PREsiDE^'T Tyler's decision. A letter from President Tyler, to Samuel W. King, who claims to be Governor of Rhode Island, under the Charter, was communicated to the Charter Assembly in April. It was greeted with joy, and hail- ed as an omen of triumph. Gov. Dorr, in his Message of May 3d to the Constitutional Assembly, very charitably attributes the tone of that letter to " a mistake of the facts." But no efibrts on the part of the Constitutionalists could suffice to change his decision. In a sec- ond letter addressed " to the Governor of the State of Rhode Island," and which was obviously intended, not for the Constitutional Gover- nor, but for Samuel W. King, the President maintains substantially the groimd previously assumed. This letter is dated May 7. It ac- knowledges the receipt of a communication, "transmitting resolutions of the Legislature of Rhode Island, informing" the President " that there existed in that State ' certain lawless assemblages of a portion of the people,' for the purpose of subverting the laws, and overthrowing the existing government, and calling upon the Executive to interposo the power and authority of the United States, to suppress such in- surrectionary and lawless assemblages, and to support the existing government and laws, and protect the State from domestic violence. President Tyler informs King that his " opinions as to the duties of this government to protect the State of Rhode Island remains un- changed." He proceeds to say that present appearances do not seen> to require immediate action, &:c. &c. But adds — " If any exigency of lawless violence shall actually arise, the Executive government of * We should be sorry to do any injustice to this gentleman. Since penning' the above paragraph, we notice in the papers that Mr. Whipple has resigned his seat in the Old Charter Assembly, and withdrawn himself from theeonncils of the existing usiiipalion. Perhaps he will make some explanations of liis recent position, which will place him in a less unfavorable light." + The Washington correspondent of the New York American says that the President was known to have been in favor of the suffrage parly, until the arri- val of this Mission fiom the Charterisls. This corroborates. stnmgly our views of that Mission. 52 THE RICaiTS AND THE WR0NG8 the Unitid States, under the authority of the resokitions of the Legis- latiiie, ah-eady submitted, will stand ready io succor the authorities of the State, in their tfforts to nnaintain a due respect for the laws." GROUNDS OF THIS DECISION. In all that has appeared of t!)ese proceedings, nothing has tran- spired which would imply that any investigation of the Constitutional • rierits of the controversy in R. [sland, or inquiry whether a majority of the people had regularly formed a new Constitution, had been had or was entertained or contemplated by the Cabinet at VVashington. The absence of any such investigation or inquiry is apparent on the face of the correspoi.dence. It is taken for granted that Samuel W. King, formerly Governor of Rhode Island, is the lawful Governor now, though t!ie collision is well known to have taken place upon the rival claims of the two contending parties. A more cool and deliberate contempt of his Constitutional responsibilities, the President could scarcely have exhibited. The Constitution of the United States " guaranties to every State in the Union a republican form of govern- ment." What if it should appear that the President's oath of office required him to support the Constitution of Rhode Island, recently adopted, and the Legislature and Governor duly elected under it '\ Tliis would certainly be the case, if the people had a right to form such a Constitution, without sanction of the Charier Assembly, and if as a matter of fact, they had actually done that thing. Why not in- quire then, into tliat question, if it be a question, of American Consti- tutional law ? And why not inquire into the particulars of the adop- tion of the Constitution '.' Why not gather evidence from both par- ties ? Why not count the votes, and ascertain whether or no the claim of the Constitutionalists was a valid one? Why not refer the question to the Supreme Court of the United States? How comes it to pass that in the letters of the President to Samuel W. King, no allusion whatever is made to any such Constitutional question — nor to the question whether the majority of the people of R. Island had adopted the new Constitution ? The marked timidity, caution, and fear of offending or alarming the democracy of the country, which characterises that second letter of the President, leaves us no room to doubt that a reference would have been had to the merits of the controversy, if the President had exam- ined it, and if he had found it safe to have made allusion to that sub- ject. Could he have cited the Declaration of Independence, Bills of Rights, Constitutions and Constitutional expositio;is of the country, in favor of his decisi'^n, uou'd ha have tailed to have done so ? Or if, on any good foundation, he had arrived at the conclusion that the Constitution had not been adopted by a majority of the people of R. Island, would ho not have been forward to say t-o ? And how can we help interring, from his silence on these points, that the President found no support from Comt tutional law, and understood perfectly well, that the controversy he had espoused was against a majority of the people of Rhode Island '! OF RHODE ISLAND. 53 But whatever inferences we may draw, one thin^ is certain. The President's decision " took the ground that the people of R. Island had no right, either by a in;ijority or by the whole, to alter their govern- ment, on their own motion, or in any way except by the permission, through the ngency, and under the direction and control of the exist- ing government." It " had no reference to the question whetlier the SuliVage Constitution was or was not adopted by tlie I)ody of the people, but solely to the fact, that it was not adopted under license from the Charter party." [J. Leavitt, in letter Irom Washington, May 3d.] THE REAL CAUSE OF IT. Does any one inquire into the causes of this very extraordinary de- vision of the Piesident ? The answer is easy. Tlie Madisonian, the O.licial or Court Gazette of tlie President, at Washington city, tells the story. From this paper it appears that a great excitement was created at the seat of Government, by the affairs of Rhode Island, after the rep- resentations made to the Cabinet by the Charter Mission. It is manifest (as Mr. Leavitt, who was on the spot, has shown, in the Emancipator) that no pains were spared to prevent any Congressional discussion on the course of the President. A member of the Senate from Ohio» however, Mr. Allen, had questioned the correctness of his position, and had endeavored to bring the whole subject into discussion. The Mad- isonian immediately denounced him as an abolitionist — declared the Free Suffrage movement in Rhode Island an abolition plot — de- nounced Gov. Dorr as an abolitionist and his adherents as traitors against the country. The following extracts may suffice, as speci- mens of its sentiments and language. " Let us be watchful ! Let us beware ! If the Government of Rhode Island [meaning the Charter party,] is to be overthrown by force, the revolution will not stop there. It will sweep, like a hurri- cane, TO THE South." "Thedoctrine that NUMBERS can CHANGE a CONSTITU- TION, without going through the forms of law, would, at once, con- vert the numberless BLACKS OF THE SOUTH into voters, who could vote down the SOUTHERN STATE GOVERNMENTS at their pleasure." And so the working-men of the North are explicitly told, by Presi- dent Tyler's Official, that " NUMBERS" (i. e. the MAJORITY,) must not be permitted to exercise their right, so fully recognised by American Constitutional law, to " change the government" — to " in- stitute a new government whenever tlieir safety and happiness re- quire"* — lest the slaves of the South should follow their example ! Verily, the question of American Liberty is no longer a question of latitude or ot complexion. * Jiiclse Stvjry'ii Cummentarie.s, Vol. I. p. 198. 54 THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS Again, said the Madisonian : " If Dorr persists in the attempt to subvert the existing laws by force of arms, then it can no longer he concealed from the pubHc ^aze that the whole proceeding is nothing more or less than an aholi- Hon movement! Dorr is an abolitionist of the most rabid descriptiorr. Allen, from Ohio, the demagogue. Jacobin, destructive, we have rea- son to suppose, will be the champion of the northern abolitionists, from this time forth. Dorr declared to a mob headed by Vanderpoel K«d Cambreleng, that ^ all men were equaV — 'that he was the uncom- jiromising advocate of human rights' — that 'a majority of human be- ings in any State had a right to alter and abolish the Constitution, at any time,'' and fifty other cant phrases of the fanatics." And so our Declarations of Independence, Bills of Rights, Consti- tutions, Expositions, Commentaries and all, are to be quoted by us only on pain of being denounced as demagogues, Jacobins, fanatics, by the Official Government paper of the nation ! And the free white people of Rhode Island must not be permitted to assert and act out thosp declarations of their fathers, lest the " peculiar institution" should suffer damage. Here we have a specimen of the expedients resorted to, by Presi- dent Tyler's Official, to overawe the democracy of the country, and especially its delegation in Congress. To contend for white liberty in Rhode Island, is to come under the ban of proscription — is to be sub- jected to the charge of aholitionism ! Verily, the democracy are re- ceiving important lessons from the seat of the National GovernmeDt. Here, too, we have the key-note of the tone now held by the pub- lic presses of the rounfry, to so great extent, in respect to Gov. Dorr and his adherents. In an article published on the receipt of ne\vs from Providence, and of the course of Gov. Dorr, the Madisonian says : — " To all suggestions that the difficulty could be settled amicably. Dorr turned a deaf ear. He declared that no oflfers of compromise ■would be listened to that did not recognise " human rights''' — the right of the majority — not only to govern, but to alter and abolish gmiern- ments at pleasure. This is the vital principle of the abolitionists. 3)orris a rank abolitionist, himself. Were this principle established, the abolitionists would have a triumph, indeed. They would only have to creep through the southern States and take down the names of all the blacks over twenty-one years of age, and all the miserable, reckless white fanatics — men, who have nothing at stake, and would, at a mo- ment's warning, engage in any lawless enterprise that promised booty — and then, at a concerted signal, throw up the black flag of insur- rection, and proclaim the laws extinct." Notice, here, in the first place, the evidence and character of Gov. Dorr's treason ! He would "listen to no comproiiiise that did not ac- knowledge HUMAN RIGHTS— the right of the majority not only to govern, but to alter and abolish governments at pleasure." This OF RHODE ISLAND. Oo news niuat luive come from the Charterisls of Rliode Island, and it agrees with their common tone of sentiment and their habitual deri- sion of " the sovereignty of the people." Here, then, the treason is described. And what is it ? VVhy. nothing more nor less than a de- termination to adhere strictly to the fundamental principles of Ameri- can Constitutional law, as laid down in all our Dtclarations, Bills of Rights, Constitutions and Constitutional expositions — a simple decla- ration of fealty to the doctrines of Washington, .Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, Wilson, Iredell, Rawie, Story, &c. &-c. &c., and expressed in almost their identical language ! And so it has become treasonable to repeat, with approbation, the well known maxims and declarations of American Constitutional law. This is it, to rebel against " law and order" ! What and ichose " law and order"? we may well demand! Not the established " law and order" of the country, most certainly. The Rhode Island Charterisls and the southern slavocrats must have set up a " law and order" of their own ! Notice, next, — this treasonable doctrine of Gov. Dorr and of tho American Constitutions, and of all the venerated fathers and eminent Constitutional lawyers of the Republic, '• is the vital principle of the abolitionists ." Treason, of course ! Finally, "were this principle established — "aye ! if the fundamental principlesof American Constitutional law were only "established'^?!?) American Slavery would assuredlyyaM. [Precious confession !] And, therefore, the Constitution of Rhode Island must be put down ! A sovereign State — so far as the People are concerned — must be blot, ted out of the Republic. So much for the testimony of President Ty- ler's Official. We will advert, next, to the speech of Mr. Senator Sinmions, of R. Island, in the Senate of the United States. This gentleman is report, ed as having made a very eloquent and thrilling appeal to the people of the South, on the subject. Yes ! the people of the South ! We have no copy of the speech before us, but this southern description of it is sufficient. Its meaning can not be mistaken. '• You help us put down our white slaves — our operatives — and we will help you keep down your black slaves." Mr. Simmons is, we believe, extensively engaged in the manufacture of cotton. We have it on good authori- ty, a letter from Washington, that, in this speech, Mr. Simmons " boldly defended the Charter, on all points." What further proof do we need ? If any were wanting, it is supplied by the late speech of Henry Clay, at Lexington, Kentucky. It was a speech against President T3'ler, but he takes occasion to say that he approves his course, on the affairs of Rhode Island. And why ? — Having described in his way, the movement in Rhode Island, he pro- ceeds : "And is it contended that the major part [note that! "the major TAUT ! "] of this Babel congregation is invested with the right to build up, at its plca'^iurc, a new goveriimont ? That as often, and whcn-^ 56 THE RIGIlta AND THE WRONGS ever, society can be drummed up, and thrown into such a shapeless niass, the MAJOR PART OF IT may establish another and another new government, in endless succession ? * * * How such a PRINCIPLE would OPERATE in a CERTAIN SEC TION of this Union, with a PECULIAR POPULATION, you will readily conce ive.'^ ATTEMPT TO REVOLUTIONIZE THE COUNTRY. The Constitutional right ot'the people, to change their government^ at |)leasure, the right claimed in the Declaration of Independence, anrf declared over and over again, in our Constitutions, and Bills of Rights, and by all our recognized expositors of Constitutional law, is here ex- l)ressly denied to a MAJORITY of the people. And in another par- agraph, as already cited, Mr. Clav distinctly admits that ^"an appar. ent majority'' voted for the Rhode Island Constitution, and that it was as regularly formed cind adopted as the Constitution of Michigan ! And this right must be given up — must be crushed by the Federal Power, because, if " the principle'' were recognized, the slaves of the South could not be kept under ! Northern liberty must be crushed — Constitutional rights outlawed — the fundamental " principle" of all our American governments must go by the board, lest the ^^ peculiar population" of " a certain section of this Union" should become free ! THE IMMOLATION OF LIBERTY AND LAW. The promise of President Tyler was not forgotten. With the out- line of the facts, the reader may be presumed to be acquainted. The first scene of the drama is thus epitomized by a late writer i — " The march of Federal troops from New York to Newport (R. I.) — from " Old Point Comfort" (Virginia) to New York, thus indicating the di- rection that would be given to the whole disposable force that is sworn to obey the orders of tlie President of the United States : the garrison, ing of arsenals, the momentary ardor of the people in support of their rights ; the apparent certainty of bloodshed ; the triumph of armed force collected and sustained by the public'purse, over the undisciplin- ed people; the dispersion of the suffrage forces : the exultation of the successful power."* It was on the 18th of May, that Gov. Dorr fled from Providence. A second scene was opened a few weeks after. Gov. Dorr rallied again at Chepachet, one of the interior villages. Thither the forces of the insurgents were directed. A second retreat of the Constitutional- ists ensued. Governor Dorr fled, the second time, from the State and has not returned. His adherents dispersed. The victors had already declared the State under martial law. This was continued. A military despotism bore sway, the Constitutional government seemed overthrown, and nothing deserving the name of a civil government could be said to exist. * Review of Wayland's Discourse, by a Member of (lie Boston Bar. i)V nUODE IS]. AND. 57 Tin; doubll: puohlem. — a minority triumi'h ; and its ikaltv to " LAW AND OUDEli." But liow canio it to pass, it may be asked, tiiat tlie inajorily wcro overborne by the minority in these military struggles ? This ques- tion has been a puzzle to many. The Providence Journal exults un- sparingly, and labors unceasingly, to make tlie impression abroad, and on the strength ot^ their military demonstrations, that the majority, were, in fact against the Constitution and in favor of its successful assailants. It was not to the ballot-box returns that the Journal ap- pealed, but to (he military array ! It boasted its 4,000 men in arms, in contrast with the comparatively small muster of tiio Constitutional- ists, and was " satisiied that a majority of the people are not in favor of the People's Constitution" ! As much as to tell the people that tho war camp, and NO T the ballot-box, was the proper place to settle tho question o{ majorities, and to test the legality and validity of Consti. tutions ! And yet, an appeal to this only legitimate arena of de- cision, on the part of the unsuccessful, they sav is treason ! This same gross absurdity lies at the basis of the discourses of Drs. Tucker and Wayland. The fact of successful occupancy and possession of the physical power of the State, tliat, in their view, settles all quest- ions of legality and allegiance ! yet the eifort to oS/am that only le- gitimate title to authority, is treasonable! Henry Clay, too, in his Lexington s|)eech, exhibits the same political ethics. He demands *' who are the people (in Rhode Island) that are to tear uo the whole fabric of human society ?" — "Our revolutionary fathers did not tell us by WORDS, but they proclaimed it" (i. e. "the right of the People to abolish an existing government") " by gallant and noble dei;ds." — The plain English of which is — If the people of Rhode Island claim sovereignty, let them get it by force of arms, if they can ! Let them not quote American Constitutional law — let them not rely on tho righteousness of their cause — nor on the majority of their numbers — nor on the regularity of their proceedings. This is all mere '■ icorcls." When tlieir bloody exploits place the power in their hands, their gov- ernment will be legitimate enough, then! A " prudent" lesson, truly, to the injured laboring masse?, north- ern and southern ! The preachers of this doctrine can not condemn those who practice upon it — unless they fail of success — fur that in evidently the divinity i!/i^^?/ worship ! — What a lesson of popular vio- lence ! VVhat a daring of the people to the bloody conflict ! The suf- frage vote of December 1841 goes for nothing, say the Charterists of Rhode Island, because the SutiVage army of May and June 1842 did not keep tallv with it ! Your votes against us — your arguments — your " words" we count only a " farce," unless you will meet us with quantum sufficit of bayonets ! And these are the Conservaiists of " law and order" are they? These are the men tliat dread revolutions and blood ! These are tlio men who would have the nation believe that they have all along been in favor of conceding to the people their rights, if Ihov would onlv 8 58 THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS cease from disorder and riot — if they would only do things in " a reg- ular and lawful manner ?" What are their notions of the legitimate foundation of civil govern- ment, and of the proper methods of establishing it, they have signifi- cantly told us ! They will recognize no umpire of disputed and rival sovereignties but the sioord. So their acts tell us, so their discourses and speeches assure us. Their early application to President Tyler, for aid, and their fiendish exultations — press-wise and pulpit-wise — on their success, their marauding scouts and their thanksgivings, let us into their bosoms. We read them, and understand their notions of rightful authority, and of" law and order." With such notions, their military preparations — their only dependance, would be formidable, of course. ANAKCHISTS ! WHO ? A PICTURE. Now it happened that the so-called anarchists, disorganizers, infi. dels, incendiaries, and plunderers, composing the Suffrage party, (the leaders and the masses) held precisely opposite views of Constitutional *'law and order" — of '• legitimate authority" — of the " lawful mode" of establishing civil government, and therefore it was, that they were less formidable in the field than at the polls. They had supposed that the Declaration of Independence — that the National and State Constitutions, with their Bills of Rights, meant something, and meant what they said. They had taken it for granted that if a majority of the adult male citizens of the S ate framed and adopted a Constitution and organized a government on precisely the model of the other American Constitutions, by the sa7ne methods, and exactly according to the express prescriptions of the Washingtons, the Jeffersons, the Mad- isons, the Hamiltons, the Marshalls and the Storys of the republic, and if they administered this government on principles of mildness and forbearance, impartiality and equity — securing the equal and in- alienable rights of all men — why then, they took it for granted, that a minority consisting, (as they charitably supposed) of law abiding and honest and Christian men, would peacefully submit to the lawful gov- ernment, and support it. The tone of Gov. Dorr's message proves this. Their own familiarity with the foundation principles of free government, and their own reverent attachment to the " law and or- der" growing out of them were such that it never seems to have oc- curred to them that the professed conservators of " law and order" would themselves turn insurrectionists — that the preachers of unqual- ified submission to the " powers that be" would shoulder the musket, causelessly, to overthrow them — that, in such a cause, the ambassa- dors of the Prince of Peace, would be among the first to raise the war- whoop, and turn their Universities into soldiers' barracks — that for no crime but organizing for the State "a Republican form of govern, ment," the President of the United States, in direct violation of his oath, would proscribe them, and pledge the Federal forces for their overthrow. In one word, they had no idea that there was enough of the spirit of anarchy, lawlessness, disorganization, insurrection, athe- OF KIIODE ISLAND. 5^ ism, murder, despotism, and hatred of righteous liberty, in the State, or in the nation, to muster any formidable military opposition to such a government, thus established and administered. And therefore, their MiLiTAKvr movements and calculations were not made in anticipation of such unexpected events. Even after the threatened interference of President 'J yler, we are informed, they really believed that two hun- dred men would be amply sufficient to keep in subjection all the law- less men in Rhode Island, who would arm themselves against the Con- stitutional government. THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE CASE. In this estimate, they greatly erred ; as the facts now prove. They had not sufficiently considered that Idolatry — the idolatry of Property — (which is identical with atheism) embodies always, and of necessity, the elements of murder, and of insurrection against righteous law — that Reason as well as Scripture teaches this universal truth — that whoever elevates Property above Humanity —matter above spirit, as the Rhode Island Ciiarterists have so tenaciously and continuously and signally done, will, of course, until the delusion is relinquished, sacrifice human life, if need be, on the altar of property. — Thus it must be, because, in the nature of the case, it can not be otherwise. To suppose an intelligent and determined adherent of the land supremacy of Rhode Island, a supremacy of acres over immortal men, is to sup.^ pose a determined murderer, of course, whenever the conflicting claims of man, and o^ acres, shall come in collision with each other. For one of those claims, the one or the other, must yield. And, to say that the acres must not yield, is to say that man must '* The fool hath said in his heart— no God !" What ne.xt ? " They are corrupt and have done abominable works." How is this made manifest? They <' shame the counsel of the poor" — for " be that despiseth the poor reproaclieth his Maker." Then comes the inevitable result — and what is it ! Nothing short of cannibalism I They " have no knowl- edge" — " they eat up the people as they eat bread" — they devour hu- man beings as coolly, with the same relish, and with as little compunc- tion, as they would swallow a dinner ! So God affirms of them,* and the testimony is found true. Such a people supply the very materials for an army of insurgents. But others are slow of heart to believe this, before-hand. And therefore the extent and depth of the spirit of murder and lawlessness in Rhode Island was not foreseen by the lawful government, nor by the majority of the people. Nor did they, in their military calculations, make due allowance for the effect, on the suffiage forces, resulting from the general ele- ments oti/jefr character, as contrasted with their opponents. They were not the men to raise an army out of, or to do service in a civil war, when they were enrolled. Why ? Because they had humitn hearts left in them ! They had some degree of regard for huraaa * Psalm XIV. 60 THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS rights ! or course, they would be tender of human life. These were not the men for soldiers. The younger brothers who were disfran- chised (by the law admitting only the oldest son)— these had not learned the creed of human inferiority to property. Humanity was something, in their eyes. For the most part, they would not take the lives of their older brothers, to maintain their own riglits. Four or five such brothers, in one family, would decline taking arms at all, or take them to no purpose — while tire one oldest brother would be prompt and firm at his post, ready to sacrifice all his younger brc thers, rather than concede their equality with himself! Theorv and fact, philosophy and history, agree here. Nothing is more certain, than that the war spirit in Rhode Island, commenced first with the Charterists, and almost universally pervaded their ranks, while it was tardily kindled, slowly infused, and faintly and partially exhibited in the ranks of the Constitutionalists. The peace men were, almost ex- chisively, among the latter, with the exception (by complaisance) of a few rich Quakers, who, we will charitably conclude, were not very much infected with the war fever. CONFIRMATION. The Charterists themselves, furnish us, as already hinted, the data for these statements. They admit that they were outvoted on i.he landholders' Constitution, and their own figures show 1,553 more votes fcr Gov. Dorr than for S. W. King, and 8,G68 votes for the two traitors, (as they call them,) Dorr and Carpenter, by the side of 4,864 for their King. [We will leave the 13,944 suflVage votes for the Constitution, in a population of 23,142, out of the estimate, now, to give the Charterists the benefit of their own figures.] Here, then, we have their account of the parties, as arrayed against each other at the POLLS. Now for the military review. Here, the Providence Jour- nal, as before quoted, claitiis that the Charterists reckoned " 4,000 good men and true, in arms," being nearly one-half of the 8,662 vo- ters, at the greatest rally ever known at the polls (in 1840), by the " freemen" or landocracy of the State ! The forces mustered with Gov. Dorr weva derided, as a mere handfull. Never reported to be, at the most, over 1 to 2,000, and now believed to have been, in re- ality, only about 500. And therefore the Journal " is satisfied that a majority of the people are not in favor of the People's Constitution" ! It boastfully asks — " Where is the majority ?" It glories in " certain heavy pieces of ordnance, which deal out arguments not easy to re- sist !" and thinks "the traitor," Gov. Dorr, must now bo "con- vinced !" So then the Charterists, finding themselves outnumbered at the polls, by their own showing, resort to the war-hatchet ! Annoyed with troublesome appeals to Constitutional law, from the pen of Ben- jamin (Jowell and others, their best "argument" i^ found in •' certain heavy pieces of ordnance" ! IC these fail to "convince" the " trai- tors" against minority supremacy, thoy have nothing more intellect. ual, or !.'M^ abiding, or orderly, to off'.-r ! Tlie controversy, they OF RHODE ISLAND. 61 think, is to be settled in no way but by Idlling their neighbors ! And they understand that it is to be a deadly encounter of" iViend against friend, brother against brother" — the " Unes of aUenation running througli families and firms of business."* Among the men to be butchered, are "civil magistrates," " who [say tliey] have sat at our tables" — " a considerable number of prolessing Christians," " who partake [with their opponents] of the elements of that body which was broken and that blood which was shed for our sins !"■{" Work, here, for fiends, surely ! Where, and among what class in Rhode Island, were they to be mustered ? The Charterists can tell us. Out of the 4,500 in arms, they furnished 4,000 themselves ! Nearly one-half X of their entire number of voters were on the spot, with their death- weapons in their hands ! But of the " bloodthirsty" sufiVago men, watching for " plunder," only about 500 could be ral- lied — about one ticenty eighth part of their voters ! TUE BONE OF CONTENTION. Yet the suffrage men were contending for " the blessings of a Con- stitution, free suffrage and an equalized representation." which " a great majority of the citizens of all parties" desired. [Vide A. C. Barstow.] Dr. Tucker adverts to " the anomaly of the e.xisting [Charter] government, as the cause of the difficulty — to the " cor- rectness of the principle avowed" [by the suffrage men] as the " ob- ject'' to be obtained, to wit, the "equality of representation, and the EIGHT of sufiVage." — "Petitions," to this effect, he attests, " have been often presented and acted upon," which implies that they had often been denied! And Dr. Wayland says, "it is universally con- ceded that it would have been better if a change in the elective fran- chise had been made, many years since." Such were the objects of the suffrage men, with their comparatively small rally in the war camp. Mighty in numbers — mighty in the rectitude of their cause, by the concessions of their enemies. Mighty too, in their hold upon the Constitutional law of their country. Weak, only, in the rally for civil commotion — for civil war — even in the de. fense of the lawful civil government, xind these are the bloodthirsty " anarchists !" the "plunderers !'' And as for the Charterists — for what did they rally ? In opposition to the objects sought by the suffrage men ? Yea? or nay ? — If so, they rallied against the admitted right ! If not, for what object did they rally ? Was it for the mere love of killing their neighbors ? — Or was it because a Constitution establishing the right had been framed and adopted without their leave — the leave of the minority — which leave they had, for half a century refused ? Either horn of the • Rev. Dr. Tucker's Discourse. t Rev. Dr. Waylaud's Discourse. t On reflection, it must have been much more than one half. For the 8,66-2 voters of 1810 included the whole number, of all parties, voting. But niAny of them are known to be Constitutionalists, and opposed tu ihe Charterists, in iljeir pre! IN THE WAY OF IT." The inquiry is next raised — " What things do stand in the way of the glorious reign of Christ?" In reply to this question, the very first particular introduced, by the preacher, is the fol- lowing : — " Every species of TYRi^NNY stands in the way of the glorious reign of Christ. His reign will be a reign of Righteousness and Peace, to which every species of tyranny stands diametrically oppos- ed. Both civil and ecclesiastical tyrants always have been and still are hostile to the reign of Christ. As soon as Christ set up his king- dom, all the kingdoms of the world, being tyrannical, were unitedly opposed to his kingdom, and employed all their power and influence to prevent its enlargement and establishment. And all pagan and Mohammedan governments are still tyrannical, and still hostile to the kingdom of Christ, and many Christian nations are more or less ty- rannical, and consequently more or less hostile to the pure and peaceable government of Christ. Civil tyranny, in every nation, and in every form, stands in the way of the glorious reign of Christ, and so does ecclesiastical tyranny. This early prevailed in the Christian church, and has been carried to a greater height than any civil tyr- anny ever has been. The Christian clergy soon began to usurp un- christian authority, and gradually carried it to higher and higher claims, till the pope presumed to be the universal and supreme head of the church, and to exercise a right to govern and put down the 94 THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS greatest kings in Christendom. Though such exorbitant ecclesiasti- cal tyranny has been considerably checked and restrained in later times, yet it still predominates in all popish countries, and has no SMALL INFLUENCE in EVERY PART of the Christian world. And just so far as it exists, it is hostile to the spread of the gospel, and the ap- proaching reign of Christ. Every species of tyranny, in every PART of the WORLD, is one thing that stands in the way of the reign of the Prince of Peace." Emvions" Servians, Vol. II. p. 302. Does the reader desire to know what would be regarded by Dr. Emmons as tyrannical ? Or does he ask for the evidence that he would consider the reigning Charter authorities in Rhode Island and their clerical abettors to be " civil and ecclesiastical tyrants ?" Read over again the quotations already made, containing his views of those rulers who seek to suppress the voice of the people. And read like- wise his declaration concerning the "friends of tyranny," that they wish for a government which grants exclusive rights and hereditary honors and distinctions" — [like those of the " landholders" and their ♦' oldest sons," for example] — and that they v/ant to rise above their fel- low men by unjust means, and have it in their power to trample upon the great mass of the people, with impunity."* [Vol. II. p. 106.] If this picture does not belong to the Charterists of R. Island, to whom does or can it belong ? The friends of liberty and pure religion may see, then, what ig their proper work, and what are their prospects. The overthrow of civil and ecclesiastical despotism is undoubtedly the grand charac- teristic eterprise of the present and next coming ages. And the en- terprise will succeed ! Listen yet again to the language of Emmons^ towards the close of the same Sermon. " Christians have great encouragement to exti't themselves, vigo- rously and wisely, in preparing the way for the glorious reign of Christ. He has pledged his faithfulness TO REMOVE ALL OB- STACLES OUT OF the way, and he is faithful and powerful, who has promised." [p. 310.] destiny of despots. Would the inveterate and unrelenting conservators of despotism learn their destiny ? They may read it in the second Psalm. They may read it, if they choose, in the former writings of their presewi apo- logist and leader. President Wayland. " Thanks be to God, men have at length begun to understand the rights, and feel for the wrongs of each other. Let the trumpet of alarm be sounded, and its notes are now heard by every nation, whether of Europe or America. Let a voice, borne on the feeblest breeze, tell that the rights of man are in danger, and it floats over valley and mountain, across continent and ocean, until it has vibrated in the ear of the remotest dweller in Christendom. Let the arm of oppression be raised to crush the feeblest nation on earth, and there OF RHODE ISLAND. 93 will be heard, every where, if not the shout of defiance, the deep-toned murmur of implacable displeasure." [How " impertinent and med- dlesome" are these " foreign sympathisers" !] " It is the cry of ag-- grieved, insulted, much-abused man ! It is human nature, waking in her might, from the slumber of ages, shaking herself from the ^ust of ANTiauATED INSTITUTIONS, girding iierself lor the combat, and going forth, conquering and to conquer."* And again, " Wo unto the man, wo unto the dynasty, and wo unto the policy, on whom shall fall the scath of their blighting indignation.''' THE TWO ALTERNATIVES. There are, then, but two ways in which the despotisms that standin the way of Christ's coming reign, may be overturned. Both these ways are described in the Bible, and in the sermon of Dr. Emmons. One way is, " by public calamities and desolating judgments" — " by the sword, by pestilence and by famine, the common weapons of di- vine indignation"-]- — by the civil commotions and bloodshed that des- potism naturally produces and provokes. Hence the descriptions of Isaiah. " Who is tliis that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah ?" — " I that speak in righteousness, mighty to save ?" " Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, and thy garments like him that treadeth the wine-fat? I have trodden the wine-press alone; and of the people there was none with me ; for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury, and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and stain all my raiment." — That is, when " the people" are not workers together with God, in bearing testimony against oppression, and he is left " alone" to work out hu. man deliverance by his just judgments, he will use the sword of con- tending armies and rival parties to overturn despotic governments, and establish freedom, and thus prepare the way for the reign of Christ. This, however, is not the way in which good men should la- bor for the promotion of the grand object. Their duty lies in a dif. ferent direction. The " more excellent way" is " to enlighten the minds of the igno- rant, the barbarous, the tyrannical, and the erroneous, in respect to their civil and religious tyranny, and their absurd and vicious customs and manners," — to employ " the gospel as the principal external in- istrument to overthrow and remove all obstacles in the way of Christ's final and most glorious reign upon earth" — relying upon the Holy Spirit " as the efficient cause of making all the other means effectu- al.":}: This method is more powerful than military armaments, which are more efficiently wielded by the enemies than by the friends of free- dom. Especially is this true in an age like the present, when men are beginning to inquire after the eights and the wrongs of existmg controversies, rather than after the fact of forcible triumph, and of * Discourse I. on the Duties of an American Citizen. April, 1825. t Vide Emmons. J Emmons, Vol, ii. pp. 301—5. 96 "THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS physical strength. These are the methods that are "mighty through Oodj to the pulUng down of strong holds, casting down imaginations, .and every high thing [every thing aristocratical and despotic] that exalteth itselt" against the obedience of Christ." And thrse peacefid weapons may be wielded, now, as in primitive times, by those v/ho are accounted the " filth and ofTscouring of all things" — the " fag end of society" — "the miserable multitude" — " the rabble." Nor is it to be taken for granted that the gross ignorance and error, the heartless barbarism and tyraimy that now reign and riot in the high places of Rhode Island, in her palaces and the learned halls upon East Providence hill — thick, dense, dark, and impenetrable as they may seem to be, are beyond the reach of these heavenly wea- pons. Suffocated and degraded as humanity must needs he, under such a heavy pressure of worldliness and wealth, of pedantry and pride, let us never forget that it is humanity still — that the vital spark of immortality is yet there ; that the breath of omnipotent and sove- reign Mercy may yet kindle it. Farther from the kingdom of heaven it may indeed be, than publicans and harlots — a more discouraging field of missionary labor it may present, than Burmah, or Hindostan, or the Sandwich Islands. But it is nevertheless within the province of Christian exertion and Christian prayer — for " the field is the world." But let not Christian faith and enterprise be misdirected and foiled. Let no friend of God and of humanity think of opposing the weight of a feather, or of a straw against this mighty strealn of baptized atheism, while he himself, continues to float down its current — to re- cognize its Christianity — to shake hands with it, at the communion table—to sit under its teachings — to countenance its sanctimonious pretenses. The admitted maxim that an ungodly ministry, adhered to, inevitably drags down the flock to its own level, is full of signifi- cancy at this point. Adhesion can not be a duty — can not beadmis- sible, when it involves apostasy — and let no man imagine his own spiritual attainments a guaranty of exception, in his own case. There is presumption, bordering on spiritual pride, in the attempted experi- ment. As there is only one way for Christians to preserve their integrity, so thei'e are only two ways for God to work out the world's redemp- tion — " to remove the despotisms that stand in the way of Christ's reign." The one v/ay is by that peaceful, Christian kefokmation, which involves, of necessity, the withdrawal of Christian reformers from des- potic ministers and churche?, and enlistment in the establishment and support of true and free Christian churches and ministers, in their stead, to be used as the heaven-appointed instruments of the world's reformation, and deliverance.* * Objection. — But we are too few in numbers — too feeble in resources." Answer. " My grace is sufficient for thee." — " Not by might, nor by strength, but by my spirit, saith the Lord of hosts." " Where two or three are gathered to- gether, in my name, there am I, in the midst of ihem." OF RHODE ISLAND. 97 The other way is by bloody revolution, by those " terrible things in righteousness" that shall sweep the earth as with the besom of de- struction, and overturn, forcibly, the despotisms that stand in the way of Christ's reign. The question to be settled in Rhode Island — in New EnHand in the United States — in Old England — on the continent of Europe in Asia — in Africa — in the whole World — is not whether the now ex- isting despotisms, civil and ecclesiastical, shall be terminated but HOW. And the decision of this question rests chiefly with Christians with the real friends of God and man, who are — to a great extent connected with the churches that now exist — churches which are in many cases, controlled and governed by despots, and wielded tor the support of despotism and oppression and slavery, both in the church and in the State. To decide in favor of remaining connected with ecclesiastical ar- rangements that can not be divorced from despotism and wielded against it (for there are no neutrals) is to decide, not only in favor of apostacy, but in favor of the sure alternative, bloody revolutions and DESOLATING JUDGMENTS. Christian reader ! Each one must decide for himself. What de- cision is yours? The cause of liberty is the cause of God. Who is on the Lord's side ? Who ? Who is lor peaceful. Christian reformation ? And who is for the DREADFUL ALTERNATIVE ? CONCLUSION. AH who prize political and civil freedom, (whether professors of re- ligion or otherwise,) should understand distinctly that liberty can not be preserved without the active and all pervading presence of a liber, ty-inspired — a liberty-inspiring religion.— A community without any religion at all — if such a thing were possible— would be a soul-less community. And liberty, the soul of humanity, could not live witiiout its atmosphere. Still less could it live in the atmosphere of a false, a despotic religion. The religion of a people whetiier it be spurious or genuine, always controls them, and determines their political as well as their eternal destiny. To suppose a free people clinging to the skirts of an ambitious, despotic, or servile priesthood, and listening, with confidence to religious teachers, who apologize for tyranny, is to suppose an impossibility— a self-contradiction. The question of pre- serving our civil, political, and religious freedom, resolves itself in- to the question — What sort of religious teachers shall be sought after, and listened to, and followed, and patronised ? In what schools, and under what influences shall our teachers of religion, themselves, he ed. ucated and trained ? All this, the story of Rhode Island makes manifest. It shows us, too, that religious teachers, whose controlling influence no comrauni. ty ever escapes, are never neutral, (though in quiet times they may seem to be,) on the great question of human rights. Wiienever the 13 98 THE RIGHTS AND THE WRONGS test comes, they will show where they are, and range themselves on one side or on the other, where they belong. The pretended neutrals will always be found on the side of oppression. And just where you find them, in respect to the liberties of one race or complexion of men, just there will you find them in respect to the liberties of any other race, or complexion of men, whenever the proper oppor- tunity for testing them is presented. There is no more real sympa- thy or zeal in the breasts of our ministers of religion (in city or coun^. try, in Rhode Island or out of it.) in behalf of the liberties of the mass- es of the common people of their own hue, and connected with their own churches, at the North, than there is in behalf of the masses, of a different hue, at the South. Common sense might have taught us that plain lesson, years ago. But God, who has determined to test and exhibit the characters of all men, has, in his all wise and holy providence, tested the characters of the leading clergy in Rhode Island, and their brethren in the surrounding States, and shown where they stand. The test next attaches itself to the mass of the people them, selves, — those who profess to value, a^ least, their own rights, and their own freedom. Do they know enough, and will they exhibit faithful- ness and selfdenial enough to separate themselves at all ENENTS, FROM ALL RELIGIOUS TEACHERS WHO ARE NOT HEARTILY EN- IISTED IN THE CAUSE OF UNIVERSAL HUMAN FREEDOM ? If SO, the preservation of their liberties will be possible — but not otherwise, un- less by CONVULSIONS that shall make the ears of him that heareth it, to tingle. APPENDIX. REVIEW OF PRESIDENT WAYLAND. In the preceding pages we have alluded now and then to the two Discourses of President Wayland, but have noticed their contents on- ly where the argument or investigation in which we were engaged, needed his testimony, or when it seemed proper to rebut his allega- tions in respect to the matters then under consideration. Some fur- ther notice of so distinguished a writer will, perhaps, be expected, be- fore the subject is dismissed. Our readers will wish to know more of the positions he assumes, and of the arguments he uses, on topics of so much importance to the interests of human freedom. Our limits will restrict us to a few particulars, but we shall endeavor to select some of the most prominent. " PSEACHING POLITICS !" Sermons on politics from President Wayland ! Sermons, too, in which he lakes sides in a pending political contest which divides the Christian community where the preacher resides, — a contest in which, (as he telis us) " men who call themselves the disciples of the Lord Je- sus, and who partake of the elements of that body which was broken and of that blood which was shed for our sins" are arrayed on the side opposite to that which the preacher espouses. At the time of preaching and publishing his Jirst sermon, it does not appear that these brethren against whom his arrows were leveled, were regarded oth- erwise than in " regular standing" — or that any « steps of gospel dis- ipline" had been taken in respect to them ; yet he publicly charges them with " one of the gravest crimes that can be committed against society" — the crime of treason. And having exhausted his argument, he proceeds to add his anathemas. By the authority and in the name of Christ, he assures them that unless they give up their views of civ- il liberty, and of political duty, and practically adopt his own, they shall be disowned by the Judge of all, at the last day.* Nor does he * Having laid down by his exposition of Romans xiii. 1, etc. the doctrine of passive and implicit submission to existing governments, the preacher adds — " The laws which I have repeated to you are those which Christ has enacted. If you are his disciples, you must obey them, or he will declare, ' I never knew you.' You must choose, therefore, in this matter, whom you will serve." S«r- mon, p. 30. 100 APPENDIX. stop here. Lest his preaching should seem to lack the support of ex. ample, he mingles actively in the political contest against his brethren. And how and where does the " legate of the skies" do this ? At the polls? and with his vote? Not exactly : but in the military ranks, with his musket ! Lest his sermons should not suffice to convince his Christian brethren of their political errors, he will try what virtue there is in powder and ball ! An impression, in some way, he is de- termined to make. Of the earnestness and zeal of the preacher there can be no question. What has become of "the dirty waters of politics," now? Of the duty of Christians and ministers to stand aloof from them, lest their piety should be soiled — their spirituality impaired — the churches dis- tracted — their peace disturbed — the Holy Spirit grieved — souls neg- lected — and revivals of religion prevented ? — What has become of the maxim that a preacher should knov/ " nothing save Jesus Christ and hisn crucified," and that therefore, the political responsibilities and sins of men is a theme with which the pulpit should not be desecrat- ed ? Where are now, those "Limitations of Human Responsibility" with which President Wayland was wont to quiet the consciences of Christians, when their high political duties were urged on their atten- tion ? In his second Discoui-se, (July 2ist,) after about two month's time for reflection, the preacher does not appear to have changed his views of the duty of political preaching. What shall we make of all this ? Had President Wayland and tho leading clergy, of the same views, been leading their tiocks in the wrong track, all the while they were urging upon them the Christian duty of abstaining from politics, and fencing themselves round with ^^ Limitations'^ that should restrict them from redressing, at the ballot-box, the wrongs of the poor? Or does political action become a Christian duty only when the usurpa- tions of the rich need support ? W^hen the rights of the people must needs be put down ? PATRICIAN PULPITS, AND CHTJKCHES — A PICTURE, BY PRESIDENT WAYLAND. In his second discourse, the preacher vindicates, at some length, the duty of preaching politics, and there is a strain of confession for past delinquencies, mingled with the argument.* In the course of his re- marks, we have the following. — " I am therefore obliged to confess that the pulpit must be resppnsi- ble, in part, at least, for much of the error that has vitiated the public mind. — The design of the public ministrations of religion is to pur- * Did the preacher mean to confess as a fault, what he boasted of, as a merit, in the beginning of his first Sermon on the politics of R. Island 1 He then said — " All who have ever known me will bear me witness, that I have never mingled in the strife of politics. Never, that I know of, have I uttered a syllable, either from the pulpit or the press, at which men of any political party have taken ex- ception." — Then he must have done little to reprove political iniquity, or to qualify himself to grapple with the political dispute in Rhode Island. REVIEW OF WAYLAND. 101 suade men to discharge their duties to God and each other. The ev- idence of religious character is found, not merely in sentiments of devotion, but also in a life of piety, charity, justice, innocence and truth. If we may believe the New Testament, aside from this practi- cal development, professions of religion are vain and hypocritical. Now I am constrained to confess tliat both in our preaching and in our other religious teaching, the inculcation of those tempers of heart and of that corresponding practice, which the gospel requires, has been greatly neglected. We have insisted on the necessity of certain spir- itual exercises, while the necessity of a holy and virtuous life, as the fruit of those exercises, and the proof of their existence, has been suf- fered to fade from our recollection." " And hence it has sometimes come to be believed that moral and religious character, having no principles in common, may be divorced from each other. One man asserts that religion has nothing to do with the regulation of his pas- sions, — another that it has nothing to do with his business, — and an- other that it has nothing to do with his politics. Thus while the man professes a religion which obliges him to serve God in every thing, he declares that whenever obedience would interfere with his cherished vices, he will not serve God, at all. — And I grieve to say that the pulpit has failed to meet such sentiments at the threshhold, with its stern and uncompromising rebuke. From fear of the reproaches of men falsely professing godliness, it has been silent when it ought to have spoken out plainly. — A man may be mean, or even dishonest in his dealings, or he may be reckless about his word, or he may indulge in unhallowed passions, or he may pursue a thousand courses at vari- ance with the Christian character, and yet, if he have occasional sea- sons of devotion, and hold tirmly to the doctrines which are professed by his church, he may attend the sanctuary sabbath after sabbath, and too frequently hear nothing which shall arouse him from his spiritual delusion. Men are told how they xnnsifeel, but not how they must act, and the result, in many cases, is that a man's belief has but an un- certain s.nd transient effect upon his practice." -" Now the evils re- sulting from this partial declaration of the doctrines of revelation, are manifold. The standard of moral character, among frofessors of re. ligion, may thus even sink helov) the level of the community around them. They cease to he the light oj the world — Nay more j their actions are pleaded as an apology for the wickedness of other men. Hence the light that is in them becomes darkness. And again, the moral effect of the religion of Christ is the great evidence, to mankind, of its divine au- thority. If no such effect is produced, men with much apparent rea. son, deny its claims to such an authority." WHOSE TS THE PICTURE ? Remarkable statements these ! Astounding developments ! Is it possible that they come from the pen of President Wayland ? It is even so ! And they justify all that even President Green has said, in his obnoxious sermon, entitled " Iniquity and a Meeting^'' ! What have the fanatical advocates of human rights ever said of the condi> 102 APPENDIX. tion of the churches and ministry by whom the claims of fundamental morality and of 1:he wronged poor are overlooked, that goes beyond these concessions of Pres. Wayland ? The facts he records, and the sentiments he expresses, are identical with the " uncharitable denun- ciations" of the abolitionists ! In only one spot on the canvass, could the colors of the picture have been brightened by the boldest pencil among them. President Wayland might have said, and said truly, that many of the pulpits he describes as having failed to rebuke the he- resies he exposes, have been forward in the manufacture and propaga- tion of them. Who, among the men in the churches, " falsely pro- fessing godliness," and through " fear" of whom the prophets, (as President Wayland assures us,) have become as dumb dogs — who, among them, we demand, ever dreamed of as many sophistical methods of divorcing their religion from their activities and relations, and throwing sfF or " limiting'''' the " responsibilities''' connected with them, as are to be found in the " Limit atioivs" of President Wayland ? Who does not know that this is the standing text-book of the "■ false pro- fessors" whom the President so correctly describes ? The preacher must have witnessed, somewhere, the picture he has drawn. Where could it have been, if not in the churches whose min- isters bid them stand aloof from the " dirty politics" of " relieving the oppressed, and executing judgment between a man and his neighbor?" What cities, more signally than those of Rhode Island, have been un- der the influence of such preaching ? And what churches, more com- pletely than those where the Thanksgiving Sermons of Drs. Tucker and Wayland were delivered, and where they were acceptable to the leading members? His own use of the confessionary terms "tee" and " our,'''' in his account of the defective preaching he censures, bears testimony not to be misunderstood, on this point. But did it never occur to the preacher that the defective teaching he de- scribes must have been most effective on those who most confided in it ? And were not these his own partisans ? And did he not see that the picture he has drawn, finds its most distinct and glowing original in the very scenes that he and they — the preacher and his hearers, were then enacting ? In their violent and lawless outrages upon hu- man rights, and their impious "Thanksgivings" for their ungodly tri- umph over Constitutional " law and order ?" The nation and poster- ity will see this, if the preacher and his hearers did not. And the bad effects of the now prevalent mode of preaching will be read in the poli- tieal history of Rhode Island. IMPORTANT CONCESSIONS. The concessions of the Sermon, are nevertheless cheering. They show that the light of truth can not forever be shut out from the American churches. It has to be admitted that religion has some- thing to do with politics, after all — that " civil difficulties" have to be discussed in sermons — that defective religious teachings lead to wick- ed political practices — that the Bible and its teachings have to be sought aftei', before political disputes can be properly adjusted — nay, REVIEW OF WA.\'LAND. 103 more than this, that, in such cases, the righteous awards of the final judgment are not unfrequently suspended upon the rectitude of men's decisions! Solemn and startUng truths, these ; truths tliat shall yet make heartless statesmen quake, and cover the faces of their clerical parasites with confusion! Truths too, tliat shall introduce more scrip- tural tests into our churches than now prevail, when ^^ evidence of re- ligious character^^ is sought after, qnd it is to be decided whether men's "professions of religion are hypocrilical and vain." In all this, as well as in preaching politics, the friends of righteous government and equal liberty can not fail to remember that they have the sanction and authority of President Way land. " OUT OF THINE OWN MOUTH WILL I JUDGE TIIEE." To the law and to the testimony, then, and let not President Way. land and his partisans shrink trom the scrutiny. The RIGHT and WRONG of the case, are, of course, the pivots of the argumentation, in this Rhode Island controversy, if the judgment day, (as the preach- er assured his hearers,) is to determine, by its awful verdict, the des- tiny of human souls, in accordance with the rectitude of their decis« ions. All this must be true, unless the adjuration of the Sermon be a mere " flourish of rhetoric" — an unworthy artifice — a pious fraud — a breath of bombast — a sacerdotal bull. We had a right to expect, then, that in approaching the discussion, President Wayland would enter minutely and correctly into the facts of the case, and bring them to the test of those changeless pn'?2c?p/e5 of eternal rectitude by which all human actions are to be tried. But did he do this ? Or did he show plainly that he dared not encounter such a test, after all ? " This difficulty, as you are all aware, (says the preacher) arose up. on the question of suffrage." Having described the existing restric- tions in the exercise of this right, and being sensible, as he afterwards informs us, that this restriction " gave rise to odious and unkind com- parisons," and that •' the representation had become palpably une- qual," — he nevertheless adds, in respect to the suffrage laws — " with the wisdom of this provision, I have nothing to do. A very able ar- gument might easily be made out on either side, of the question." If " the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom''' — if justice and wisdom, where human rights are concerned, be one and the same, then President Wayland (so he tells us) has nothing to do with the RIGHT or the WRONG of the question on which " the difficulty arose !" On this point (the very turning point of the whole contro- versy) he would be thought to be still in doubt ! A very able argu- ment, he thinks, might be made, on either side of the question. The claims of ACRES on the one hand, and of HUMAN NATURE, on the other, are so nearly balanced, in his mind, that, with all his philo- sophical acumen, and ethical skill, and theological lore, and Biblical erudition, the learned instructor of a divided community, has found himself utterly unable to arrive at any satisfactory conclusion, -^s to the RIGHT of the case, " upon which this difficulty arose," he pre- 104 APPENDIX. tends to know nothing about it ! He " has nothing to do" with it ! He spares himself the trouble of the inquiry — the inconvenience of taking a manly position, on the side of the true and the right. But he has found out, nevertheless, by some process, on which side the cleri- cal ANATHEMA MARANATHA is to be placed, and with all due dignity and stately solemnity does he pronounce it ! " From such apostles, Oh ! ye mitred heads, Preserve the church ; and lay not careless hands On skulls that can not teach, and will not learn." CONVENIENT NEUTRALITY. To have had an opinion on the moral merits of the question upon which he had so zealously taken sides, pulpit-wise, and musket-wise, might have been somewhat inconvenient to President Wayland, just at that time. If he had decided the delicate question, in favor of the right of free suffrage, how could he excuse the concession, to his mu- nificent patrons, who had so long and so strenuously maintained the opposite position ? [And the preacher's habit, as he tells us, (p. 5.) had always been not to " utter a syllable, either from the pulpit or the press, at which men, of any political party" should " take excep. tion !"] How should he vindicate himself and them, in the present struggle ? And how would he make out the charge of treason and anarchy against the people, for only asserting and maintaining their heaven-conferred rights 1 On the other hand, if he openly and unambiguously denied the right of suffrage, how should he and his friends avail themselves of the cur- rent pretense that every body is in favor of free suffrage in Rhode Island ? And how would it agree with his statement, [p. 6.] that his own opinion has always been in favor of the extension of the suf- frage ? Does any one marvel how a neutral or hesitant position, on such a point can be maintained 1 Let him compare the " Elements of Mor. al Science" with the " Limitations of Human Responsibility." No balance master need beat a loss, who can wield implements like these. He has only to throw one of the books into each scale, and he may *• smile delighted with the eternal poise." EVASION " POINT NO POINT." But President Wayland would have it that a new issue is now formed. That the question is not whether the people are entitled to the suffrage, but whether a majority of them have a right to change the government without leave of the Charter Assembly. But how does that alter his position ? Who can help seeing that the distinction is ■without a difference ? That the decision of the latter question must depend upon the decision of the former? That, if the people have a right to the suffrage, then they have a right to a government that shall maintain that right ? That the righjt of suffrage implies and includes the right to remodel the government at pleasure ? That the right of the individual is the right of the mass of individuals ? That REVIEW OF WAVLAND. 105 as the first question, (that of the right of suffrage) is decided, so the second question — if it be another — (the question of the right of organ, izing a government) must be decided likewise? The learned teacher who " has nothing to do" with the first question, ought, in decency, to seal his lips, on the second, or he ought not to expect his decisions, on the latter question, should be accounted trust- worthy, till he has satisfied himself in respect to the former. To evade this, it will be necessary to assume that the matter of suf- frage is altogether a question of expediency, and not of right. And it will follow that the matter of popular sovereignty is a question of expediency, and not of right. Then comes the conclusion that the question whether the majority of the people of Rhode Island should assert and exercise sovereign powsr, was a question of expediency, and not of right ! And how, on this principle, will President Way- land, or any body else, fasten the guilt of moral wrong upon them^ for doing as they have done? And where is the moral warrant for charging on them crime, misdemeanor, or high treason ? NEtTTKALITY, NOT NEUTRAL. But the truth is — President Wayland does decide, strongly, against the right of free suff'rage, as a right, after all, whatever expressions of doubt he may sometimes make, and notwithstanding he sometimes ad- mits that it would have been better for the oligarchy to have granted it, graciously, long ago, and so saved themselves all the anxiety and trouble of the contest. The rigJit of suff'rage is denied by President Wayland when he " blushes" to think that those who have pertinaciously refused it, for half a century, and who, ** until within a very short time," regarded the whole movement in its favor " a farce" and " took no notice" of it, have, for that cause, been represented as "despots.'' He does so, when he affirms that under the Charter " government, every man has been most perfectly protected," and " enjoyed the most perfect liber- ty," — (p. 9.) and when he says " No instance has ever been adduced* so far as I have been informed, of any oppression or injustice which has occurred under it." [the Charter.] (p. 12.) If the people had a right to the suffVage, then, in being depriveon the State, by which — not the majority, to be sure — b\it the minority . — should claim " the right to do all it had power to do" — " merging all Constitutional right in the will of the strongest" and fixing no available bounds to their power. This is what they always havo done — what they are determined to maintain, by force of despotic law, and even by " the su|)pression of all law." But the Suffrage men, and thet/ only, proposed and adopted a Constitution, in which the pow. ers of the governing body were limited and dejined. So that the el- oquent declamation of President Wayland, on this topic, and his quo- tation from Dr. Channing, are against his own party and in favor of his opponents, unless he claims that a minority, in distinction from a ma- jority, may safely be intrusted with unlimited irresponsible power, while no Constitutional limitations can make it safe to trust the ma- jority. Why seek to conceal the true issue ? Why not come out boldly in favor of the doctrine — not that power of the majority must be limited, (which no one has questioned,) but that the majority ought not to govern, at all — that the people ought not to be sovereign — but that the power ought to reside in the select few ? That is the doctrine practiced. Wl?y not let it be the doctrine defended, if its friends have confidence in its soundness ? Why mine in the dark ? VVhy labor to exchange costume with an opponent, in order to raise against him. the cry of '• the wolf" } It ill becomes a partizan of those who refused to incorporate the customary Bill of inherent, inalienable, heaven-conferred human rights into their Constitution,* to raise the hue and cry of unlimited power, *■' the power of the strongest," against those who did the reverse, andybr having done it, are driv^en like the partridge upon the mountains bi/ "' the power of the strongest." THE CONSTITUTIOXALISTS CONFUTED. There are three principal arguments by which President Wayland would convict the Constitutionalists of insurrection — of anarchy — of rebellion. — They are these. 1. The binding power of oaths of alle- giance. — 2. The inviolability of the social compact.- — 3. The apostol- ic injunction of submission to " the powers that be." — Concerning these three arguments, and their application, v/e would make three general remarks. First. They are precisely the same nrgamc nts that have been urg- ed for centuries against the friends of civil and religious freedom — the same with which ]\Iilton, and Cromwell, and Bunyan, and all the pu- * In the Bay State Democrat of Sept. 9lh, we see it stated that at the Charter- ist Convention, a motion v/as formally mai.le and carried, to strike oiu the ex- press language of the Declaration of Independence, affirming inalienable rights, and that it was declared by a distinguished member of that body, whom he names, that those words were only ^- rhetor leal flouriskes, intended to urge on our fathers to a war with the mother country." Whether this siatment be true or not, we know that the words and the sentiments are not found in the landholders' Constitution. 1 5 114 APPENDIX. ritans of England, had to contend — the sam6 that were urged by the tories, English and American, against the fathers of our American rev- olution — the same that were met and rebutted by the New England clergy of that period. Second, They are arguments which, if admitted in their fidl force, as held by the preacher himself, might be applied and wielded against the Charterists of Rhode Island, with much more force and pertinen- cy than against the Constitutionalists. The disfranchised majority of the people of Rhode Island, who were never admitted to the polls, and who are not eligible to office, have never taken any oath of allegiance to any civil government — certain. ly not to the Charter government of Rhode Island. What oath of al- legiance did they break, by forming a State Constitution ? By organ- izing and supporting a State government? But the Charter officers of State had taken the oath of allegiance to the Constitution of the United States. This bound them to " maintain justice" — to preserve the " public tranquility" — to secure the " bles- sings of liberty" — to respect the " guaranty" " to every State in the Union" of " a republican form of government" — to submit to that sov- ereignty of the people which the Constitution, founded upon, and (in effect and intent) comprising the Declaration of Independence, was intended to secure and maintain. This oath they violated, when they took up arms against the legally adopted Constitution of Rhode Island and its officers. As much so, as any other State officers would do, who should refuse to submit to the newly elected officers and rebel against them, instead of resigning them their seats. The stronger President Wayland makes " the social compact" — the more he insists on the danger and the criminality of frequent, needless, irregular, forcible and lawless change — the more he insists on the apos. tolic injunction (as he interprets it) of " submission to the powers that be" — so much the more emphatically does he, in effect, condemn the course of the Charterists of Rhode Island. " The powers that be" — in fact — in this country — is " the sover- eign people." This v/e have proved. It is too notorious for dispute. And it is the government, in fact, whatever be its character, that Pres- ident Wayland's doctrine requires him to recognize and maintain. And the government, in fact, of Rhode Island, was the Constitutional government under Gov. Dorr. Be it so, that the Charterists thought the change that had been made, was needless and unwise. It had, nevertheless, been made — and made too, in accordance with the usages and precedents of the country. Or however made, it had been made — and the doctrine of the sermon is, that the governments that have been made (no matter how, or for v/hat object, or by whom,) are to be re- cognized — must not be forcibly overturned. It is change that the ar- guments under review, deprecate. Why, then, make this change? And hy force, too ? If the change made by the Constitutionalists was unwise, because it was a change, why make another ? If the new Constitution contained blemishes, it contained provisions for amend- REVIEW OF WAVLAXD. 115 ment. Why not wait and make them, " in a lawful manner" instead of overthrowing an existing government by force ? — In every view we can take, the doctrines of the sermon, whether false or true, condemn the course of those on whose behalf it was preached. There is no way to evade this conclusion but by saying that tho Constitutional government was not the existing government in fact, be- cause it had not the physical power. But to make this plea would be to "appeal from Constitutional law to military force" — which the ser- mon justly condemns ! It would be " to merge all Constitutional right in the will of the strongest" to claim for a government " the right to do all it has power to do." — By this rule "/Ae powers that Je'' must be so construed that if Gov. Dorr had gained the military mastery for one ■week, and Gov. King for the next week, and so, back and forth, for years, shifting weekly, the allegiance of President VVayland would have to be transferred once a week, from the one to the other ! A rule suf- ficiently absurd, one would think, and certainly not to be commended for its stability and exemption from change. Third. Our third remark is this. Whatever of wisdom or of fol- ly there may be in these thi-ee arguments of President Wayland, he ev- idently relinquishes all three of them, himself, as any one may see by reading the following paragraph, on the 28th page of his first ser- mon. " But it may be asked, is a revolution never to be justified ? I an- swer, the proper object of all government is to secure to every individ- ual the full enjoyment of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, or the pozcer to do it, in every respect, as he will, if he interfere with tho rights of no other human being. For this purpose government is in- stituted; and never, i^7Z it utterly fail to accomplish these purposes, can it he rightfully overturned. No other rule can be safely adopt- ed, «fec." Let it be noticed, here, that the preacher professes to give a case in •which, and a rule by which, a government may he lawfully overturn- ed : — and that too, by the people — and on their own judgment (of course) whether or no the government has forfeited its claims to their support. President Wayland's rule of judging may be adopted by them, or some oiher rule, which they may think a better one. But of the rule and of the cases coming under it President Wayland al- lows them to judge and to act, and this covers the whole dispute in Rhode Island. If the people have this right, then oaths of allegiance — obligations to obey civil government — and the admonitions of Paul, are all to be construed accordingly. And when President Wayland shall have shown the agreement ol' his own rule for overturning worth- less and wicked governments, with the oaths, obligations, and admoni- tions so confidently quoted by him, he will have opened a path suffi- ciently wide for the Constitutionalists of Rhode Island to travel in. On the other hand, if he persists in the doctrine that no government, for any cause, may be overturned, (and that was the doctrine he urged against his opponents,) then the overthrow of Gov. Dorr's government, 116 APPENDIX. whatever may be said of its legal validity, or of its moral character, or the aims of its administrators, comes under the same ban. The American revolution, too, is condemned by the same svv'eeping rule, and all changes in civil government, by the people, or any portion of them, are pronounced criminal. LETTER OR SPIRIT ? ' It is the spirit that quickeneth — the letter kiileth.' Whether we would expound Paul's writings, or learn the significancy of oaths of allegiance, we must do one of two things. We must either chain our- selves down to the dead letter — the phrases — words — syllables — let- ters, that strike the eye or the ear, and ioWow them, without regard ta the spiritual meaning — the thing signified by the symbol, — or else w^ must regard mainly the substance itself — the nature and reasons of the acts promised or commanded to be performed. President Way- land is at liberty, in this case, to take which method he pleases, and the issue we will cheerfully abide. Does he go for the spirit of the oath of allegiance ? The rational and Christian-like promise to obey a just government, because and while it is just? The admonition of Paul, as construed by the great masters of the common law, and expounded by pur revolutionary fa- thers ? by the puritans ? by Milton ? by " our ancient and famous lawyer Bracton," whom Milton quotes ?* If so let him prove that the Charter government, with its " palpably unequal representation" is a just government, and that the Constitution of December 1841 was un- just, and his argument will be sustained, but not otherwise. Does he choose, instead of this, to stick to the dead " letter that kiil- eth ?" Let him see how much life, even to his own cause, he can get out of it. Mark ! He is to abide by the strict letter — the words and the syllables of Paul's admonitions, and of the oath of allegiance. How must they read, to answer his purpose 1 We have a right to in- sist, now, upon the strict letter, (for that is the principle of his argu- ment,) and give him his " pound of flesh,'' according to the " bond" — ♦ This "ancient and famous" expounder of Scripture and of law, is thus quo- ted by Milton in his reply to Salmasius. " A king is a king, so long as he rules well ; he becomes a tyrant when he op- presses the people committed to his charge." " The king ought to use the power of law and right, as God's minister and vicegerent : the power of wrong is the devil's, and not God's: when the king turns aside to do inpistice, he is the piinister of the devil. Since, therefore, the law is chiefly right reason, if we are bound to obey a king and a minister of God, by the very same reason and the ve- ry same law, we ought to resist a tyrant, and a minister of the devil." The same controversy is still urged, in England. A writer in the London Non-Conformist, Rev. B. Parsons of Siroud, furnishes a translation of a portion of R.omans xiii. 1, etc., commencing thus — " Let every soul be subject to su- preme authorities, for there is no authorityexcept from God, and those which are authorities have b^en determined by God." etc. — The writer remarks the wide difference between brute power and rightful authority. He shows that the origi- nal word in question is commonly translated ''authority'" elsewhere; and he hints that the translators of king James were misled by the servile maxims of their times. REVIEW OF WAYLAND. 1 1 7 but without drawing a drop of " Christian blood." We insist, then, that if the texts of Paul, and if the oaths of alleijiance do not specify Samuel W. King's Proclamation, and James Fenner's coun- sel, and Col. Blodget's broadsword, and President Wavland's Ser- mon — if these are not designated, either in the Epistle, nor in the oath of allegiance, as the grand arbiters of " law and order" in Rhode Island, then, by this rule of exposition, his citation of the cath, and of Romans xiii. 1, is not to his purpose, and can avail him nothing. Ab- surd as would be such an exposition, it is only carrying out the prin- ciple of following the letter instead of the sinrii of legal documents, and ancient writings. THE SOCIAL COMPACT. But what shall be said of the mysterious obligations arising from the social compact, whose inviolability is made to be more sacred than the claims of justice, of human nature, and the law of God ? The notion of a " social comjjact,''' as formerly held, is an absurdi- ty, and to reason from it is to build on a pit of ashes. The fiction was this. Man was said to have been born in a state of nature, and not in a state of society. And it was only by remaining in that ori- ginal, sarvage state, that he could retain all his natural rights. It was at his option whether he would do so or not. But having concluded to establish civil society, the " social compact" was accordingly formed, and in entering it, a man gave up a part of his natural rights for the protection of the rest. Henceforth, he was not a whole man, but only a part of a man. His civilization was at the necessary ex- pense of his manhood. When, or where, or how, or by whose author- ity this mammoth town meeting of the human race was convened, who presided over it, or acted as the secretaries, nobody knew. But the school-men said it had been held, and that was enough. And they said, too, that the compact having been made, could not be unmade — that it was binding on those who had never heard of it. The theory lacked three things, and was founded upon two. It lacked truth, moral principle, and common sense. And it was founded on a forgetfulness of God, and an ignorance of man. It was a fiction con- venient for tyrants, because it shrouded civil government in mystery — - taught the political necessity of infringing natural rights — preclude(| the right of the people to introduce changes — kept God and equity out of sight, and trampled man and liberty under foot. Mr. Jefferson and others have successfully exposed and exploded this fallacy. What a pity that religious teachers, speaking in the name of Chris- tianity, should attempt, at this late day, its resuscitation ! THE TEUE THEORY. Power belongeth unto God. Authority is from him alone. It is no begotten conventionalism of his creatures. Compacts may honor, but can not create it. Civil government, unless it be sheer usurpa- tion, from first to last, and in all its forms and phases, is the result of the Divine will — a part of the Divine administration. It is committed lis ^rPENDIX. to. man, as man : not io a particular family, or caste. It is inherent in man ; it vests not in property, but in human beings, in all men. Man is not born out of it. any more than he is born out of his nature. He is a social being, and is never born out of society, with the sad op- tion of coming into it, or not, as he pleases. His obligations to civil government are founded, not on an unreal compact, but on his real nature, rights and duties, as a social being, under the government of God. It is the whole business of civil government to protect all of every man's natural rights, and take none of them away from him ; to execute justice between a man and his neighbor. Instead of being the jurisdiction of the individual, or of the few, over the mass, it essen- tially consists in the supervision of the whole body over individuals : of the whole over the parts of which it is composed. This feature is al- together essential to a just civil government, and can not be spar- ed from it. Hence, the sin of the Hebrews, in seeking to throw off their responsibilities upon a monarch. God considered it rebellion against him. Hence, too, all the men in a nation are held responsible .for national sins. The death-blow at midnight, in every family throughout the'land of Egypt, settled that question, long ago. Pha- raoh might have exacted fealty to his imaginarj'^ " social compact" — his artificial arrangements. His priests might preach the sacred ten- ure of oaths of allegiance to him. But God would hold the Egyptians amenable to the higher lows of their social nature, and to himself. The masses may govern wrong — but they must govern. God will punish theqni for abdication, as truly as for wrong government. He has appointed them no substitute, at the day of judgment and they may accept of none here. Representative rulers they may have — viceroys — but they must superintend their administration. The king- ship, under God, is theirs. " Tell me not" says Montesquieu, " that the people may sometimes reason incorrectly. It is sufRcient that they reason." — ' There is a .spirit in man, and the inspiration of the Almighty hath given him un- derstanding.' The people may govern oppressively ; all other governors always do — .they MUST — for a minority government is itself usurpation, and con- sequently oppression. Legitimate authority may fail to govern with equity ; but usurped authority is iniquitous, of itself, and good can not grow out of it. What do those mean, then, who talk of the " divine right of the wisest and best" to govern the masses ? The " wisest and best," will ,be wiser and better than to undertake any such thing ! They will know that the entire mass, of which themselves are only a part, is wiser than any portion of itself; as the whole is greater than a part. The " best" will have goodness enough to know that they have no right to take upon themselves, alone, the work and the responsibility which God has divided between them and their equal brethren. " But have not Wisdom and Goodness an inalienable right to gov- ern ?" What if it be so ? Who shall decide who they are that, in REVIEW OP VVAYLAND. 1 IJ? (he comparison with their brethren, may be characterized as *« Wis. dom and Goodness ?" The people should select their wisest and best men, for office, but the government is nevertheless, their own, and they may not abdicate in favor of the " wisest and best" of their species. Not one of them may be safely entrusted with such power. The " wisest and best" would not long continue such, if thus elevated. If it be to ?nan — to all men — to the MASSES, that God has com- mitted the higli charge of civil government, then they may not abdi- cate, to an angel. Gabriel bimself would be an usurper, and lose his "wisdom and goodness," if he should displace the people of Rhode Is- land, and undertake, unbidden of God, to wield i^/teir civil government, for them. My neighbor may be much wiser and better than I. But that superior '^ wisdom and goodness" does not authorize him to en- ter my family, and govern it in my stead. And it is not true that any select number are as capable of wielding absolutely and uncontrolled, the government of a country, as the entire j)eople, by a proper supervision of their representatives, are to govern themselves. A Senate of John Miltons and Thomas Carlyles could not govern England as well as the people of England, including their Miltons and Carlyles (properly organized) could govern England. The Calhouns and Clays of the South can not govern the laborers of the South, degraded as they are, as v/ell as they can govern themselves. And (President Wayland must pardon us) we doubt whether there is wisdom and goodness enough even in the Charterisls of Rhode Island, priesthood and all, to govern Rhode Island as equitably and as wisely as the entire people could govern themselves. The dreaded doctrine of popular sovereignty is only one branch of the more comprehensive yaci of man's equality with man. Of all the hard lessons that man has to learn, his own equality with his own mother's children, seems surely among the hardest. When he learns that, the millennium of Christianity is ushered in. Though reasoned^ or laughed, or perhaps, bayonetted out of the fancied superiority of birth, of primogeniture, and even of wealth, he will next fancy himself among the " best and the wisest." He will build his lofty preten- tions on learning, on talents, on genius, or even upon humility (!) and erect a governing aristocracy upon .them. You may read to him your long lists of literary shoe-makers, and eminent brick-layers, and learned blacksmiths, your chronicles of " genius" headed by Shaks- peare and Bunyan — you may enumerate your Franklins and Patrick Henrys, and so on, chapter after chapter, to no purpose. He reads in in them only exceptions to his rule. It never comes into his head that these are specimens of his race — Oh • no ! these are the rare ^^ geniuses" and he hopes, perhaps, to be sainted, himself, on the cal- endar, and stared at, with a D. D. or an LL. J), attached to his name, if he be not too shrewd or too proud to be tickled with such feathers. *' The wisest and the best" must govern ! So he dreams. And so dream the Charterists of Rhode Island. It is 7iot the $134, worth of brick, mortar, or bog meadow, now ! Oh ! no ! That dream was brok- 120 APPENDIX. en, the Slat of December, 1S41. It is "the wisest and best" hence, forth that are to govern. " The moral worth and respectability of the city," says the correspondent of the New York Journal of Commerce — " the most virtuous citizens of Providence" says President Wayland [page 24] represented, [very worthily, of course,] by James Fenner and William Blodget, and Samuel VV. King — these are they — and not the landholders, merely, that are henceforth to put the " fag end of so- ciety" in order, (including the West Baptist Church in Providence with their Pastor) and keep the foundries from smelting out popular legislation. Pity were it that even such a true man as Thomas Carlyle could not comprehend the humanity of human nature, after all. Pity that one who could himself be taught by corn-law rhymes, could net discover the capacity of the rhymers for self-government ! That in the majes- tic voice of a wronged nation — in the mighty thundei-ings of count- less immortals, demanding distinctly, in the midst of usurpation and confusion, the true and the right — he should only have heard tlie "bel- lowings — -the inarticulate cries as of a dumb creature in rage and in pain" calling out "to the ear of wisdom" — " Guide me. Govern me! I am mad and miserable, and can not guide myself." [Carlyle's Char- tism, page 52.] Pity that he should spend his noble powers in sum- nioning " the wisest and best" from their gaming tables, and palaces, and stews, and bishoprics, and banking houses, and fox hunts, and birthnight balls, and military reviews, to " guide'' and " govern" the worthier and more reflecting portion of their brethren ! — Joseph Stuuge and the Editor of the " Non- Conformist," are on the better track. Give them the suffrage, and the people of England — of the world — will articulate wisdom and justice, for the " wisest and best" to emulate. Not the " No government and Laissez-faire^^ that the phil- osophic phdanthropist deplores, but the '• non Laissez-faire''^ of the *' New Era" he would have hammered out. — Heaven speed it, at Man- Chester, and at New Orleans, at Japan, and in Rhode Island ! With the rumbling of the Messiah's chariot wheels, it will come ! POSTSCRIPT. Latest from Rhode Island.— The martial law, first sus- pended, for 23 days, was afterwarde suspended indefinitely — or duringthe A"zm^- ly gooA. pleasure. But, at the last dates, the arrests and imprisonments under " Algerine law" were going on, briskly. The second Fieedoai " Clam-bake" oa Massachusetts soil, drew out about 15,000 men, women, and children, chiefly R. Islanders. Many a meeting took place between the exiled husbands and parents, and their wives and children. — The " farce" of choosing delegates to the Char- ter Convention, was enacted the same day — the Constitutionalists taking no part. Some towns mustered 13 votes — some 20, and Gloucester voted to send no dele- gation at all. Returns not ascertained, but rumor puts the aggregate of votes at about 2,000, in the whole State. When the vote of the Constitiuionalists, in April, " dwindled down" to over 6,400, it was claimed that the Constitution was thereby annulled ! Within a short lime, many prominent statesmen in other States, have espoused the cause of the Constitutionalists. The Charterist Con- vention for forming a Constitution was to sit, this present week. Whether, with the turning tide, they had foresight enough to do anything that a free people can sanction, we are yet uninformed. [Sept. 15. j RECEIPTS For the Christian Investigator, since the publication of the last number. . Of B Snow Jr FUchbiirg Ms. 1 00; Rev D H Ranney CaynI)ridgeport Vt. 1 00; Rev E Reynolds Hannibal 25c; T Tanner Trenton 25c; G Smith Peterboro 5 00; D Bartlett Whitesboro 100; S D Hastings Philadelphia "i 00; H R Piercv iVew York 1 00; Rev Dr J Ide Medway Ms. 200; P Stone Jr W Brookfleld Ms 50c; Rev W B Stone Gardner Ms. 50c; J Briggs Troy 1 00; J W Hill N York 1 00: Rev J W Parker Cavibridgeport Ms. 1 00; S D Cochran New York 25c; R El- mer Springfield 1 00; Rev D Sewall Oak Hill Mc. 19u S S Moulton Manchester N H2oc; SL Elliot N Hampton NH25c; T Simms Bouckville 1 00; S Scholes Fall River Ms. 3 00; J Campbell Jefferson 25c; EFooie 25c; W Talbot Pecalone 111 25c; W R Willis Adams 100; JVl Stringham Utica 56c; L Couch Macedon- ville 50c; W W Crane Eaton Rapids Mich. 25c; B Church Tallmadge O50c; J R Bartlett N Adams 25c; E Biirnham Madison 1 00; Dr J R Lee Worcester 1 00; M Burnham Madison 50c; J Skinner Harwinton Ct. 100; SB Smitn Ver- non Center bOc\ E Clark PuUnsyville 50c; T Earle Philad. 50c; E Dalton do. 50c; P Lewis Teriyville Ct. 50c; J Norton Exeter 'ibc; Rev E Ripley iM&n^fe/i Ct. 50c; J C Babcock Phelps 1 00; Dr E Frisbee do. 1 00; Eld J Marks Oberlin 1 00; C Clapp Akron O. 1 00; Dr E Allen Augusta 40c; Rev J Keep Hartford O. 2 00; S W Green Whitesboro \ 00. .Also deceived in V/ashington Co. Me. contributed on account of lectures there, 100 00. Total amount received, $142 05 Patrons of Christian Investigator, # To William Goodell, Dr. For balance due up to April 28, as then stated, SHS 33 For 1200 copies of No. 8, at 18 3-4 cts. 225 00 S-398 33 Credit. By Receipts as above, S142 65 Balance due me $255 63 S::^* The friends of the publication will see that it needs aid. / >: ■^^:^5S»^^!i>' >>^ . »S»^~^> :¥^^ >■> ;>3> _Z3t|,^^, J^^^^ '>'^'"Jt»' ^-^>^ >s>:;^_ 3 ::>>'~^^m -jae^ -S7>^ ^: -r> >>;::> 50;^ >-> siw>: ^^^^<^ »'•»>; :>; 5' :> > > y ^^>;^^ vjy ^ ^, -^ ,'- - ,3 t>-» ^ r5>:>5>