Syracuse University Library
Special Collections Research Center
Gerrit Smith Broadside and Pamphlet Collection

To the Public.

Smith, Gerrit, 1797-1874.

Digital Edition.

This digitization project was supported by Regional Bibliographic Databases and Interlibrary Resources Sharing Program funds, awarded by the New York State Library.

Call number: Smith 436

To The Public.

The last Newspaper, into which Mr. Rand has gone to establish his charges against my veracity, is the Religious Recorder of Syracuse. The Editor of that paper refuses to print the following Communication. I, therefore, give it to the Public in the form of a handbill.

Peterboro, Feb. 23, 1846

GERRIT SMITH.

[col. 1]

MR. SMITH'S REPLY

TO MR. RAND.

Peterboro, Feb. 16, 1846.

MR. TERRY, -

I regret that it was not until a few days ago, that I saw Mr. Rand's Communication in your Paper of the 29^th ultimo. It is, however, not too late to reply to it.

A few words of explanation will give your readers a clearer understanding of the controversy between Mr. Rand and myself.

Saturday, 18^th Sept. last, Mr. Rand and I publicly discussed the question in this village: "Is it right to preach on the Sabbath such politics, as Gerrit Smith preaches on that day?" The discussion was adjourned to the following Monday evening. All was pleasant between us, until the ill-omened moment of that evening, when Mr. Rand, leaving the subject matter of the discussion, dashed off into an assault on my integrity. I could not have been more astonished at a thunder-clap out of a clear sky. As far as I know, there was not a person in the audience, who was aware, that Mr. Rand premeditated the assault. The specific charges, which he brought against me, are "TWISTIFICATION," "DISINGENUOUSNESS," and "DISSIMULATION." Mr. Rand has since said, that he meant by the charges, that my "course had been that of hiding under a false appearance, and pretending that not to be, which really was;" and that he "employed the word dissumulation, as expressing my (his) opinion of Mr. Smith's course in electioneering on the Sabbath for the Liberty party, and yet often denying it."

Mr. Rand has repeatedly said, that he has witnesses to prove his charges - even "scores" of them.

I long ago, proposed to Mr. Rand, that our discussion be reopened for the purpose of giving him an opportunity to produce his witnesses, and establish his charges: and I accompanied my proposition with the stipulation, that I would introduce no witnesses; and that, inasmuch as he complains of the fascinating and bewildering power of my voice, it should be perfectly silent on the occasion.

To the strict truth of all the foregoing, Mr. Rand will give his full assent.

I come now to Mr. Rand's last communication in your Paper. In this he takes the ground, that he "fully proved" his charges, at the time he made them; - that he did so by means of quotations from letters of Alvan Stewart, Francis Hawley, James C. Jackson, and E.W. Goodwin; and that my "demand for additional witnesses is entirely gratuitous and insolent." These letters, it appears, were written shortly after I gave notice, July 14, 1843, that I intended to preach politics on the Sabbath. Whether they do, or do not, favor the idea, that, in the discourses in question, I electioneer for the Liberty Party, it is certain, that, unless written with a personal knowledge of the discourses, they prove nothing, in respect to their character. Mr. Goodwin is dead. He never heard of any of them. Mr. Stewart had heard of none of them, when he wrote this letter. Mr. Jackson and Mr. Hawley did not hear any of them, until months after I began to deliver them. I make the last remark, notwithstanding Mr. Jackson attended my first Meeting, viz: 23d July. He being on a visit to his home, attended that Meeting. James N. Buffum of Massachusetts, a distinguished friend of the slave, was also present. In these circumstances, I felt unwilling to carry out my plan for the next Sabbath. Mr. Buffum and Mr. Jackson occupied most of the time. And I would here remark, that, from a similar cause, I had to forgo the carrying out of my plan for the next Sabbath. Those distinguished advocates of human rights, George Bradburn and Charles T. Torry, attended my second Meeting; and how I could refuse to give up the time, principally, to them? It was not until the 6^th of August, that I was in circumstances to conform to my plan of preaching politics on the Sabbath.

It follows, from what I have written, that Mr. Stewart, Mr. Hawley, and Mr. Jackson, could, none of them, at the time they wrote their letters, (from 8^th to 17^th August, as Mr. Rand says,) testify respecting the character

[col. 2]

of my much talked of Sunday discourses. - Hence, it is perfectly absurd for Mr. Rand to say, that he drew from those letters full proof of that character. It is not possible, that they can afford, any, even the least particle of, proof of it. But, since they wrote the letters under consideration, they have qualified themselves to testify the character of these discourses. Mr. Stewart heard one on them on 26^th Sept. last, in Utica, when I was on my way to Boston. Mr. Hawley and Mr. Jackson have heard many of them. If, therefore, these gentlemen will now speak of the character of these discourses, they will speak to effect. They will either make true and indisputable Mr. Rand's charge, that I am a liar, or they will make him the scorn and loathing of all who scorn and loath the slanderer. Thanks to a favoring providence, they have spoken: and we will, now, hear what it is, that they have spoken.

Letter of Mr. Stewart.

11^th February, 1846 - Utica.

GERRIT SMITH, Esq.:

Dear Sir: - Nothing could more astonish me, than to have it asserted in words, or thoughts, as a matter of form, or substance, by the Rev. Asa Rand, or any other human being, that you, in your discourses, entitled "Bible politics," had attempted to electioneer for the Liberty Party. In fact, I had always understood, that, in your Sabbath discourses "on the politics of the Bible," you had most carefully abstained from making deductions, arguments, or inferences, which might go to build up the Liberty Party by name. I never heard you but once, on your celebrated topic of "Bible politics," and that was on a week day at the Mechanics' Hall last fall in Utica, and then, although it was a short time before the November Election and the audience large, and the opportunity one peculiarly inviting to apply your Bible politics to the upbuilding of the Liberty party, still you never alluded to the Liberty Party, for which I should have censured you most strongly, had I not known this to have been a conscientious and upright desire on your part, to give your audience a fair specimen and an accurate picture of your Sunday preaching of your Bible politics. No mortal could have told from the discourse I heard, that there was such a thing as the Liberty party in existence. I hope Asa Rand may find a more hopeful pursuit than attempting to rob the poor slave's friend of his reputation, and by so doing strip the poor outcast bondman of his last hope of freedom. For liars will have as little desire to aid the slave, as God will to employ them.

Respectfully yours,

ALVAN STEWART.

Letter of Mr. Hawley

Mr. Gerrit Smith:

Dear Sir: - I learn, that Mr. Rand relies upon me, as one of his witnesses to fasten upon you the charge of lying. For this purpose he has made use of a passage from an article from me, in reply to one, that was published in the Madison County Eagle, over the signature of a "Respecter of the Sabbath" - in which your preaching of Bible politics was most unjustly attacked. The cause, that Mr. Rand relies upon, reads thus: "But Mr. Smith preaches politics; he advocates the claims of the Liberty party. True, he does." If Mr. Rand had extended his quotation, it would have placed the above in a very different light, but it would not have answered his purpose as well to have done so. I would say, that the above sentence was premature, inasmuch as, at that time, I had not heard you preach even a single discourse on the subject of Bible politics, but supposed, that, so far as the Liberty party conformed to your views of Bible politics, you would directly advocate its claims. My article appeared in the Liberty Press on the 22d of August 1843. Since then I have heard you preach Bible politics, once only on the Sabbath, but repeatedly on week days: and I am prepared to say, that your avowed and apparent object has always been to show, what are the politics of the Bible and what Civil Government is in light of the Bible; at the same time refusing to advocate the claims of any party. I believe the charge to be false, that you have electioneered for the Liberty party in these discourses; even admitting the fact, that preaching Bible politics does tend to advance the Liberty party. It is most unjust to charge electioneering purposes upon you, because in your exposition of the Bible on the subject of Civil Government, you advance doctrines, that perhaps most Liberty party men with many Whigs and Democrats hold to. As far as my knowledge goes, you have never said aught in these discourses in favor of the Liberty party. I much question, if a stranger to you, upon hearing one of your Sabbath discourses, would be able to decide, that you belonged to the Liberty party. I trust that Mr. Rand will strike me from the list of his witnesses against you.

Yours truly,

F. HAWLEY.

Cazenovia, Feb. 11, 1846.

Letter of Mr. Jackson.

Feb'y 16, 1846.

TO GERRIT SMITH:

My Dear Sir: - Since the Fall of 1843, I have frequently heard you in the exercise, called "preaching politics." In that exercise you present the politics of the Bible - the Bible view of Civil Government. You do not electioneer for the Liberty party - you say nothing in favor of any party - nothing, indeed, to justify the conclusion, that you belong to any party, political or ecclesiastical.

Yours truly,

J.C. JACKSON.

And now, Mr. Rand, you have heard your own witnesses - the witnesses you have yourself called to the stand - the witnesses, other

[col.3]

than whom, you say, that you will have none - other than whom you say it is "entirely gratuitous and insolent" in me to call for. And what do you learn from them? You learn, that you were wholly mistaken in your reliance on them. By your own witnesses - your exclusive witnesses - your charges are not only not proved, but disproved. By your own witnesses - your exclusive witnesses - you are overthrown, and I am vindicated. Haman is himself hung "on the gallows, that he had prepared for Mordecai."

Late as it is - five months having passed away since Mr. Rand preferred his charges - I am content, that I am at last, and that too by his own witnesses, triumphantly vindicated from them. I thank and praise God for this mercy. I knew not at one time, but that the industrious machinations of my enemies might send down my name to my children and children's children, as the name of a liar. What is due from Mr. Rand for having so deeply stabbed my reputation, and for having suffered it to lie bleeding for so long a time, is not for me to dictate. I leave him with his conscience and his God.

Mr. Rand complains of my severe treatment of him. But, this treatment, whether too severe, or not severe enough, is solely on account of his utterly causeless and unprovoked assault on my character. Perhaps, it is too severe. Would he bring me to feel sorry for it? He can readily do so. He has but to repent of his cruel, assassin-like, entirely groundless and now disproven, charges; and my sorrow, at having been obliged to chastise him, will be as great as his soreness under the chastisement.

I observe, Mr. Rand's threat to resort to the Civil law, and transfer to his own pocket money from mine. Poor man! he totally misconceives the character of his disease. Repentance is its only remedy. Repentance - not money - can alone cure him. By the way, Mr. Rand should not utter this threat. He should not make this appeal to my fears. He should not thus shackle the freedom of discussion. He should leave me to continue it unterrified. Indeed, he might rather leave me under the impression, even if a delusive one, that, if either of us has the moral right to appeal to the Civil law, it is I, - not he; the assailed - not the assailant; the injured - not the injurer; the slandered - not the slanderer.

I must, again, confess to Mr. Rand, that I have fallen into an untruth. Until reading the Communication, to which I am now replying, I supposed, and so said, that Mr. Jackson's letter was written before I began to "preach politics." I, doubtless, took this for granted from its language. But, it seems, that although my announcement to preach politics was a month old, Mr. Jackson wrote of it, as of a piece of fresh news. I do not keep a file of newspaper, in which it appeared, nor, indeed, of any other newspaper.

Justice to Mr. Rand requires the further admission, that the question of my electioneering was, as he says, an original question in our discussion; and that the question, whether the specimen of my Sunday discourses, which I gave on the Saturday of our discussion, was a lying specimen, was, as he says, an "incidental" one. It did not occur to me, when I said, in one of my Communications to the Albany Patriot, that the latter, not the former, was "the controverted point between us," that my meaning was liable to misapprehension. I am sorry, that I did not express it more clearly and fully. My meaning was, that, in itself considered, I care little, whether people do, or do not, ascribe an electioneering character to my Sunday discourses; and that the only point in the controversy, which deeply concerned me, is that which affects, and most vitally too, my character for veracity - the point, whether I had been guilty of the deliberate and peculiarly base lie of giving, as a specimen of my Sunday discourses, what is not a specimen of them. Let Mr. Rand admit, that my specimen of these discourses is fair and truthful, and he can then, without at all disturbing me, charge to his heart's content, that they are electioneering discourses.

I shall not blame you, Mr. Editor, if you close your columns against the continuance of Mr. Rand's and my controversy. I am more than half ashamed, should be spread out before the public: - and yet, how can I well forbear

[col. 4]

to follow up the man, who, never having received aught but respect and kindness at my hands, determined, and has most industriously followed up his determination, to convince the world, that I am a liar - and a liar too of the basest type. Should you close your columns, I shall not follow Mr. Rand's bad example, and intimate, that it is the result of an understanding between the editor and my opponent. Mr. Rand was not more surprised than myself, at the closing of the Albany Patriot against us; and should the Religious Recorder also be closed against us, I shall neither be so ungenerous, as to suspect, nor so ill-mannered, as to hint, that Mr. Rand had an agency in closing it.

I observe, that Mr. Rand entitles his late Communication in your Paper: "Last words concerning Gerrit Smith." But, I do not believe, that these are his "last words concerning Gerrit Smith." Mr Rand is not so bad a man, as he thinks himself to be. Eminently gifted, as he is, with what I have, politely and kindly, called his grace of firmness, he will yet break this silence, which he has resolved to keep. His resolution to keep it, determined and dogged as the resolution may be, will yet give way before his penitence. He will yet cry out in anguish of spirit over his sin of holding me up, as a liar, in that, which is characterized, not by falsehood and concealment, but by the strictest truth and the most transparent candor. He will yet lie in the dust and ashes of repentance for having sent my private letter to the press; and for having given to it a construction and an application, which, he perfectly well knew from the explanatory letter I wrote him only two days afterwards, were wholly foreign to my thoughts. His sending that letter to the press is a sad instance of yielding to temptation. His sending it, unaccompanied by the explanatory letter is a crime, the heinousness of which I shall not here venture to speak of.

A word to my Whig and Democratic neighbors, and I have done. I have often, perhaps too often - and in terms of perhaps too great severity - assailed the inhumanity and crime of your votes for men-stealers. Yon are, therefore, pleased with Mr. Rand's assaults upon me. They are, as you think, no more a fair return for mine upon you. But, have you never thought, that you are gratifying a retaliatory spirit, at the peril of Mr. Rand's soul? When you cheer him on, in his assaults on my integrity, he, doubtless, supposes, that you are manifesting your approval of the morality of his conduct; and it, probably, never occurs to him, that you are but giving vent to your revenge. And when, too, you would make light of Mr. Rand's sin, in preserving in these assaults, by calling it but a specimen of his characteristic obstinacy, do you never consider, that obstinacy is not, as it is commonly supposed to be, a sinless trait of character, but is, on the contrary, as foreign and hostile to the gentile and truthful spirit of christianity, as in any other foe, which she encounters in the human heart?

How little we know of the future! Only six months ago, and I could not have believed, that I had one neighbor, who would delight in hearing me called a liar. But now, how few are the Whigs and Democrats in all this neighborhood, who do not stand by Mr. Rand in his attempt to make the public believe, that I am a liar! Are they doing by me, as they would have me do by them? - as they believe I would do by them? Neither. They would think it the height of injustice, were I to show favor to an unprovoked, unproven, totally false, and glaringly malicious charge against their veracity; and they know me too well to believe, that I could be guilty of such injustice. But, my erring neighbors, I am patient with you; and I fully believe, that you will yet number amongst the things you most deeply regret and are most heartily ashamed of, your consent to do me so foul and flagrant a wrong, in return for my plain dealing with your proslavery votes.

I thought I had done: - but it, this moment, occurs to me, that there is another claim, which Mr. Rand has on my justice. He may say, that had he foreseen his failure to sustain his charges by Mr. Stewart, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Hawley, and Mr. Goodwin, he would have supplied himself with other witnesses to sustain them, at the time he made them. I admit, if he wishes the admission, that he may say so with propriety; and, hence I, cheerfully, release him from his promise to carry our controversy no farther, unless it be into the civil courts. Again, I say, that our discussion may be reopened - and opened too, if he pleases, for the single purpose of allowing him to introduce his witnesses. Again, I stipulate, that if it be reopened, I will offer no witnesses; and that, inasmuch as Mr. Rand deprecates the fascination of my lips, I will not prejudice nor endanger his cause, by opening them. I add, that he may choose the Chairman and the time of reopening the discussion: and that he may choose the place also, provided it be not beyond the limits of the County. If he thinks, that justice cannot be done him in the antislavery atmosphere of Peterboro, he may carry me elsewhere - even to Canastota or Chittenango - villages, whose inhabitants are so holy, that they will not suffer one, with such messages as mine, to cross the threshold of their churches.

GERRIT SMITH.