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

To the Liberty Party of the County of Madison.

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 480

TO THE LIBERTY PARTY OF THE COUNTY OF MADISON.

PITTSBURG, August 13, 1852.

I HAVE obeyed your wishes, and attended the Pittsburg Convention. It closed its labors, last evening.

I came to the Convention with very little hope, that it would take what I deem to be the proper ground of a political party. It has not taken it distinctly - perhaps not at all. But whether it has, or has not taken it, it has come much nearer to it than I feared it would. Again, whilst I shall go home less displeased with the proceedings of the Convention than I feared I should be, I shall, also, go home entertaining far more favorable opinions than before of the mass of the abolitionists. I think I am safe in saying, that of the thousands who came to the Convention, there are not five hundred, nor three hundred, who are not with us in spirit and in principle. Not only is it true, that Charles Durkee and General Paine of Wisconsin are heartily and wholly with the Liberty Party; but it is also true, that those noble men are, in this respect, no more than fair specimens of the great majority of the Western abolitionists.

The West is ahead of the East. The ardent, generous, confiding West is not so trammeled as the East with the habit of circumspection and calculation. Whilst the Eastern man pauses to reckon results, the Western man pushes on to realize them. The Eastern abolitionists are, however, making progress. Abolitionists of the type of Charles Francis Adams will not be able to imbue with their conservative spirit the reformers around them. On the contrary, these reformers will be continually imbuing with their radical spirit abolitionists of the type of Charles Francis Adams.

I have named Mr. Adams. I cannot forbear to add, that I am greatly pleased with him. His characteristic dignity is the perfectly natural outgrowth of his high-souled integrity and rare mental discipline. I was happy to see, that his habit of caution and conservatism was not proof against the atmosphere which surrounded him here he made manifest progress in the two days: and could he mingle for twenty days with Western abolitionists, he would not fear, that the cause of Liberty is in danger of being misdirected or harmed in their hands. In a word, it did Mr. Adams and some other New England men great good to come to the Pittsburg Convention.

As I have already virtually said, the immense "mass Convention," as it was called, was prepared to plant itself on the high ground of the Liberty Party - was, indeed, already on that ground. But the Convention proper, being a selection from the masses, contained, as was natural, a greater relative amount of wariness and timidity. Nevertheless had the Convention proper, instead of appointing a Committee to prepare a platform, prepared it without such intervention, I have no doubt, that the platform would have been distinctly and fully that of the Liberty Party. But this Committee, being a selection from the select, was still more characterized than even the Convention proper by wariness and timidity. Indeed, I have, scarcely, a doubt, that, had this Convention continued another day, its platform would have been nearly all, that we could desire. What rapid progress the Convention made in the Session of the last afternoon! In that Session, it struck out the most offensive of all of those wretched Resolutions, which contain limitations and implications against Liberty. In that Session, it came very near adopting Mr. Tappan's Resolution, the adoption of which would have nullified all those limitations and implications. And it was in that Session, that the Convention adopted so enthusiastically, and with but three dissenting voices, the glorious Resolution in favor of Land Reform - that Reform, which is emphatically the own sister of the Abolition Reform.

I came to the Convention with the purpose of insisting on but two things; and I adhered to my purpose. These two things are

1st. That the Convention should organize a permanent party - and, therefore, a party, which should be as comprehensive in its scope, as is civil government itself - and, therefore, a party, which should look after all the political interests of all the people, white and black, male and female.

2d. That the Convention should declare slavery to be utterly incapable of legalization.

On these two things I insisted, both in the Committee and in the Convention. Four members of the Committee were with me: and I must do the dozen, who opposed us, the justice to say, that several of them evidently believed, that the two things, which I insisted on, were in their own series of Resolutions, and were expressed in better language there than in my series. Indeed, I firmly believe, that the Convention would not have adopted the platform, which they did adopt, had they not judged, that these two things were substantially in it.

Perhaps, the two things, on which I insisted, are in the platform. I will not say, that they are not. But, if they are, they are, nevertheless, obscurely expressed, and that, too, whilst things to the contrary of them are in it, and are clearly expressed; or, if not clearly expressed, nevertheless clearly implied. Who can read the platform, and deny, that its clear implication is, that slavery in the States has not only a legal existence, but a legal existence, which is permitted by the Federal Constitution. Indeed, the platform goes so far as to admit, by clear implication, that a State Government is at liberty, so far as the Federal Constitution is concerned, to deprive persons "of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

It was said in the Convention, and with manifest influence, that my phrases: "slavery is incapable of legalization," "slavery cannot be legalized," &c. &c., are absurd. Indeed, more than once or twice, I was kindly told, out of the Convention, that, if I were not in the habit of expressing myself so obscurely and unintelligibly on this and kindred points, I should be able to bring more persons to adopt my views. But, it seems to me, that this logic, which had so much effect

- 2 -

on the Convention, is of that circular kind, which, though apt to be very - plausible and effectual, is, nevertheless, very unsound. This logic ran after this manner: "For Mr. Smith to say, that slavery cannot be legalized, is nonsensical and absurd. Virginia has laws for slavery. They may be unjust laws. But there they are, outstanding and fixed facts, the existence of which is not to be disputed." The circular logicians, having assumed in this case the very thing to be proved, viz., that what they called laws are laws, obtained, at least in their own esteem, a very quick and easy victory over me. My answer to them was, for substance: "Not only is every unconstitutional enactment among the Statutes of Virginia no law, but every enactment among them, whether it does or does not accord with the constitution, is also no law, provided its purport and object are such, as transcend the limits and powers of human legislation. For instance, the authorizing men to murder men, or, what is worse, the authorizing men to enslave men, transcends such limits and powers, and hence all enactments to these ends are void, and no law. It is for the like reason that a 'sumptuary law' is but a nominal law, and is, in strictness, no law. We are all prepared to say, that enactments prescribing what, we shall eat, drink, and wear, are no law. But the reason, why they are no law, is simply because the legislature has got beyond, its province, when it presumes to meddle with such subjects. And thus might we argue, in respect to enactments, which should presume to prescribe the intercourse and endearments between parent and child."

I said, that we are all prepared to treat a sumptuary law as no law. How grossly inconsistent are we then - nay, how grossly wicked - when we accord to an enactment for slavery the name, dignity, and sanction of law!

To help me understand myself; these, my instructors in logic, would kindly put words into my mouth, and say "We understand you, Mr. Smith. What you mean, and all what you mean, is, that these laws for slavery are unjust laws. We, also, believe them to be unjust laws; and, hence, we are, really, together." But I was too obtuse to receive this their kind interpretation of myself; and, therefore, I would, over and over again, explain, or try to explain, the difference between an enactment, which I call no law, and an enactment, which I am willing to call but an unjust law. I would say, that an enactment, fixing the rate of interest as high as fifteen per cent. per annum, is an unjust law - but that it is not to be treated as no law. It is an enactment, which should be repealed or modified; but it should not, like an enactment for murder or slavery, be trampled under foot, and treated as no law. So, too, in respect to an unwise enactment for regulating travel. The matter of regulating travel, as well as that of regulating interest, comes within the field of human legislation; and hence, an enactment regarding it is not to be treated and trampled upon, as is an enactment for murder or slavery.

I would here throw out the remark, that few persons seem to have considered how very narrow is the field of human legislation, and how very far it falls short of being commensurate with the whole field of human interests, relations and obligations. It is the want of such consideration, that exposes us and many another people to be ruined by legislative usurpation and despotism.

But, notwithstanding all the fault I have found with the platform of the Free Democracy, I, nevertheless, regard myself as a member of that party. It is a good party - and it will, rapidly, grow better. Do you fear, that it will break up and disgrace itself; as did the Free Soil party? You need not fear it. Low as was the platform of that party, the party itself (or, at least, a large share of it) was far lower. But the Free Democracy is as much higher than its own platform, as that platform is higher than the platform of the Free Soil party. Hence, "Excelsior" will be most emphatically the fit motto of the Free Democracy.

Not one year should be allowed to pass away - no, nor half one year - before the platform of the Free Democracy, which, in truth, is not its platform, but only the platform of the Pittsburg Convention, and, that too, the little, instead of the big Convention, should be so modified, as distinctly to meet all the demands of truth. Alas, what a pity, that this platform is not now such, as to teach the slaveholder, in bold and unmistakeable terms, that one of the aims of the Fred Democracy is to strip him and his "peculiar institution" of the covering, and sanction, and respectability of law, and to hold up to the loathing and execration of the world a naked pirate in the one and a naked piracy in the other - a pirate and a piracy too, that far outstrip all others in atrocity and mischief! Such an exposure would work the speedy death of slavery: and, without such an exposure, it will never die, until it shall die in violence and blood.

But warm, as are my hopes of the well-doing of the Free Democracy, they may, nevertheless, be blasted: and, hence, I cannot advise the disbanding of the Liberty Party. The next meeting of the Liberty Party is to be Wednesday, the last day of September. It should be numerously attended. Whilst I hope, that the meeting will not array itself against, but will, oil the contrary, resolve to act with, the Free Democracy, at least for the present - I also hope, that it will advise the Liberty Party - to continue its organization, until such time, as the Free Democracy shall have distinctly and fully covered the ground of the Liberty Party.

Of course, I did not vote for the Pittsburg platform. I can never vote for it until it shall boldly and distinctly utter the great truth, that the Free Democracy aims to bring under its impartial regard all the political interests of all classes of the people; and also the other great truth, that slavery, which is the most atrocious and abominable of all the forms of piracy, can never be known as law.

Nor did I vote in the Convention, for Mr. Hale and Mr. Julian. I voted for those true and tried men, William Goodell and James H. Collins. Nevertheless, I hope to find myself able to vote, at the Election, for Mr. Hale and Mr. Julian, both of whom are beloved in private life, and both of whom have honorably distinguished themselves in public life. I cannot doubt, that Mr. Julian scouts the idea of the possible legalization of slavery: and, in the Boston rescue trials, Mr. Hale scouted it. Is it said, that it was only in rhetorical flourishes, that he did so? I answer, that, I trust, that Mr. Hale will, ere the Election, make it indisputably manifest, that he is established in the principle, that there can no more be a human, than a divine, law for converting a mail into a thing; and that to recognize, and dignify, as law the enactment, which attempts such a conversion, is a high crime against both God and man.

GERITT SMITH.