35
sought the emancipation of the slaves: that they might enter into some enjoyment, however limited, of their hitherto despised manhood. But his vision went further, his insight deeper; he knew and said that as an institution slavery could never keep fellowship with democracy, not even with aristocracy, in the true meaning of the word; its only companion piece in the State must be oligarchy, with all the tyranny that term implies, and the consequent division and jangling which must follow. The black man must have his rights, that the white may keep his; that was his cry, and in a high sense it was his own, because he said it better and louder, and more convincingly, than the rest of his fellows. [Applause.]
Again, you will see how bold the man was, even then
scorning expediency, laughing at the fetich of manifest
destiny, that watchword of those who shirk responsibility
and of the self-seeking. There is a moral courage
which resides in men whose physical courage is but
small. Our guest, however, had both in the highest
degree, like the other great protagonists of the
anti-slavery struggle. The son of a Presbyterian clergyman,
who was proud of the glorious inconsistency that he was
also a Garrisonian abolishtionist, would that I could
recall for you the horrors of that sad time. To
champion the slave meant social ostracism, to be pointed at
with the finger, to be pelted with opprobrious epithets,
to be a victim of riot and murder. These are no imaginings,
for with many others in this room, my ears
have heard, my eyes have seen, my heart has been
wrung, mere boy as I was at the time. Without the
scene thus clear before your imagination, you cannot
