Since mobs became so common in our land, I have thought much of what the victims of popular fury should do when thus attacked. Our Lord often escaped before the fulness of time was come for hini to offer up his life upon the cross; but let us remember, he never raised his arm against his foes; although he knew that the Jews went about to kill him, and that there was no safety for him, and no defence in Judea, either in the laws or the protecting ægis of public sentiment,' yet he never armed himself in self-defence, neither did he ever appeal to the civil authorities for protection. It appears, then, very plain to me, that if an abolitionist cannot escape from a mob without violence, as a Christian he may be assured that the time has come for him to surrender himself a willing and unresisting sacrifice upon the altar of Christian liberty.

"I said that Jesus never armed himself in self-defence-O no! He had too much moral courage. The very fact that a man arms himself, and determines to resist violence, shows that he is afraid of that violence: if he is not afraid of it, why does he resolve to ward it off by physical force? I wish this sentiment were better understood. I wish that men would reflect upon it. If they did, I am sure they would see that true moral courage walks abroad in the midst of enemies unarmed, unprotected by civil authority, undaunted by threats and violence. This was the courage of Christ, and of Stephen, and of Paul, and of a host of Christian martyrs. And I earnestly desire that THIS may be the courage of all abolitionists. O, that we may never be called to mourn over such another martyr to the glorious principles of universal liberty, as we have in the fallen Lovejoy!"

Miss Grimke makes a touching allusion to Mrs. Lovejoy's frantic heroism in clinging at St. Charles around her husband's neck, and beating off the daggers of his assailants; but she strongly condemns her resort to violence as a dangerous precedent. "I should have said nothing on this part of the subject," she remarks, "if the conduct of our sister had not been held up to view as worthy of imitation. Nothing-had I not feared that others, seeing her thus praised, might be induced to follow her example; for indeed we know not what woman may next be called to witness a similar scene. Instead, then, of smiting the mobocrats in their faces, let her either surrender herself to them, to suffer with her husband, if she feels the sacrifice to be called for, or let her follow him afar off, as did the mother of our Lord. If we want to see an example of true moral greatness in woman, under the most appalling circumstances, let us look at Mary standing by the cross of her beloved son, in perfect silence, in holy resignation. Let us watch her countenance as he was extended on the cross, and nail after nail was driven into his hands and feet. Is there not inexpressible agony of feeling depicted there? See we not that in those fearful moments, a sword was piercing through her own soul also? O, what should we think of her, had she in a phrenzy of despair rushed upon the soldiers, and attempted to hinder them in their horrid work, by smiting them in their faces, and clinging round her precious son? Where would have been her diguity, her inoral courage, her holy resignation, her Christian greatness? And what would Jesus have said at such interference? The cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it? Let the wives, the mothers, the sisters, the daughters of abolitionists, pray for the spirit of Mary, and then will they be enabled to meet

the violence of mobs in such a way as shall exalt the character of woman, sustain man in the dark hour of temptation and peril, and glorify God by obedience to his holy commands, and submission to the events which are permitted in his providence.

"I feel as though God had permitted these things for our instruction; and that the lesson he designed to teach abolitionists was, that when there is no safety for them, no defence either in the laws or the protecting ægis of public sentiment, unarmed, there is none in the use of carnal weapons; that there is no such thing as trusting in God and pistols at the same time; and that if life is to be sacrificed, it had better be surrendered as Stephen surrendered his."

DR. CHANNING'S REMONSTRANCE, IN HIS LETTER TO ABOLITIONISTS. "You well know, that I have not been satisfied with all your modes of operation. I have particularly made objections to the organization and union of numerous and wide-spread societies for the subversion of slavery. I have believed, however, that many of the dangerous tendencies of such an association would be obviated by your adoption of what is called 'the peace principle; in other words, by your unwillingness to use physical force for self-defence. To this feature of your Society, I have looked as a pledge, that your zeal, even if it should prove excessive, would not work much harm. You can judge, then, of the sorrow with which I heard of the tragedy of Alton, where one of your respected brethren fell with arms in his hands. I felt, indeed, that his course was justified by the laws of his country, and by the established opinions and practice of the civilized world. I felt, too, that the violence, under which he fell, regarded as an assault on the press and our dearest rights, deserved the same reprobation from the friends of free institutions, as if he had fallen an unresisting victim. But I felt that a cloud had gathered over your Society, and that a dangerous precedent had been given in the cause of humanity. So strong was this impression, that` whilst this event found its way into other pulpits, I was unwilling to make it the topic of a religious discourse, but preferred to express my reprobation of it in another place, where it would be viewed only in its bearings on civil and political rights. My hope was that the members of your Society, whilst they would do honor to the fearless spirit of your fallen brother, would still, with one loud voice, proclaim their disapprobation of his last act, and their sorrow that through him a cause of philanthropy had been stained with blood. In this, I am sorry to say that I have been disappointed. I have seen, indeed, no justification of the act. I have seen a few disapproving sentences, but no such clear and general testimony against this error of the lamented Lovejoy, as is needed to give assurance against its repetition. I have missed the true tone in the Emancipator,' the organ of your National Society. I account for this silence, by your strong sympathy with your slaughtered friend, and by your feeling as if one, who had so generously given himself to the cause, deserved nothing but praise. Allow me to say, that here you err. The individual is nothing, in comparison with the truth. Bring out the truth, suffer who may. The fact, that a good man has fallen through a mistaken conception of duty, makes it more necessary to expose the error. Death, courageously met in a good cause by a respected friend, may throw a false lustre over dangerous principles

VOL. II.-NO. VII.

6*

which were joined with his virtues. Besides, we do not dishonor a friend, in acknowledging him to have erred. The best men err. The most honored defenders of religion and virtue have sometimes been impelled, by the very fervor which made them great, into rash courses. I regret, then, that your disapprobation of Mr. Lovejoy's resistance to force has not been as earnest, as your grateful acknowledgments of his self-consecration to a holy cause.

"By these remarks, I do not mean, that I have adopted the peace principle' to the full extent of my late venerated friend, Dr. Worcester, whose spirit, were he living, would be bowed down by the sad story of Alton. I do not say, that a man may in no case defend himself by force. But, it may be laid down as a rule, hardly admitting an exception, that an enterprise of Christian philanthropy is not to be carried on by force; that it is time for philanthropy to stop when it can only advance by wading through blood. If God does not allow us to forward a work of love without fighting for it, the presumption is exceedingly strong, that it is not the work which he has given us to do. Is it asked, how such a cause, if assailed, is to be advanced? I answer, by appeals to the laws, and by appeals to the moral sentiment and the moral sympathies of the community. I answer, by resolute patience and heroic suffering. If patience and suffering, if truth and love, will not touch a community,certainly violence will avail nothing. What! shall men, whose starting-point is the love of every human being, hope to make their way by slaughter? Shall a cause, which relies on the inculcation of the disinterested spirit of Christianity as its main instrument, seek aid in deadly weapons? Are we not shocked by this incongruity of means and ends? What fellowship has moral suasion with brute force? What concord between the report of the rifle and the teachings of philanthropy?

"Nothing is plainer than that Mr. Lovejoy, had he succeeded in his defence, could not have accomplished his purpose, but would have placed him in a position more unfavorable to doing good than before. Suppose him, by a sustained and well-directed fire, to have repelled his assailants. Would he have planted his press in Alton? The following morning would have revealed the street strewn with dead bodies. Relatives, friends, the whole people of the surrounding country, would have rushed to the spot. What rage would have boiled in a thousand breasts! What vows of vengeance would have broken from a thousand lips! The men, one and all who had been engaged in the defence of the press, would probably have been torn limb from limb at the moment. If not, assassinations would have dogged them night and day; and we should have been startled with successive reports of murders, till the last victim had fallen. Or suppose Mr. Lovejoy to have fled with hands stained with blood; could he have preached with success the doctrines of love? Would not that horrible night have been associated with all his future labors? Happy was it for himself, happy for your cause, that under such circumstances he fell. I beg that this language may not be so construed, as if I question the moral or religious worth of Mr. Lovejoy. I know nothing of him but good, except his last error; and that error does not amaze me. That a man hunted by ferocious foes, threatened with indignities to his person, and with death; and at the same time conscious of the greatness of his work, conscious that civil rights, as well as the interests of the oppressed, were involved in his decision; that a man, so tried, should fail in judgment,

we need not wonder. He knew that the constitution and laws were on his side. He knew that the prevalent construction of the precepts of Christ, which gives a wide range to self-defence, was on his side. We can easily comprehend, how a good man, so placed, should have erred. I believe in his purpose to do and suffer for great truths and man's dearest rights. God forbid that I should give the slightest countenance to the scoffs of men, who, had he fallen on their side, would have lauded him to the skies.

"It seems to me of great importance, that you should steadily disavow this resort to force by Mr. Lovejoy. There are peculiar reasons for it. Your position in our country is peculiar, and makes it important that you should be viewed as incapable of resorting to violent means. You are a large and growing party, and are possessed with a fervent zeal, such as has been unknown since the beginning of our revolutionary conflict. At the same time, you are distrusted, and, still more, hated by a multitude of your fellow-citizens. Here, then, are the elements of deadly strife. From masses so hostile, so inflamed, there is reason to fear tumults, conflicts, bloodshed. What is it which has prevented these sad results in the past, in the days of your weakness. Your forbearance; your unwillingness to meet force by force. Had you adopted the means of defence, which any other party, so persecuted would have chosen, our streets might again and again have flowed with blood. Society might have been shaken by the conflict. If, now, in your strength, you take the sword, and repay blow with blow, what is not to be feared? It is one of the objections to great associations, that they accumulate a power, which, in seasons of excitement and exasperation, threatens public commotions, and which may even turn our country into a field of battle. I say, then, that if you choose to organize so vast a force for a cause which awakens fierce passions, you must adopt the peace principle' as your inviolable rule. You must trust in the laws and in the moral sympathies of the community. You must try the power of suffering for truth. The first Christians tried this among communities more ferocious than our own. You have yourselves tried it, and through it have made rapid progress. To desert it might be to plunge the country into fearful contests and to rob your cause of all its sanctity."

We like much the general drift of this remonstrance; but we think Mr. Garrison's strictures on one part of it very just and forcible. "Is it consistent," he asks, "for a man who rejects the doctrine of non-resistance, to enforce it as a religious duty upon others most exposed to peril, suffering and lawless outrages? There is a beam in his own eye-a mote only in theirs. He observes, ‘I do not say that a man may in no case defend himself by force; but it is time for philanthropy to stop, when it can advance only by wading through blood.' The theory, then, is this: a cause which is not benevolent, will authorize the shedding of blood without guilt, that which is, will not; so that, if I kill a robber merely for my own preservation, I do well; but, if I lay down my life in defence of liberty, the rights of man, and the cause of God, all must be shocked by this incongruity of means and ends! If men may fight at all, may they not fight for that which is most valuable?"

LITERARY NOTICES.

1. CONGRESS OF NATIONS. Doings of the Legislature of Massachusetts on the subject, during the sessions of 1837 and 1838.

THE project for a Congress of Nations was brought last winter before the Legislature of Maine, with a result prospectively favorable to the object. The same subject has been, for several years in succession, before our own Legislature; and every committee upon it has made an able report, and proposed resolves in furtherance of the scheme; but no action was taken or tried, until the last session, when the strong resolves, here with published, were passed, unanimously in the House, and with only two dissenting votes in the Senate; a very decided expression of public opinion in favor of the measure.

We can quote only a small part of the lucid and eloquent reasoning of the joint committees. The following statement will give some idea of what has already been done on this subject:

"It appears, from well authenticated facts, and many printed and written documents, presented by the memorialists to the Committee, that there has been a very wide and full expression of sentiment from all classes of the community, without distinction of party, sect or profession, in favor of the measures now in contemplation in reference to a Congress or Court of Nations, for the amicable adjustment of international disputes. Among those who have given their signatures in favor of the proposition, your Committee find the names of a great number of individuals of the highest rank in regard to social, intellectual, moral, political, and religious attainment. Among them are some of those who have filled the highest executive and judicial offices of this Commonwealth and of other States; many of the most eminent of our counsellors and statesmen; the clergy, the most intelligent merchants, manufacturers, mechanics, and farmers; also masters of vessels appear to have come forward in bodies to enrol their names in favor of this cause. In our colleges, academies, and public and private schools, its reception appears to have been equally favorable; presidents, professors, tutors, instructers, and the students of the higher classes uniting in its support; in furtherance of which, it appears, peace societies have recently been formed by the associated instructers and students at many of our colleges and literary institutions; and orations and other exercises on this topic have been assigned at commencement, and on other occasions; and, in some cases, prizes are statedly assigned, and medals are awarded for the best dissertations and poems on the subject of peace, and of arbitration as a substitute for an appeal to arms. Very many and strongly expressed resolves have been passed with perfect unanimity in a number of ecclesiastical and lay conventions, associations, conferences, and other meetings. Indeed, so very favorably has this cause been received by the community at large, it appears there are about a thousand clergymen in the New England, Middle, Western and Southern States, who have given their names, pledging themselves to preach at least one sermon every year on this subject; and it is introduced in lyceum lectures and discussions, and made an object of attention in Bible classes, and in the course of instruction in Sabbath schools. Many of the most popular and talented authors have proffered their services in the promotion of this cause; and Sabbath school books, and books for other schools and academies, and some works of a still higher class, having reference to its promotion, have been published, as is shown by the memorialists, not only in