Thoughts on African Colonization. Garrison William Lloyd
them, I am willing to be covered with reproach.'
The following is copied from an editorial article of July 9, 1831:
'The superstructure of the Colonization Society rests upon the following pillars:
'1st. Persecution. It declares that the whole colored population must be removed to Africa; but as the free portion are almost unanimously opposed to a removal, it seems to be the determination of the Society to make their situations so uncomfortable and degraded here, as to compel them to migrate: consequently it discourages their education and improvement in this their native home. This is persecution.
'2d. Falsehood. It stigmatises our colored citizens as being natives of Africa, and talks of sending them to their native land; when they are no more related to Africa than we are to Great Britain.
'3d. Cowardice. It avows as a prominent reason why colored citizens ought to be removed, that their continuance among us will be dangerous to us as a people! This is a libel upon their character. Instead of demanding justice for this oppressed class, the Society calls for their removal!
'4th. Infidelity. It boldly denies that there is power enough in the gospel to melt down the prejudices of men, and insists, that, so long as the people of color remain among us, we must be their enemies!– Every honest man should abhor the doctrine.'
In 'The Liberator' of July 30, 1831, alluding to the present work, I used the following language:
'I shall be willing to stake my reputation upon it for honesty, prudence, benevolence, truth and sagacity. If I do not prove the Colonization Society to be a creature without heart, without brains, eyeless, unnatural, hypocritical, relentless, unjust, then nothing is capable of demonstration – then let me be covered with confusion of face.'
The following paragraph is extracted from 'The Liberator' of November 19, 1831:
'It is the enemy of immediate restitution to the slaves; it courts and receives the approbation of notorious slave owners; it deprecates any interference with slave property; it discourages the improvement of the colored population, except they are removed to the shores of Africa; it is lulling the country into a fatal sleep, pretending to be something when it is nothing; it is utterly chimerical, as well as intolerant, in its design; it serves to increase the value of the slaves, and to make brisk the foreign and domestic slave trade; it nourishes and justifies the most cruel prejudices against color; it sneers at those who advocate the bestowal of equal rights upon our colored countrymen; it contends for an indefinite, dilatory, far-off emancipation; it expressly declares that it is more humane to keep the slaves in chains, than to give them freedom in this country! In short, it is the most compendious and best adapted scheme to uphold the slave system that human ingenuity can invent. Moreover, it is utterly and irreconcileably opposed to the wishes and sentiments of the great body of the free people of color, repeatedly expressed in the most public manner, but cruelly disregarded by it.'
The following passages are taken from my Address to the People of Color, delivered in various places in June, 1831:
'Let me briefly examine the doctrines of colonizationists. They generally agree in publishing the misstatement, that you are strangers and foreigners. Surely they know better. They know, that, as a body, you are no more natives of Africa, than they themselves are natives of Great Britain. Yet they repeat the absurd charge; and they do so, in order to cover their anti-republican crusade. But suppose you were foreigners: would such an accident justify this persecution and removal? And, if so, then all foreigners must come under the same ban, and must prepare to depart. There would be, in that case, a most alarming deduction from our population. Suppose a philanthropic and religious crusade were got up against the Dutch, the French, the Swiss, the Irish, among us, to remove them to New Holland, to enlighten and civilize her cannibals? Who would not laugh at the scheme – who would not actively oppose it? Would any one blame the above classes for steadfastly resisting it? Just so, then, in regard to African colonization. But our colored population are not aliens; they were born on our soil; they are bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh; their fathers fought bravely to achieve our independence during the revolutionary war, without immediate or subsequent compensation; they spilt their blood freely during the last war; they are entitled, in fact, to every inch of our southern, and much of our western territory, having worn themselves out in its cultivation, and received nothing but wounds and bruises in return. Are these the men to stigmatize as foreigners?
'Colonizationists generally agree in asserting that the people of color cannot be elevated in this country, nor be admitted to equal privileges with the whites. Is not this a libel upon humanity and justice – a libel upon republicanism – a libel upon the Declaration of Independence – a libel upon christianity? "All men are born equal, and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights – among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." What is the meaning of that declaration? That all men possess these rights – whether they are six feet five inches high, or three feet two and a half – whether they weigh three hundred or one hundred pounds – whether they parade in broadcloth or flutter in rags – whether their skins are jet black or lily white – whether their hair is straight or woolly, auburn or red, black or gray – does it not? We, who are present, differ from each other in our looks, in our color, in height, and in bulk; we have all shades, and aspects, and sizes. Now, would it not be anti-republican and anti-christian for us to quarrel about sitting on this seat or that, because this man's complexion is too dark, or that man's looks are too ugly? and to put others out of the house, because they happen to be ignorant, or poor, or helpless? To commit this violence would be evidently wrong: then to do it in a large assemblage – in a community, in a state, or in a nation, it is equally unjust. But is not this the colonization principle? Who are the individuals that applaud, that justify, that advocate this exclusion? Who are they that venture to tell the American people, that they have neither honesty enough, nor patriotism enough, nor morality enough, nor religion enough, to treat their colored brethren as countrymen and citizens? Some of them – I am sorry to say – are professedly ministers of the gospel; others are christian professors; others are judges and lawyers; others are our Senators and Representatives; others are editors of newspapers. These ministers and christians dishonor the gospel which they profess; these judges and lawyers are the men spoken of by the Saviour, who bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. These Senators and Representatives ought not to receive the suffrages of the people. These editors are unworthy of public patronage.
'Colonizationists too generally agree in discouraging your instruction and elevation at home. They pretend that ignorance is bliss; and therefore 'tis folly to be wise. They pretend that knowledge is a dangerous thing in the head of a colored man; they pretend that you have no ambition; they pretend that you have no brains; in fine, they pretend a thousand other absurd things – they are a combination of pretences. What tyranny is this! Shutting up the human intellect – binding with chains the inward man – and perpetuating ignorance. May we not address them in the language of Christ? "Wo unto you, scribes and pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in! Ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy and faith."
'Colonizationists generally agree in apologising for the crime of slavery. They get behind the contemptible subterfuge, that it was entailed upon the planters. As if the continuance of the horrid system were not criminal! as if the robberies of another generation justify the robberies of the present! as if the slaves had not an inalienable right to freedom! as if slavery were not an individual as well as a national crime! as if the tearing asunder families, limb from limb, – branding the flesh with red hot irons, – mangling the body with whips and knives, – feeding it on husks and clothing it with rags, – crushing the intellect and destroying the soul, – as if such inconceivable cruelty were not chargeable to those who inflict it!
'As to the effect of colonization upon slavery, it is rather favorable than injurious to the system. Now and then, indeed, there is a great flourish of trumpets, and glowing accounts of the willingness of planters to emancipate their slaves on condition of transportation to Africa.