Mr. Thompson at Lynn, published June 13, 1835

[From the Lynn Record,]

This distinguished young friend and disciple of Wilberforce, and justly celebrated orator, who has been repeatedly invited by the Anti-Slavery Society of this town, arrived on Saturday afternoon last, and was received with great satisfaction and delight. The society had a meeting on business, at the Town Hall, at the close of which, Mr. Thompson addressed a large crowded assembly of people, ladies and gentlemen, nearly two hours, in a strain of eloquence and power, quite beyond any thing we ever heard, and equally beyond our power to describe. All were held, as if by enchantment, to the close. It would be difficult to decide in which he most excelled, matter or manner. He took a comprehensive and varied view of the enormous injustice and evil of slavery, and brought up and considered the most prominent and popular objections to the plan of immediate abolition, and exposed their hypocrisy and absurdity in his own peculiar and effectual manner of cutting sarcasm. The effect was evidently great.

After Mr. Thompson had closed, a stern Pharisaical looking man, who had been sitting near the speaker, announcing himself as a preacher of the Gospel, from the South, desired the privilege of putting a few questions to Mr. Thompson, which was readily granted, and the questions as readily answered, to the satisfaction of the audience generally. The object of the stranger was to cavil and carp at what had been said. But the tables were adroitly turned upon the poor man, in a manner least expected, and most mortifying to him. One of the questions, in substance at least, was—‘Do you consider every slaveholder a thief?’ ‘I consider every person who holds and claims the right of holding his fellow being, as property, A MAN STEALER.’

After several questions, captious in their nature, had been asked and answered, Mr. Thompson turned upon his assailant, ‘If you have now done, sir, I, in turn, should like to ask you a few questions.’

‘Do you consider slavery a sin?’

‘I consider slavery a moral evil.’

‘Do you consider slavery a sin?’

‘I do consider slavery a sin.’

‘Is the marriage of slaves legal in the Southern States?’

‘It is legalized in Maryland.’

‘Can the Slaveholder, by the laws of Maryland, separate husband and wife?’

‘He can,’ &c. &c.

The gentleman stranger, (who is said to belong to Springfield in this state, formerly from the South) appealed to the people, but finally withdrew his appeal, and declared himself ‘satisfied.’ Whether satisfied or not, we believe he had as much as he could digest, and as much as he could swallow, including the question and answer system.

On Sunday evening, Mr. Thompson delivered a lecture on Slavery, in a religious view, as opposed to the doctrines of the Bible. The meeting-house (Rev. Mr. Peabody's) was much crowded, and many went away unable to gain admittance.

On Monday evening, Mr. Thompson lectured on the sin of slavery, before a newly formed ‘Anti-Slavery Society, of the New England Conference of Methodist Episcopal Ministers, consisting of about 60 or 70 Ministers—(a glorious phalanx!) at the South street Methodist meetinghouse. The house was well filled; but owing to a misunderstanding by many, that the lecture was to be delivered at the Woodend Meeting-house, (which was otherwise engaged) all who went were enabled to get in. The lecture was a powerful and splendid production both in argument and in manner of delivery.

On Tuesday evening, Mr. Thompson lectured at the Friend’s meeting-house, which is very large, and was thoroughly filled. He was assisted by Rev. A. A. Phelps, one of the public Agents of the Society, whose address was able, and well received. Mr. Garrison and several other friends of the cause, from Boston and Salem, were present. Mr. T. took occasion to glance at the past history and conduct of the Friends in regard to slavery, the lively interest they had taken in the cause of the oppressed, and the liberal contributions they had made; and exhorted to a continuance in the ways of well doing.

There may be men in our own country of more learning and more depth of mind, and strength of reasoning, than Mr. Thompson, though, we think, rarely to be found; but for readiness and skill in debate, and splendor of eloquence, as an orator, we believe he stands unrivalled. His amiableness, mildness of temper, urbanity, and blandness of manners and deportment, are adapted to win the love and affection of all, who are honored with his acquaintance. That the haughty, and the envious, should whisper their malignant hints that something evil is lurking about his character, is no more than may be naturally expected; though they are most fully and satisfactorily refuted by his numerous and honorable testimonials of respect which we have seen, from benevolent societies and individuals in England, where he is well known. These all breathe the warm friendship and esteem which goodness and greatness of soul alone can inspire.

The independence of mind which Mr. Thompson possesses, is one of the most striking and important traits in his excellent character. He shrinks from nothing. He is ready to attack sin and wickedness in every shape—in high or low places: and his thrusts never miss—never fail of effect.

The name of ‘Mr. George Thompson’ was often associated in the public journals, with distinguished orators and philanthropists, at the various public meetings of benevolent societies in England, long before he embarked for this country. He was there ranked among the most able and popular orators. But here, in this country, there are certain would-be great men, who dare not meet Mr. Thompson in the open field, who vent their pitiful malice, and strive to induce others to treat him with that neglect, to which themselves are so well entitled; because he brings out and exposes to the light of day their works of darkness.

‘He is a foreigner—he has no right to come here interfering with our laws, our customs, and our private rights.’

Very fine, indeed! Capital! Who has a right to interfere, or say a word, if a man murders his wife and children, or sells them into bondage? It was all his own family concern. Who has a right to express an opinion of the Turks, when oppressing, starving, and murdering the Greeks, not only men, but helpless women and children : Who has a right to express an opinion against the Russians for similar conduct toward the Poles, under similar circumstances, as the latter were the vassals of the former, in both cases? Who has a right to send Gospel missionaries abroad among the benighted heathen, groping in darkness, in order to instruct and enlighten them in the way of truth? WE—we, the American people, the ‘sons of liberty,’ claim the right, and exercise it too; without once being asked, why do ye so We, the American people, claim and exercise the right, when the laws of God— the eternal laws of truth and justice, and humanity, are broken, to expose the sin, and to ‘reprove, rebuke and exhort the transgressor.

‘But slavery was brought to our shores and entailed on us by England, against our consent, when we were under her government; and now shall England send men here to complain of the injustice and cruelty of the act, when we should be glad to get rid of the evil, but cannot?’

Reason answers, Yes. If England did wrong, and afterward saw the evil, repented, and brought forth fruits meet for repentance, by liberating all their own slaves, was it not right—was it not a christian duty, to extend their acts of kindness to us also, whom they had led into error; to tell us what they had done, and how they did it ; and to aid and assist us to get out of the difficulty ? The law of God is universal. The law of Christians—the law of love, is universal; and requires the subjects of that law to oppose and expose sin and oppression wherever they are found. We send Ministers, political, religious, and masonic, to England and other places—to co-operate—to ask and give assistance, and mutually to benefit each other. But what can we, in the Northern States do? We can say, slavery is ‘a sin.’ We can enlighten public sentiment on the subject, and cause the sin of slavery—the greatest sin in the world, to become odious: and public sentiment in this country has the force of law, to correct any evil.

To assist us in these labors of love, Mr. Thompson has been sent among us, by the friends of humanity in England; and a most efficient and powerful co-worker he is, sweeping away the refuges of lies, and carrying his principles as a mighty sweeping torrent, wherever he goes. The advocates of slavery fear and hate him, the humane and philanthropic love him, and all respect and admire his talents, whatever they may pretend.

Mr. Thompson possesses all the requisites of an impressive and powerful orator—a fund of acquired knowledge, a brilliant imagination, natural pathos, a powerful voice, an elegant form, graceful gesticulation, a countenance capable of expressing any passion or emotion, and lastly, the most important of all, a benevolent heart—an expansive soul.

SOURCES: Isaac Knapp, Publisher, Letters and Addresses by G. Thompson [on American Negro Slavery] During His Mission in the United States, From Oct. 1st, 1834, to Nov. 27, 1835, p. 88-92; “Mr. Thompson at Lynn,” The Liberator, Boston, Massachusetts, Saturday, June 13, 1835, p. 3.

Important Meeting., between April 9 & 11, 1835

A meeting of a peculiarly solemn and interesting character was held on Thursday evening, April 2, in the Hall, corner of Broomfield and Tremont streets, in Boston. It was composed exclusively of members of various Christian churches, and convened for the purpose of considering the propriety of forming a Union among professing Christians, with a view to the action of churches as such upon the question of slavery.

The Hall was crowded to overflowing. Among those resent, we noticed the Rev. Messrs. Hague, Stow, Wells, Himes, Thrasher, S. J. May, Amasa Walker, Esq. S. E. Sewall, Esq. and Mr. Geo. Thompson. At a quarter before eight, the meeting was called to order by deacon Sullivan; and the Rev. Baron Stow was unanimously elected Moderator; Mr. Hayward was appointed Clerk of the meeting. After a few introductory remarks, the moderator called upon Mr. George Thompson to open the meeting with prayer.

After remarks from the Rev. Messrs. Himes, Thrasher and Wells, Mr. THOMPSON observed, that when it was his privilege to meet with christian minded men, who were devotedly attached to the work of abolition, he felt, even when their number was comparatively insignificant, that his heart was more elated, and his hopes of a speedy, peaceful, and righteous triumph were higher and brighter, than when he stood in the midst of thousands whose minds were not moved and sustained by the principles derived from a recognition of God, and a zeal for His glory. He regarded, with feelings of indescribable delight, the assembly before him. It showed the deep and hallowed interest which the cause of abolition had excited. The question was, — Ought the members of christian churches to organize a union upon the subject of Slavery His reply to that question was, —Yes! The union is desirable. It is proper — it is important — it is indispensable — it is is overwhelmingly imperative. The inquiry had been started, what has the church to do with slavery The answer was — Every thing. The honor, the purity, the usefulness, the glory, nay, the very existence of the church was concerned. The churches at the south had to do with slavery. Slavery was upheld by the churches. Essentially wicked, it had no self-sustaining energy. Were the sanction and participation of otherwise good men withdrawn, it would be condemned and annihilated with the common consent of mankind. The Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, Congregationalists, and some other minor denominations of Christians were at the present time the pillars of the hateful fabric. Hundreds of ministers were slaveholders. Thousands of professing christians were slaveholders. The minister of Christ was paid out of the hire of the laborer, kept back by fraud. Church property frequently consisted of slaves. There were many human beings, who, when asked by whom they were owned, replied — By the congregation? The followers of Christ buying, branding, bartering, toiling, and debasing God's image, and God's poor daily robbed to support the ordinances of a just and equal God, who hath made of one blood all nations of men In view of these things would it be said, the churches had nothing to do with slavery ? Had northern Christians no regard for the honor of their religion—the purity of the body to which they belonged? Must every sin be boldly denounced but the sin of slaveholding ? Must the harlot, the swindler, the gamester, the Sabbath-breaker, the drunkard, be thrust out of the church, and the slaveholder kept in, and soothed, and excused, and long and labored apologies framed for him and the abomination with which he stood connected? Was such a course a just or impartial one? If a man was known to sit down and spend an occasional hour in shuffling and exchanging pieces of painted paper, he became the subject of church discipline, and if he persisted, was ejected from the visible church of Christ. But thousands of slaveholders were permitted to gamble with immortal souls — speculate in human blood redeemed beings — and were all the time recognized as worthy members of the church of Christ, and were comforted, first by the direct countenance, co-partnership and participation of their own ministers, and next, by the silence and fellowship of northern professors of the same denomination. The southern churches were thoroughly corrupt, and would remain so as long as the churches of the north refrained from bearing a testimony for God against their crimes. One fact would show the state of feeling amongst Christians at the south. The editor of a religious newspaper, the Charleston Southern Baptist, had recently stated in behalf of his brethren around him, the following views: “We do not contemplate Slavery with hatred and horror, and our southern people do deny in the abstract, the injustice of slavery. We think that we can prove that slavery is not necessarily founded on injustice!” Mr. Thompson proceeded to support the motion for an organization, at considerable length, and advanced a variety of arguments and illustrations, which, as we cannot correctly report, we must pass over. He concluded by saying — My hope is in the churches. I earnestly desire that the abolition feeling of the North may flow onwards towards the South, through the sanctifying channels of the Christian churches. There are millions in this and every land, whose help I should deplore, unless checked and controlled by the wisdom and authority of those who fear God. The humble, prayerful and believing follower of Christ is the man to whom we must look. The man who seeks and enjoys the royal privilege of audience with the Deity. The man that grasps the promises, that in Christ are yea and amen to those that believe. The man who looks to rescue, not the slave alone, but the slave's master—to this man we must look. I love the cause in which we are engaged too well, to wish to see it under the conduct of irreligious, and therefore irresponsible men. I feel little anxiety to enlist the unsanctified eloquence of the demagouge. I would not make a speech to win a rabble multitude that would cover the spacious common that adorns your city; but I would weep and plead till midnight, or the blushing of the morn, to gain the righteous man whose faith, when exerted, grasps omnipotence, and whose effectual fervent prayer would avail to the speedy overthrow of the unhallowed institution.

SOURCES: Isaac Knapp, Publisher, Letters and Addresses by G. Thompson [on American Negro Slavery] During His Mission in the United States, From Oct. 1st, 1834, to Nov. 27, 1835, p. 48-51; A very similar but much longer & more detailed article, “Important Meeting,” was published The Liberator, Boston, Massachusetts, April 11, 1835, p. 3

George Thompson’s Reply to Professor Daniel D. Whedon, February 18, 1835

23 BRIGHToN STREET, FEB. 18, 1835.

To the Editor of Zion's Herald:

SIR — I have just read in your paper of to-day a letter signed D. D. Whedon, and headed “Foreign Interference.” I am ignorant of the profession or station of the writer. If he be a Christian man, and continue one a few years longer, he will, I believe, deeply lament the publication of the sentiments which that letter contains. Under what extraordinary circumstances of excitement it was written I cannot say. I hope it was not a cool closet composition; for with the belief that it had been written deliberately, I should be compelled to draw conclusions very unfavorable to the character of the writer's heart.

He declares it right to denounce the measures of the Papists in this country as “infamous and impertinent foreign interference;” and then asks, in reference to myself, “but with what severer epithet [severer than infamous and impertinent!] shall we characterize the man who comes to lecture the citizens of these United States upon the most delicate and most vital of all the PoliTICAL questions which agitate this distracted nation?” In other words, who comes to “open his mouth, judge righteously, and plead the cause of the poor and needy.” Your correspondent proceeds — “Did that gentleman come, commissioned from some foreign clubs, to collect meetings and nominate an American President, it might be borne with comparative patience; but to come to apply the principles of the gospel to a system which reduces to the most brutal subjection one-sixth portion of our home-born population of these United States; — which puts out the eyes of the soul, defaces the image of the Maker, and leaves the wretched victim to grope sightless and hopeless to the judgment of an equal God; — which tears the infant from its mother's bosom, and brands it as a beast for the shambles; — which converts into solemn mockery the charter of man’s rights, and all the forms of justice; — which renders null and void the holy bond of matrimony;—which denies the Book of Life to two millions, who without it are destitute of that knowledge which begets a hope beyond the grave; — which punishes with DEATH the second offence of teaching an immortal being the way to heaven: to apply the principles of eternal righteousness to such a system is a work which requires “better credentials than a diploma from any foreign Society, of whatever character or of whichever sex.” Your correspondent is “right,” and I am thankful that such credentials are at hand. Whenever your correspondent is disposed, I will, in his presence, spread these credentials before any impartial American audience he can collect, and allow him all the space he wishes to question their sufficiency, or invalidate their authority.

There is every evidence that your correspondent deems himself a staunch patriot, — so staunch that he dare not trust himself to comment upon the extensive patronage which the Anti-Slavery Association of this country have extended towards me, lest he should be “betrayed into language half as strong” as the “perpetration of such an act deserves.”

From the 57th page of the life of Richard Watson, I make the following extract. It is the language of that distinguished ornament of the Methodist body, and will perhaps show that the work in which I am engaged is as patriotic as writing unkind and violent articles against the friends of the enslaved :—

“To what, then, ought patriotism to be directed? It has secured our civil rights; it has organized our armies; it has rendered our navy invincible; it has extended our commerce, and enlarged our dominions: but there is yet one object to be accomplished, without which well appointed armies, an invincible navy, extended commerce and enlarged dominion, will add little to our dignity, our happiness, or our real strength; — I mean, the correction of our MoRALs. Immorality and irreligion as certainly dry up the resources of a nation, and hasten its downfall, as a worm at the root of the finest plant will cause it to fade, to wither, and to die. Wickedness arms God against us; and if he ‘speak concerning a nation, to pluck it up and to destroy,’ no counsels, however wise, no plans, however judicious, no exertions however vigorous, can avert the sentence — “Righteousness exalteth a nation ; and every endeavor to promote it is PATRIOTIC.”

Adopting Mr. Watson's views of “patriotism,” I plead for the liberation from hateful and unjust bonds of 2,250,000 human, immortal, blood-ransomed beings. Am I worse than “infamous” and “impertinent” for this?

I plead that the hindrances to moral and religious improvement may be removed, and the colored population, instead of “perishing for lack of knowledge,” enjoy the blessings of education, grow up in “the nurture and admonition of the Lord,” and in his fear discharge all the duties of civil, social, and domestic life. Am I worse than “infamous” and “impertinent” for doing this?

I plead that the BIBLE may be given to millions of accountable beings who are prohibited from looking into its pages. Am I worse than “infamous” and “impertinent” for doing this?

I plead for the abolition of temptations and opportunities to licentiousness, profligacy, and impurity, and the presentation of motives to chastity, honor and fidelity. Am I worse than “infamous” and “impertinent” for doing this?

I plead for the recognition, protection, sanctification and security of the marriage tie. Am I worse than “infamous” and “impertinent” for doing this?

I plead for the abolition of a practice that robs the fathers and mothers of this land of two hundred new born infants a day, and introduces that number of hapless innocents into all the pollution and degradation of hopeless thraldom. Am I worse than “infamous” and “impertinent” for doing this?

But enough. Let the Christian world judge between me and my accuser. I fear not the verdict.

I desire to register my unfeigned gratitude to God for the success which he has uniformly granted to the fearless publication of the truth upon the subject of Slavery. Our cause is advancing rapidly. Its advocates may smile upon all opposition. Any attempt to prevent the spread of abolition sentiments, or crush the spirit which is now going through the land, is as vain, (to say nothing of its wickedness,) as to attempt to hurl the Rocky Mountains from their foundations, or roll back the waters of the Mississippi. We may adopt the language of the dying Wesley — “The best of all is, God is with us.”

To D. D. Whedon I would kindly say — Take the letter you have published to your closet, your knees, and your God. Pray earnestly for wisdom, truth, and charity. Contemplate the state of things in the Southern States of the country you profess to love. Let the slave stand before you in the awful attributes of a deathless and accountable being. Reflect upon your own responsibility to plead his cause and promote his present and eternal good, — and then say, whether you have done well to seek to bring down upon the head of a stranger, and the slave's advocate, a relentless storm of popular indignation ?

I will offer no reply to your remarks on my country. They are wholly unworthy the Christian — the patriot – and the man.

In respect to the “fulness of hospitality” which you say you would “pour upon me” if I were an inactive and indifferent observer of the wrongs of the slave, — I beg to say that I am quite content to relinquish the enjoyment, and see it reserved for the “Christian brother” who can “forbear to deliver them that are drawn unto death, and those that are ready to be slain.”

Pardon, Mr. Editor, these protracted remarks. I doubt not you will follow the dictates of justice whether you insert or reject what I have written. It is not likely I shall soon trouble you again. Heaven bless your country, and send a speedy and peaceful triumph to the cause of the oppressed! “The Lord reigneth, let the earth rejoice!”

— “All is in his hand whose praise I seek,

Whose frown can disappoint the proudest work,

Whose approbation prosper even mine.”

Very respectfully yours,

GEO. THOMPSON.

SOURCE: Isaac Knapp, Publisher, Letters and Addresses by G. Thompson [on American Negro Slavery] During His Mission in the United States, From Oct. 1st, 1834, to Nov. 27, 1835, p. 41-4

Asa Cummings to Reverend Henry Reid of Columbus, Mississippi, December 28, 1838

To THE PREsBYTERY of ToMBECBEE.

DEAR BRETHREN. At the annual meeting of the General Conference of Congregational churches in Maine, in the month of June last, the Rev. Messrs. Wm. Allen, D. D., B. Tappan, D.D., J. W. Chickering, A. Cummings, S. McKeen, W. T. Dwight and S. L. Pomroy, were appointed a Committee to correspond with Southern Ecclesiastical Bodies on the subject of slavery The history of their appointment will throw some light upon its object.

The General Conference of Maine is made up of Delegates from County or District Conferences, of which there are now ten in this State. The subject of slavery has been introduced into a majority of these Conferences, and declared by them to be opposed to natural and revealed law. One of these Conferences instructed its delegates to the last meeting of the General Conference to procure of that Body, if possible, an expression of sentiments in opposition to slavery, in the form of a memorial to the Southern Churches. Their proposition, having been presented, came before a Select Committee; and, after mature deliberation, was ultimately disposed of, as stated above, by the appointment of the Committee of correspondence, who now address you.

This course was adopted, because our constituents deemed it unexceptionable, and truly Christian in its character. If they had any remonstrance to offer, or any censure to pass, they judged that the laws of our common Lord and Master required them to communicate with you directly, rather than through any public vehicle — to tell, you what we deem your faults “between us and you alone,” rather than to proclaim those faults to the world. And they believed, that the moral influence of an act of Christian fellowship and faithfulness, performed in this way, would be far more favorable and efficacious, than in the more imposing and arrogant form of public rebuke. And the well known frankness of the Southern character, superadded — in your case — to that of religious obligation, induces the confident trust of the Committee, that this communication will be kindly received, though it be marked by “great plainness of speech.” We do you the justice to believe, that frankness, on our part, would please you better than concealment — the expression of our feelings better than silence.

The Committee, too, believe with a majority of their constituents, that any act on our part, censuring the Southern churches in the face of the world, would, at this time, be premature: for while there may be individuals, perhaps whole churches, not chargeable with holding slaves; there may be others, perhaps collections of churches, entire Presbyteries or Synods, who are lamenting before God the existence of such an anomaly in a community voluntarily subject to the laws of Christ; and meditating its extinction, and praying to God for his guidance, as to the means which they can most successfully employ in effecting its cessation. To act understandingly on this subject, we feel the need of more knowledge, drawn from original and unexceptionable sources, knowledge, on which we can depend. We would not, in this case, incur the “folly and shame” of him, who, “judgeth a matter before he heareth it.” —  Though with the data supplied from the word of God, we feel competent to decide on the general character of slavery; yet in applying general principles to your case, we might do you injustice, without a more particular knowledge of facts, circumstances and feelings in relation to it.

Now, Dear Brethren, we are dependent on you to supply this defect in our knowledge. We would know from ourselves the facts in the case. Is the holding of slaves as common among church members, as among other classes of citizens? And if so, on what ground is the practice defended? that of right? or of necessity? If the latter, what is doing to remove such necessity? Is there a general feeling, that slavery must be perpetual unless terminated by some interposition of God, without the voluntary action of the masters? Is it regarded by devout Christians among you as a desirable state of society? If so, why? If not, why not? Does prescription, or anything in the by-laws or discipline of your churches secure any immunities to slaves, who are church members? May they be bought and sold, when their masters also are church members, and such masters not be subjected to discipline? Does their relation to the church — their masters being church members — afford them a guarantee against the separation of husbands from wives, parents from children? Does it secure to them adequate means and opportunities for religious instruction, and the performance of their duties to God, and to one another.

We hope, dear Brethren, it may comport with your views of self-respect, and of Christian duty and privilege, to reply to these queries, or to so many of them as you shall find it convenient to answer, or to give us the requisite information in such forms as shall be most agreeable to yourselves. We ask it, not as judges and censors, but as brethren of the same family, and on the strength of your and our common relation to Jesus Christ — on the strength of that bond of union which is so all-pervading, that if one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; and if one member rejoice, all the members rejoice with it.

It is proper that you should know, that in regard to what is called the “northern abolition movement,” we are divided in opinion; some in our churches having warmly espoused it, and others being as warmly opposed to it, or indifferent. But the conviction, and feeling, is universal among us, that slavery is a great evil; and nearly so, that slaveholding is a sin. And as Christians, we are in great perplexity on this account. It is strongly impressed on not a few, that our churches have a duty to perform in relation to it, as sister or corresponding churches with yours. Now, though your opinion should differ from ours, and you should regard us as troubling ourselves with that for which we are not responsible; still we hope you will reply to our communication —  if for no other reason, yet from respect to our weak consciences; such a service being often highly acceptable to God, and beneficial to man. For this you have the authority and example of the magnanimous apostle of the Gentiles. Our hope is, that your correspondence may be a means of conciliating and uniting us, and enkindling in our bosoms a deeper interest in your churches, and of calling forth more earnest prayer for the divine Spirit and blessing upon you.

Yours in Gospel bonds,

ASA CUMMINGS,  

for the Committee.

P. S. We do not intend to publish your communications without your full and free consent first obtained; but should be glad of permission to make a digest of facts, &c. for our report to the Conference, from which we receive our appointment. In this case, we shall suppress names and localities, unless we have liberty to use them.

Portland, Dec. 28, 1838.

SOURCE: Cyrus P. Grosvenor, Slavery vs. The Bible: A Correspondence Between the General Conference of Maine, and the Presbytery of Tombecbee, Mississippi, p. 3-10