The Rivalry Between Frederick Douglass and Henry Highland Garnet

Author(s): Joel Schor

Source: The Journal of Negro History , Winter, 1979, Vol. 64, No. 1 (Winter, 1979), pp.
30-38
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Association for the
Study of African American Life and History

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2717124

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Association for the Study of African American Life and History and The University of
Chicago Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Journal of Negro History

This content downloaded from

195.43.22.135 on Sun, 28 Feb 2021 12:49:01 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 30 JOURNAL OF NEGRO HISTORY

THE RIVALRY BETWEEN FREDERICK DOUGLASS

AND HENRY HIGHLAND GARNET

Joel Schor*

When the historian George Washington Williams heard Garnet speak, he glow-
ingly proclaimed Garnet to be the "equal in ability to Frederick Douglass espe-
cially excelling in logic and terse statement."1I Not only was Garnet the equal of
Douglass, but he was also an intellectual catalyst for Douglass. In the view of a
former editor of the Journal of Negro History, "Garnet created the idea which
Frederick Douglass tempered and presented to the world in a more palliative and
acceptable form."2
The latter statement of William Brewer is true enough but does not communi-
cate the infighting, passionate conflict and mutual suspicions which came to gen-
erate permanent dislikes among black abolitionists. As a consequence, the histori-
cal importance of the peers of Frederick Douglass has become obscured over the
years, particularly for Garnet, whom many considered too radical in his own
lifetime and about whom the early historians in the field likewise felt uneasy.3
"Ah sir," Garnet wrote to Douglass in September 1849, "the green-eyed mons-
ter has made you mad. Pardon me, when I tell you that you never imbibed a spirit
so narrow from any dark son of our native Maryland, living or dead."4 Douglass
likewise wrote disparagingly of Garnet. Incensed at Garnet's altered views on
emancipation and civil rights and anxious about his projected trip to England in
that year (England was a vital source of funds for Douglass' newspaper), Douglass
wrote to Harriet Beecher Stowe that educated men of the Russwurm, Garnet,
Ward and Crummel stamp had no stomach for continuing the struggle against
prejudice and ignorance in this country, and thus it was that they sought more
congenial places where they could live peaceful and quiet lives.5
What then was the reality underlying these denunciations and antagonisms? The
rest of this paper seeks to describe that reality. The two statements suggest a
genuine rivalry between the Douglass forces, that is the black followers of William
Lloyd Garrison, and those who rallied around Garnet, though this is to simplify
somewhat for purposes of illustration. The rivalry was in turn a struggle for the
control over the minds of the black community in the United States, and it re-
flected sharply diverging views as to the best means of ending slavery, segregation
and second-class citizenship. The views, then, which Garnet presented to Doug-

*Joel Schor is a member of the Agricultural History Group, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C.

This content downloaded from

195.43.22.135 on Sun, 28 Feb 2021 12:49:01 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 FREDERICK DOUGLAS AND HENRY HIGHLAND GARNET 31

lass and Douglass to the community at large in a "more palliative" form were
largely forced upon him by Garnet-minded individuals and by the force of events.
Conflict first arose among these abolitionists as part of the larger schism within
the abolitionist movement in 1840, most likely over the question of supporting an
abolitionist political party. It produced the well-known split between Garrison and
his followers who opposed such a move, and the Tappans, James G. Birney,
Gerrit Smith and others who wanted one. There were of course other issues in
1840, such as the opposition to Garrison's personal leadership and the position of
women and their rights; however, the political issue was probably paramount.6
The division resulted in the formation of the American and Foreign Anti-Slavery
Society in May; black leaders also had to choose either to stay with Garrison and
the American Anti-Slavery Society or else join the new group. The large majority
followed Robert Purvis, William C. Nell and Douglass in proclaiming their loyalty
to Garrison, while black New Yorkers, led by their ministers, Theodore S.
Wright, Samuel Cornish and Garnet supported the American and Foreign Anti-
Slavery Society. A new challenge had been raised, indeed, and the effects were
felt immediately.
At a meeting honoring Garrison after the division had become permanent (held
in Rev. Wright's church in New York City) a motion of support for Garrison and
his colleagues about to leave for England was laid before those assembled. It had
been introduced by one of his supporters, Thomas Van Rensselaer of the Ameri-
can Anti-Slavery Society. Immediately, sharp opposition came from Garnet and
others, on the ground that delegates from the American and Foreign Anti-Slavery
Society were not represented on the committee to go abroad. To the dissenters,
Garrison no longer represented their views. As a result, the Garrisonian contin-
gent left the United States without any endorsement.7
Though largely repudiated in 1840 by fellow blacks, the Garnet faction was
definitely on the ascendency; political action was the wisest alternative, if we are
to trust the scholarship of Dwight Dumond and Leon Litwack. Dumond has
stated, "after 1840 the anti-slavery movement was political; the husting were the
forums, every candidate for office in an anti-slavery community was an anti-
slavery lecturer; and the halls of Congress were the battle ground."8 Further along
in his Anti-Slavery Origins of the Civil War, he states, "when Garrison gained
control of the American Anti-Slavery Society in 1840, it had outlived its useful-
ness and was little but a name."9 Litwack is even more emphatic as to the weak-
ness of the Garrisonian ideological and tactical position. "Nonresistance," he
wrote, "the rejection of political action, disunion, and a proslavery interpretation
of the Constitution did not strike many abolitionists in the 1840s and 1850s as
being either suitable or realistic weapons with which to abolish southern bondage
or northern proscription. Indeed the final triumph of Garrisonian objectives re-
sulted almost entirely from the employment of strictly non-Garrisonian
methods - political agitation and armed force."10
Garnet had no reservations about his position. "I was the first colored man," he
wrote in his famous rebuttal to Garrison, "that ever attached his name to that

This content downloaded from

195.43.22.135 on Sun, 28 Feb 2021 12:49:01 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 32 JOURNAL OF NEGRO HISTORY

party (the Liberty Party), and you may rely upon my word, when I tell you I mean
'to stand.' " 1 1 If he was not the very first of his color to join, Garnet certainly was
one of the first, and the records of both state and national convention movements
of the 1840s among blacks reveal him relentlessly hammering away for Liberty
Party endorsements over the unsuccessful opposition of Douglass and other black
Garrisonians.12 This then was the reality behind the first great disagreement be-
tween the two abolitionists. Some eight years were to pass before Douglass be-
came a convert to political abolition, and then he had little choice if he was to
maintain his constituency.13
As Litwack stated, freeing the slave required physical resistance beside political
action. On this issue, an even greater clash between the Douglass and Garnet
supporters occurred. The Buffalo, New York, meeting of the Negro National
Convention held in 1843 served as the forum; here, Garnet first delivered his
famous Address to the Slaves. Belligerent in tone, the speech advocated a general
type of strike on the part of slaves, if their masters refused to free them voluntar-
ily. "If, they (the slave masters) then commence the work of death, they, and not
you, will be responsible for the consequences. It is far better to die than live as a
slave and to pass a degraded status on to children."14
In this speech, Garnet was threatening, if not directly advocating, a kind of
violence. It was not then nor is it now conceived as a revolutionary document. Yet
because it played upon the chief fears of Garrison-that of a slave
insurrection-and his disciples, black and white, the Address caused a sensa-
tion.15 Here Garnet was meeting the notion of absolutely nonviolent protest
head-on. After hearing the speech, most delegates recoiled psychologically from
the impact; the motion to publish the Address was defeated by a single vote and
later on by a larger margin. Douglass had led the counterattack successfully, even
to the point of winning over some of Garnet's original proponents on a second
ballot. He did so by stating that there was too much violence in the Address and
that strictly nonviolent means should be continued a little longer.16 Douglass
seemingly won the day, and, in the opinion of Dr. Carter G. Woodson, surpassed
Garnet in influence after that date. 17
This statement is true but requires qualification. As related to the Negro Na-
tional Convention Movement, which remained largely Garrisonian, the fact holds
true; however, in the state movement Garnet continued to play a leading role.
Among white abolitionists his influence was deeply felt. John Brown is said to
have published the Address at his own expense or at the very least been influ-
enced by it. 18 Finally, Douglass himself accepted the principle of violence to free
the slave in 1849, before the passage of a National Fugitive Slave Law.19
Another national meeting held in Troy, New York, at Garnet's church in 1847
produced more sympathy for the Address; yet the delegates refused to endorse the
document. Douglass' encouragement of the use of education and propaganda had
its effect in softening the "bite" of Garnet's message. Still, the convention did
appoint a committee of Garnet, Van Rensselaer, and Amos G. Beman to draft an
Address to the Slaves, and it passed a resolution advising Negroes to instruct their

This content downloaded from

195.43.22.135 on Sun, 28 Feb 2021 12:49:01 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 FREDERICK DOUGLAS AND HENRY HIGHLAND GARNET 33

children in the art of warfare.20 By 1849, Negroes meeting in convention in Ohio

resolved to have five hundred copies of the Address and the Appeal of David
Walker printed and distributed.21 Ultimately, it was the massive, unfocused vio-
lence of civil war, in which blacks were to figure most prominently on the northern
side, that sustained Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. In examining limited
violence in 1843, Garnet was clearly ahead of his peers.
Finally, Garnet took the unpopular side of perhaps the most explosive issue of
the antebellum period and beyond for blacks, that of emigration. Students of the
abolitionist crusade know that the notion of compensated emancipation coupled
with involuntary emigration became anathema to abolitionists long before 1840.
The deportation and displacement of the free Negro in America many believed to
be behind the efforts of the American Colonization Society; therefore, that or-
ganization received its rightful denunciation from abolitionists of every stripe.
Garrison had propounded the doctrine of proximity; that is, he believed the means
by which free blacks could best facilitate emancipation lay in remaining close to
the slave and in agitating the cause.22 Although compensated emancipation
coupled with deportation was recognized as treachery by many abolitionists, the
question of black emigration was far broader and involved a whole series of
alternatives and reasons worthy of intellectual exploration.
Throughout the 1840s and 1850s, the mind of Frederick Douglass remained
closed on the subject; blacks who left the United States for whatever reason were
traitors to the cause. His newspaper became a means of resisting nationalist and
emigrationist aspiration.23 Those among his peers who were more willing to ex-
plore the subject began to publish in 1859 the Weekly Anglo-African. The appear-
ance of a rival paper reflected the fact that Douglass' leadership was being chal-
lenged again. His major nemesis during this time was likewise Garnet, Martin R.
Delany and others who were of nationalistic inclination.
As early as 1849, Garnet began to toy with the idea of emigration as a means of
obtaining freedom for blacks generally. In that year also, he was planning to visit
England and lecture in the Free Produce Cause, and England was, as mentioned
before, an important source of funds for Douglass' newspaper. Earlier that year,
Douglass and Garnet had quarreled bitterly over the issue of sending Bibles to
slaves, a proposal of Henry Bibb.24 When Garnet informed Douglass, then, that
he would "rather see a man free in Liberia than a slave in the United States,' '25
Douglass declared war. He published a scathing attack upon Garnet for the benefit
of his British audience in advance of Garnet's visit. He accused Garnet of being an
advocate of violence, mentally unstable and an enemy. In England Garnet would
be representing himself only, Douglass warned his readers, certainly not Douglass
and his supporters.26
Before leaving for England, Garnet was also incensed and wrote his patron and
co-worker, Lewis Tappan, that Douglass wanted to "sit in St. Peters' chair and is
haunted by the green-eyed monster."27 Douglass also condemned Garnet in pri-
vate correspondence to friends. In this instance, more was involved than the
struggle for influence and personal rivalry. Garnet had demanded that emigration

This content downloaded from

195.43.22.135 on Sun, 28 Feb 2021 12:49:01 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 34 JOURNAL OF NEGRO HISTORY

and nationalism be given a fair hearing before the black community at large.
Garnet's intellectual position covered the ground between the compulsory
emigration of the Colonization Society on the one hand and Douglass' "stay-at-
home no matter what" position on the other. Surely there were alternatives in
between, he reasoned. Perhaps freedom at home might be facilitated through
efforts abroad, some of which involved emigration. Garnet would devote a decade
of his life to finding such an alternative.
He began his quest in 1850 by agitating the cause of Free Produce and by
lending his support to the Friends of Universal Peace, a world-wide peace move-
ment which met in convention that year at Frankfort on the Main, Germany.
While in England, Scotland, Ireland and Germany, he and J. W. C. Pennington,
one of the best educated men of his generation, organized chapters of Free Pro-
duce or individuals who agreed to give up goods made through the labor of slaves.
By the end of 1850, the first year of Garnet's lecture tour, some twenty-six new
chapters were formed, wrote Mrs. Anna Richardson, a Free Produce leader,
"chiefly as a consequence" of his efforts alone.28 Garnet became very well-
known; so much so that the Scotch Presbyterian Church agreed to send him as
their missionary to Jamaica, West Indies. This was to be his great opportunity to
observe the impact of emancipation at first hand while performing his missionary
endeavors. The family departed for the West Indies late in 1852 bound for an
established church in Westmoreland County, a sugar district.29
After becoming accustomed to the Jamaican way of life, he wrote Douglass a
brief description which Douglass published. In it, Garnet proposed that a limited
number of black Americans emigrate to Jamaica where he believed they could
gain lands and homes in a short period of time. Douglass answered such a proposal
with his usual blanket attack upon emigration, supported by articles in the same
issue of his paper on the diseases of tropical areas.30 Nevertheless, he was proba-
bly expressing views before a community which was increasingly sympathetic to
emigrationist sentiment.31 When Garnet returned to America after 1856, his quest
for another alternative to freedom than staying home absolutely or to involuntary
emigration had become fruitful.
Garnet's plan which became known as the African Civilization Society would
involve the use of black professionals to establish a cotton industry in Africa, in
the upper Niger region, to compete with the southern staple. Having produced
great sympathy for Free Produce among the British working classes and devel-
oped important connections among industrialists and philanthropists, Garnet en-
visioned this small group of black Americans as permanent residents of the upper
Niger who would supervise the cotton-growing, resist the slave trade at its source,
establish an Afro-American state, and spread the Christian gospel.32 The multi-
plicity of purposes at once suggests that Garnet would be seeking the widest possi-
ble base of support for his cause. In doing so, he would also have to either by-pass
or convert individuals such as Douglass who remained vigorously opposed and
controlled the most important black newspaper. Garnet quickly allied himself with
the newly formed Weekly Anglo-African which began publication in 1859 and

This content downloaded from

195.43.22.135 on Sun, 28 Feb 2021 12:49:01 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 FREDERICK DOUGLAS AND HENRY HIGHLAND GARNET 35

treated the entire subject of emigration and nationality with far greater kindness.
Also, he had joined forces with like-minded individuals in the United States and
Canada.33 Garnet's scheme of limited emigration and colonization was by 1859
merely one of a number of such proposals before the black community. Douglass
remained adamant along with other black Garrisonians throughout that year, cer-
tainly up until the time he was forced to flee the country in the wake of John
Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry.34 His temporary exodus prompted Garnet to
remark in his witty way that Douglass was "fighting it out" under the protection
of the British Lion-an obvious allusion to Douglass' slurs when Garnet had gone
to England ten years earlier.35 Garnet continued preaching from his church in
New York City, holding prayer vigils and delivering sermons which eulogized
Brown.36 Douglass would not change his mind until after 1860, until after Lincoln
had declared in favor of union over changing the established order.37
His conversion occurred in May 1861 when he printed an editorial which had
been in type as of April, the moment the nation plunged into civil war. By then he
had accepted an invitation of the Haitian government to visit at its expense, with
the explicit acceptance of emigration as a solution to the problems of blacks:

we propose to act in view of the settled fact that many of them [black Americans] are
already resolved to look for homes beyond the boundaries of the United States, and
that most of their minds are turned toward Haiti.38

As the war had become inevitable, Douglass added a paragraph to the editorial,
already in type, which said that he would wait and see what happened before going
immediately to Haiti.39 Having accepted emigration to Haiti, and Haiti was closer
to those enslaved in the United States than Africa, Douglass still held as much as
he could do so, to the notion of proximity. His wait-and-see stance, however,
saved him from public capitulation on the issue as northern battle victories
guaranteed the legitimacy of Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. Even so, "by
the middle of the year [1861]," wrote Howard Bell, "no Negro leader of first rank,
with the possible exception of George T. Downing, was publicly championing the
traditional stay-at-home-at-any-cost beliefs; most of them did not look unfavor-
ably upon emigration-or championed it as the true road to progress."40
Douglass came to the realization as finally did Downing that blacks could lead
useful lives in their own right and be very helpful to the cause by emigrating to
areas outside of the United States.41 Between 1861 and 1865, at least two thousand
such individuals had decided to try their luck emigrating to new regions either in
the Caribbean or Africa, and although these efforts were unsuccessful, those who
went out were not considered traitors for so doing. The legitimation of emigration
as an avenue of possible advancement was in part a contribution of Garnet.
There were other issues which divided Garnet and Douglass that cannot be dealt
with in the space remaining; for example, the question as to the nature of ttle
United States Constitution, the role of religious institutions in perpetuating slav-
ery and segregation and the question of sending Bibles to slaves. The three major
ones-political action in 1840, the use of violence in 1843 and finally emigration

This content downloaded from

195.43.22.135 on Sun, 28 Feb 2021 12:49:01 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 36 JOURNAL OF NEGRO HISTORY

beginning in 1849-on which they disagreed revealed a difference in approach to

the same problems. In retrospect, it appears that Garnet was the more forward-
looking of the two; yet, both points of view were necessary to provide the
dynamics of a long-running reform movement which ultimately was a success.
Douglass represented the moderating element, while Garnet exemplified the radi-
cal component, without which progress is unlikely.
Regardless of his enormous contribution, the old dislikes remained; the fame of
Douglass grew, while Garnet remained poor and became embittered. In later years
when Garnet had decided to accept a federal diplomatic post as Minister Resident
and Consul-General to Liberia, he was discouraged from doing so by old friends,
including Rev. Alexander Crummell who feared for his health. "What," Garnet
answered, "would you have me linger here in an old age of neglect and want?
Would you have me tarry among men who have forgotten what I have done, and
what I have suffered for them? To stay here and die among those ungrateful
people?"42 Giving Garnet, then his rightful due, albeit posthumously, has been the
intent of this article.

'George Washington Williams, A History of the Negro Race in America, 1619-1880 (Reprinted;
New York: Arno Press, 1969), p. 579. Although I am using articles, virtually every bit of material
including documentation appears in Joel Schor, Henry Highland Garnet: A Voice of Black Radicalism
in the Nineteenth Century (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1977).
2William Brewer, "Henry Highland Garnet," Journal of Negro History. 13 (January 1928): 36-52.
Brewer believed that the influence of Garnet on Douglass, Remond and other black abolitionists was
considerable, but the exact extent would never be known.
3Not only Douglass, but William Wells Brown, George T. Downing and their supporters were
antagonistic to Garnet personally because of his unpopular views. Downing threatened Garnet with
violence. See The Weekly Anglo-African, September 15, 1859, p. 2. I deal with the assessment of Dr.
Carter G. Woodson later in the article. It is also possible to read through all the excellent works of Dr.
Benjamin Quarles and never realize how deep-seated and long-lasting these conflicts and antagonisms
went.
4The North Star, September 7, 1849, p. 3.
-See Frederick Douglass, The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass as Written by Himself (Rev.
ed.; New York: Crowell Collier Books, 1962), pp. 85-86.
6Benjamin Quarles, Black Abolitionists (New York: Oxford University Press, 1969), pp. 42-45;
Dwight Dumond, Antislavery: The Crusade for Freedom in America (Reprinted; New York: W. W.
Norton & Co., Inc., 1961), pp. 285-286; The Emancipator, May 22, 1840, p. 14. Article III of the new
faction's constitution was worded carefully so as not to preclude political action by abolitionists.
Although it was not stated that the new organization would support the Liberty Party, Article III left
members a margin of individual choice. It is also true that many new members were not political
abolitionists; however, the leaders were more open-minded toward a third party attempt. Some were
already Liberty Party men.
7Quarles, pp. 45-46; Dumond, The Letters of James G. Birney, 1837-1857, (Reprinted; Glocester,
Mass.: Peter Smith, 1966), p. 577.
8Dumond, Antislavery Origins of the Civil War (Ann Arbor, Mich: University of Michigan Press,
1959), p. 50.
9Ibid., p. 87.

This content downloaded from

195.43.22.135 on Sun, 28 Feb 2021 12:49:01 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 FREDERICK DOUGLAS AND HENRY HIGHLAND GARNET 37

I Leon F. Litwack, North of Slavery; The Negro in the Free States, 1790-1860 (Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1961), pp. 243-244.
1"The Liberator, December 8, 1843, p. 193; letter reprinted in Carter G. Woodson, The Mind of the
Negro as Reflected in Letters Written During the Crisis, 1800-1860 (Washington, D.C.: Association
for the Study of Negro Life and History, 1926), pp. 194-195.
l 2Minutes of the National Convention of Colored Citizens (New York: Piercy and Reed, 1843), p. 16;
Howard H. Bell, A Survey of The Negro Convention Movement, 1830-1861 (New York: Arno Press,
1969), pp. 82-83; Minutes of the Fifth Annual Convention of the Colored People of the State of New
York in the City of Schenectady, etc. (Troy, N.Y.: J.C. Kneeland & Co., 1844), pp. 8- 11; Proceedings
of the National Convention of Colored People and Their Friends, Held in Troy, N. Y., etc. (Troy,
N.Y.: J.C. Kneeland & Co., 1847) pp. 14, 15. Here Garnet and Douglass are struggling over wording.
Garnet wanted the use of "political action" included as an acceptable means of abolishing slavery. An
excellent source of these proceedings bound in a single volume with informative introductions is
Howard Bell, Proceedings of the Negro Convention Movement (New York: Arno Press, 1969).
'3A changing of Douglass' attitude in favor of political abolition seems to have occurred in 1848; it
appeared to be connected with his separation from Garrison. Douglass attended the Free Soil conven-
tion in August but refused to talk on the excuse of a "recent throat operation." The National Era,
August 17, 1848, p. 80. During the actual campaign, Garnet, Douglass, Remond and Martin Delany all
became heavily involved.
'4Minutes of the National Convention of Colored Citizens (New York: Piercy and Reed, 1843);
Lored Katz (ed.), Walker's Appeal and an Address to the Slaves of the United States of America
(Reprinted; New York: Arno Press, 1969), p. 93.
'5Robert Abzug had developed and explained this phobia of Garrison as an enormous source of the
abolitionists' vitality. Abzug, "The Influence of Garrisonian Abolitionists' Fears of Slave Violence on
the Antislavery Argument, 1829-1840," Journal of Negro History 55 (January 1970): 15-26; also
Russel B. Nye, William Lloyd Garrison and the Humanitarian Reformers (Boston: Little, Brown &
Co., 1955), p. 54.
'6Minutes, pp. 23-24; Quarles, p. 227; Bell, A Survey of the Negro Convention Movement, p. 80.
' 7Carter G. Woodson, "Henry Highland Garnet," DAB, pp. 154-155.
'8Bell, A Survey of the Negro Convention Movement, pp. 63-75, 83-87, 99, 106-109; John Brown
claimed to have had the Address published at his own expense. Dr. Quarles has disputed that'state-
ment on the grounds that Brown had no money. In two recent works, Dr. Quarles provides information
which suggests that Garnet advised Brown to delay in carrying out his raid at Harper's Ferry, because
Garnet did not think the timing was correct. See Allies for Freedom: Blacks and John Brown (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1974), pp. 67, 76 and Blacks on John Brown (Urbana: University of
Illinois Press, 1972), pp. 29-30; whether Brown published the Address himself or not, there is some
evidence that he was influenced by it. "But the fact is," writes Stephen Oates, "Brown was growing
increasingly militant in his own denunciation of slavery, and the passage in 'Sambo's Mistakes,' urging
slaves to resist their white oppressors, sounds almost exactly like something Garnet would say."
"More-over," Oates continues, "Brown was soon to quote Hebrews 9, that 'almost all things are by
the law purged with blood; and without the shedding of blood is no remission.' " Oates, To Purge This
Land With Blood: A Biography of John Brown (New York: Harper and Row, 1970), p. 61.
9Quarles, Frederick Douglass, (New York: Atheneum Press, 1970), pp. 115-116; Black
Abolitionists, pp. 227-228; Carleton Mabee, Black Freedom: The Non-Violent Abolitionists from 1830
Through the Civil War (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1970), p. 294; New York Daily Times, 18 May
1857, p. 1. Although Douglass was speaking out in violent terms by 1857, he first abandoned his pacific
stance in 1849.
20Proceedings of the National Convention of Colored People and Their Friends, Held in Troy, N. Y.,
etc., pp. 17, 31; Bell, A Survey of the Negro Convention Movement, pp. 89-90; The Liberator,
November 19, 1847, p. 185.
2'Minutes of the Ohio State Convention (Columbus, Ohio, n.p., 1849), p. 18; Quarles, Black
Abolitionists, pp. 227-228.
22Bell, pp. 14-15, 26-27, 29-34, 55-56, 126.

This content downloaded from

195.43.22.135 on Sun, 28 Feb 2021 12:49:01 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 38 JOURNAL OF NEGRO HISTORY

23Ibid., pp. 138, 154-155, 158, passim.

24The North Star, May 18, 1849, p. 2; June 15, 1849, p. 2; June 22, 1849, p. 3.
25Ibid., January 26, 1849, p. 3.
26Ibid., July 27, 1849, p. 2 and September 7, 1849.
27Garnet to Tappan, August 25, 1849 (Amistad Collection).
28The Slave, His Wrongs and Their Remedy, January 1851, p. 1. (Wasington, D.C.: Howard Univer-
sity, Moorland Foundation).
29Somerville to Garnet, April 19, 1852, and October 7, 1852, National Library of Scotland; see also
Missionary Record of the United Presbyterian Church, November 1852, pp. 187-188.
30Frederick Douglass' Paper, June 10, 1853, pp. 2-3; July 31, 1853, p. 2; August 20, 1853, p. 2, and
September 2, 1853, p. 2. Garnet's request for laborers was also published in June 1853 in the New York
Tribune.
31See Bell, A Survey of the Negro Convention Movement, Chapter X "Changing Opinion: Emigra-
tion Triumphant," pp. 206-224.
32Perhaps the best single article discussing the origins and goals of the African Civilization Society is
Richard MacMaster, "Henry Highland Garnet and the African Civilization Society," Journal of Pre-
sbyterian Church History 48 (Summer 1970): 91-112. It deals with the immediate causes. Garnet was
familiar with the African Civilization Society of Lord Fowell Buxton, a wealthy British philanthropist,
which appeared in The Colored American (February 27, 1841, p. 1). See also, the Constitution of the
African Civilization Society and etc. (New Haven: Thomas J. Stafford, 1861), p. 1. (Copies in New
York Public Library and the Spingarn Collection, Howard University). Garnet defended his scheme
publicly on numerous occasions. See the New York Daily Tribune, August 11, 1858, p. 7.
33Bell, pp. 206-224, 228-235.
34Ibid., pp. 206-217.
3sThe Weekly Anglo-African, April 7, 1860, p. 2; Bell, p. 217.
36The Weekly Anglo-African, November 5, 1859; December 10, 1859.
37Bell, pp. 216-217.
38Ibid., p. 221; cites Douglass Monthly, May 1861, p. 450. See also Quarles, Frederick Douglass,
pp. 190-192.
39Bell, p. 221; cites Douglass Monthly, May 1861, pp. 449-450.
40Bell, p. 223.
41Ibid., p. 224.
42Alexander Crummell, The Eulogy of Henry Highland Garnet, D.D. Presbyterian Minister, Resi-
dent of the United States to the Republic of Liberia, Delivered Under the Auspicies of the Union
Bethel Literary and Historical Association in the 19th St. Baptist Church, May 4, 1882, by Alexander
Crummell. (Washington, D.C.: n.p., 1882), p. 27. The Eulogy was published by Crummell in Africa
and America (Springfield, Mass.: Wiley & Co., 1891).

This content downloaded from

195.43.22.135 on Sun, 28 Feb 2021 12:49:01 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms