nist. The praise of such men is the
strongest testimony that could be adduced to the declension of the
Society of Friends in anti-slavery zeal. To a great extent I fear their
sentiments on this subject have been held traditionally; and that in
many cases, they have not only done nothing themselves, but by example
and precept have condemned the activity of others; I trust, however, a
brighter day in regard to their labors is approaching. I feel
disinclined to take leave of Henry Clay, without some animadversions
which, on the public character of a public man, I may offer without any
breach of propriety. In early life, that is in some part of the last
century, he supported measures tending to the "eradication of slavery"
in Kentucky, and at various periods since, he has indulged in cheap
declamation against slavery, though he is not known to have committed
himself by a solitary act of manumission. On the contrary, having
commenced life with a single slave, he has industriously increased the
number to upwards of seventy. As a statesman, his conduct on this
question has been consistently pro-slavery. He indefatigably negotiated
for the recovery of fugitive slaves from Canada, when Secretary of
State, though without success. In the Senate he successfully carried
through the admission of Missouri into the Union, as a slave State. He
has resisted a late promising movement in Kentucky in favor of
emancipation; and lastly, in one of his most elaborate speeches, made
just before the late presidential election, the proceedings of the
abolitionists were reviewed and condemned, and he utterly renounced all
sympathy with their object. By way of apology for his early
indiscretion, he observes, "but if I had been then, or were _now_, a
citizen of any of the planting States--the southern or southwestern
States--I should have opposed, and would continue to oppose, any scheme
whatever of emancipation, gradual or immediate."

In this extract, and throughout the whole speech, slavery is treated as
a pecuniary question, and the grand argument against abolition, is the
loss of property that would ensue. Joseph John Gurney, who appears to
have been favorably impressed by Henry Clay's professions of liberality,
his courteous bearing, and consummate address, manifested a laudable
anxiety that so influential a statesman should be better informed on the
point on which he seemed so much in the dark; he therefore addressed to
him his excellent "Lett