his special protection. He (Mr. T.) would show that
the improvement of the black man's condition was not the chief object
of the Colonization Society; that its operations sprung from that
loathing of color which might be denominated the peculiar sin of
America. Slavery might be found in many countries, but it was in
America alone that there existed an aristocracy founded on the color
of the skin. A race of pale-skinned patricians, resting their claims
to peculiar rank and privileges upon the hue of the skin, the texture
of the hair, the form of the nose, and the size of the calf! But for
this abhorrence of color, Mr. B. would not have been contented with
the means proposed by the Colonization Society for the amelioration of
slavery; he would not have spoken a word of colonization, or of that
Golgotha, Liberia.
Acquainted as he (Mr. T.) was with America, he had been able to come
to no other conclusion, but that the prejudice of color was that on
which the colonization of the free negro was founded. There had been a
great deal said of the inferior intellect of the black race, and of a
marked deficiency in their moral qualities; but these were not the
grounds on which it was sought to expatriate them; the injustice
practised towards them rested solely on the prejudice which had been
excited against their external personal peculiarities. Every word
spoken by Mr. Breckinridge in defence of colonization, went directly
to prove this. The whole scheme rested on the dark color of those to
be expatriated. Had the sufferers been white in the skin, Mr. B. would
have advocated immediate, complete, and everlasting emancipation.
He would now turn to a matter, regarding which he considered Mr.
Breckinridge had treated the abolitionists of America with
injustice--with unkindness--with something which he did not like even
to name. Mr. B. had charged the abolitionists with having published a
law as the law of the state of Maryland, which had never been adopted
by the legislature of that state; and when he (Mr. T.) had required of
Mr. B. evidence in support of his grave allegations, it was in this
case precisely as in the case of Mr. Garrison and Mr. Wright,--the
proofs were non est inventus. Now, he would ask, was this fair; was it
magnanimous; was it generous; was it Christianlike?
The charge had been distinctly made, and then it had been asked of the
parties accused to prove a negative. Mr. Breckinridge was not likely
to be long i
|