FROM

THE

MILLENNIAL HARBINGER.

SERIES III.

VOL. IV.	B E T H A N Y, NOVEMBER, 1847.	NO. XI.

      My dear Clarinda--LITTLE did I think that I should ever be confined within the walls of a prison in Scotland, or any where else, in the way of honor or dishonor. It is, however, a true and veritable fact that I am now a prisoner in the city of Glasgow and in the kingdom of Scotland; and this, too, without trial or conviction of any kind whatever. You, no doubt, with very many others, will ask, How can this be!!! If, then, you can command a sufficient degree of calmness and patience, I will reveal to you the mystery.

      You have long since learned that Scotland is the land of orthodoxy--the only country in the world in which men always think right on all subjects, but especially in religion and morals. True, there have been occasionally a few heretics in this land, but they have generally been of a mongrel race; they have been abroad, or intermarried with foreigners.

      In former times religion and politics were those subjects on which orthodoxy, or right thinking, was of saving importance; and heterodoxy, or wrong thinking, a damning sin. But nations become weary of their idols, as well as of other paternal customs, and set up new ones. Still as orthodoxy is outward conformity to the views of the fashionable idol, and heterodoxy nonconformity, the virtue of orthodoxy and the vice of heterodoxy are yet omnipotent for good or for evil.

      In Scotland a new divinity, unknown in my youthful days, is now in the ascendant; consequently a new creed reigns, and a new orthodoxy is established. Orthodoxy is, therefore, of saving efficiency; and heterodoxy is still a sin to be punished by the Judge.

      The present idol is the liberty of all men of color on natural and moral principles;--saving faith, the immediate emancipation of American Africans;--and the true evangelical church, the Scotch antislavery society.

      Now, as in days of yore, when a man's politics were unpopular at court, or his opinions unfashionable at church, it was always easy to convict him of treason against the king, or of blasphemy against the pope, and then, by a summary process, rid the world of him. But that age having passed away, and religious views and opinions being no longer so sacred nor so profane as in former times, they are not now actionable before the king, nor always before the pope.--When, then, it so happens that any one's doctrine becomes offensive to the reigning or aspiring priesthood, they do not think of meeting him, face to face, before the people, or of discussing with him the points of difference; but as in the days of Darius the Mede, the presidents and priests seeking, but not finding fault in Daniel in some political matter, resolved to find him heterodox in religion, and would test him by some religious question, that they might thus put him out of their way; so, now-a-days, when a man's religious views become obnoxious to certain presidents, priests, and secretaries of churches in Scotland, when seeking occasion of an attack upon him, they, in imitation of their Median predecessors, do not think [625] of accusing him on the real issue; but seizing some popular idol of national admiration and reverence, they seek to find occasion against him in reference to his idol god. Nor are they conscientiously fastidious as to the means; for, as in the case before us, the Median politicians chose religious grounds of accusation against Daniel, so the Edinburgh priesthood chose political grounds of accusation against myself. I say political grounds; for they are, in truth, more of that character than of any other, as the sequel may show. That I may be clearly understood on these premises, I will briefly develope the plot, so far as I have been able to discover it.

      In Scotland the old ecclesiastic parties have greatly changed their position. Burghers, Antiburghers, Relief-men, are now absorbed in the Church of Scotland or in the Free Church. The Independents or Congregationalists are divided into Morrisonians and Congregationalists--the former having embraced a more liberal theory of the gospel than their old sectarian brethren. Indeed, in some particulars they make the nearest approach to our views of any party in Scotland. These leading denominations, with a few Romanist, Episcopalian, and Methodist churches, make up the Pedobaptist community of Scotland. The Scotch and English Baptist communities, with our brethren, make the remainder. The Morrisonites and Infidels constitute, however, a fearful aggregate compared with any of these denominations; indeed, with all of them, so far as vital piety is to be regarded as the fruit of discipleship.

      The Morrisonians are of recent origin. From a conversation which I had the pleasure of enjoying with one of their most respectable ministers, I learn that their views of Bible truth in several points are much in advance of most of their contemporaries. They have already in the field some seventy preachers, and have some thirty on the way. They suffer much, however, under a sort of religious hydrophobia, being exceedingly fearful of immersion.

      It is strange that the nigher religious parties approximate to each other, so long as a sectarian spirit reigns within them, they do the more cordially and pertinaciously oppose one another. I cannot now expatiate on the philosophy of the fact; but since the days of the Jews and the Samaritans till now, those nighest of kin are the most fierce in all animosities and bickerings about "miney and thiney." Family quarrels are somewhat of a similar character; and, therefore, there is something in proximity of blood, of lineage, and of faith, which, in case of any misunderstanding, greatly augments and exacerbates the feelings of the parties--"lands intersected by a narrow frith abhor each other," and a single mountain interposed "makes enemies of nations who had else, like kindred drops, been mingled into one."

      The Morrisonians are yet in a transition state. The metal is not yet cooled. Those in proximity with our brethren are occasionally allured into a more candid and inquisitive temper; and now and then some of them actually become disciples indeed; and knowing the truth after much searching of the Scriptures, are not only immersed, but become wholly obedient to the faith.

      Of this people there is one church in Leith, within two miles of [626] Edinburgh, under the care of the Rev.¹ M. Kennedy and one in the city, under the Rev. M. Kirk. The Reverend James Robertson, of the city of Edinburgh, is also of the Congregational school; and if not wholly recognized as a Morrisonian minister, occasionally communes with them.

      Now as I believe that my imprisonment has its origin here, I will minutely relate all the incidents and circumstances that have come under my notice, or come to my ears, producing this conviction, setting down nothing in malice, nor extenuating nor concealing any thing that may be alleged in their defence.

      Shortly before my arrival in Edinburgh, two male members of respectable standing in the church at Leith, under the pastoral care of the Rev. Mr. Kennedy, had been immersed and joined our church in Edinburgh. Other ministers of that church were also in much mental perturbation and doubt on their own position. We were also informed that the church in the city under the Rev. Mr. Kirk, was also disturbed on the subject. At the time of my arrival this party were so much excited and alarmed, that on application by our brethren to hire their meeting-house, "Counsellor Scott," one of the Trustees, positively refused it on any terms.

      Immediately after my commencement in Edinburgh, so soon as the community gave evidence of the interest taken in my lectures, by the very large and attentive crowds that thronged to hear them, Rev. Messrs. Robertson and Kennedy, and Mr. Hunter, called upon me stealthily, not informing me that they came as "a deputation from the Scotch Anti-Slavery Society," but as if in a courteous and hospitable manner. They indirectly approached the subject of slavery, and desired to know if certain extracts on the relation of master and servant, which they read from some pamphlet, not giving the author, were my words.

      Having answered in the affirmative, not so much for the words as for the ideas expressed, one of them asked whether my present views were those which I had expressed in the Christian Baptist. To this I promply responded in the affirmative. A desultory conversation on American slavery ensued, which I cannot accurately report, save that I informed them, that, while I had no personal interest in American slavery, having for sundry reasons emancipated all that any way came into my possession; I, nevertheless, regretted the course pursued by many antislavery men, both in Britain and in America, as not at all tending to the amelioration or abolition of slavery; but rather operating directly against both; adding that the people in Britain did not understand the subject so well as we did; and that, therefore, they could neither enlighten us on the subject, nor induce us, by their importunity, to take any measures on the subject.

      On which Mr. Robertson desired to know if I would lecture on the subject. I replied, the gospel and the church, and neither slavery nor abolition, occupied my mind, and filled up the objects of my mission. On being farther pressed, I added, that, although I cared not if all Scotland knew my opinions on the subject, my [627] published appointments would not give me a single day, till late in September, for any purpose, unless by changing the subjects already announced for Edinburgh; which I could not, as yet advised, with propriety change to a lecture on "American slavery"or on Scotch anti-slavery. On which, after bidding me an apparently friendly adieu, the gentlemen departed.

      But a few hours afterwards the following placard was posted on every prominent corner, and at every centre of rendezvous in Edinburgh, in capitals so gigantic that a man on horse back might read it as he passed along:--

      "CITIZENS OF EDINBURGH--BEWARE! BEWARE! THE REV. ALEX. CAMPBELL, OF VIRGINIA, U.S. OF AMERICA, HAS BEEN A SLAVEHOLDER HIMSELF AND IS STILL THE DEFENDER OF MAN-STEALERS."

      Not having with me here a copy of the placard, I am sorry that I cannot transcribe it. But that you may have an idea of the spirit and character of the party that issued this one, and that filled all Scotland with them at every point we visited, I will give you a full copy of one that I happen to have before me. There common heading was--"People of Scotland, beware? Mr. Alexander Campbell and his colleague, Mr. Henshall, from Virginia, U.S., are at present lecturing throughout Scotland on Christian Union," &c, &c. Here follows one pasted up at PERTH:--

"AMERICAN THEOLOGY.
LECTURES.
APOSTOLIC COMMISSION--THE OBEDIENCE OF THE
GOSPEL;
OR, How to baptize a family the one day into the fellowship of the American Baptist church, and to sell them the next by public sale or otherwise, to the highest bidder, as they do the horse, the ox, or the ass; tearing asunder "those whom God hath joined together." This is the Campbellite's obedience to the gospel--with vengeance. From such apostolic commission and gospel obedience, as well as Socialism, we earnestly say, Good Lord deliver us."--Perth, 17th August, 1847. J. W. J. Jeffers Wilson, Printer."

      Some even went further than this. At Paisley and Glasgow they were so violent as to be actionable in law. I was announced in a Paisley paper, without any qualification, as a "Man-stealer"--"BEWARE OF THE MAN-STEALER!"--and in terms as gross and disreputable at Glasgow.

      But to return to Edinburgh. Before the first placard appeared in Edinburgh, I had delivered three public discourses--two of them in the Waterloo Rooms, as before stated. One lady had signified to me a desire to be baptized. On the evening of the 11th August, the placard to the contrary notwithstanding, I found, on entering the Rooms, a large audience in waiting. On rising, of course, I adverted to the placard, informing the audiences that in addition to what they had seen and heard, I had also received from the Secretary of the Anti-Slavery Society a challenge to discuss with him my position to American slavery, after he had particularly inquired [628] and understood from myself, my whole list of appointments, times and places; and, therefore, he knew, before he wrote it, that I could not possibly accept it at this time.

      I then stated to the audience that I was both misrepresented and calumniated in the placard--that it was grossly false, and I feared malicious; but that I would presume so much upon their candor and impartiality as to proceed with my lecture for the evening, promising them on Friday evening a full view of my position on the subject of American Slavery, and also that I would read to them on that evening Rev. James Robertson's challenge and my response to it.--Without farther notice of the subject I proceeded to my lecture, and enjoyed a respectable attention to its close.

      The brethren fearing a riotous meeting on Friday evening, resolved to demand sixpence admission, which after defraying expenses of the room, was to be given to the Royal Infirmary. My debates with Owen, and Bishop Purcell having been much read in Scotland, many of the Socialists or Owenites, with some Catholics were not very kindly disposed to favor my person or my views on any subject, and, as now-a-days, Edinburgh has become somewhat distinguished for tumultuous meetings, it was thought expedient to prevent a certain class of auditors from too easy and cheap access on that evening.

      At the appointed hour I appeared before a crowded auditory in the Waterloo Rooms, with my documents--among which were the two placards printed by the Secretary of the Anti-Slavery Society, the aforesaid Rev. James Robertson, the Christian Baptist, the Millennial Harbinger for 1845, containing the discussion between Dr. Wayland for the American Abolitionists, and Dr. Fuller of South Carolina, in response, my Bible, two letters from Mr. Robertson, with my responses to them.

      I commenced with a narrative of my manner of life since I left Scotland to this day, and with the statement of my present mission, noticing my position, first to Presbyterianism, Congregationalism, and the present Reformation. I also noticed the opposition and calumny to which I had been subjected in the New World, the progress of the controversy there, and its present position; declaring that in all my efforts from the Atlantic cities to the Indian territory, from Vermont to Georgia, I had never been more rudely, more violently, and more truthlessly assailed and calumniated than I had been within the present week, in this metropolis of Scotland, the last place on earth that I would or could have thought capable of such uncandid, ungenerous, and discourteous proceedings.--Nay, I might say I never was so maltreated, so outrageously calumniated as in this city by its Anti-slavery Society.

      I then showed the Edinburgh placards, read them, and commented on them. I next read Mr. Robertson's challenge and my response, his second letter and my response. On these, also, I made some passing remarks; alluding also to his manner of placarding his letters to me before I had time to answer them; having employed a man to walk through the streets of Edinburgh between two boards, one on his back and one on his breast. On his back, BEWARE! BEWARE!! of [629] A. Campbell--on his breast, Rev. James Robertson's challenge to A. Campbell, of Bethany College. This was not enough. He had him or a second one standing between two boards at the entrance to the Waterloo Hall, showing to every one as he entered, the courage and orthodoxy of this Reverend "Secretary of the Scottish Anti-Slavery Society.

      I next proceeded to inform my auditory that the United States could not abolish slavery in a single state of the Union. England and Scotland always speak of American slavery as if it were a constitutional or national affair which a simple congressional majority could any day abolish. I gave a history of the institution--the position of the several states to it, and spoke of Virginia and her views as indicated in her last convention, with her present views and prospects. I also spoke of Maryland, Delaware, and Kentucky, as well as of the free states, and of their views and feelings as I could judge on the premises. I went at some length into the various hindrances and difficulties in the way of those disposed to emancipate--especially the opposition shown to free persons of color in free states, developed in the treatment of the late Mr. Randolph's slaves, &c. &c.

      I then proceeded to my own position to American slavery--declaring that I never approved of, nor defended any system of slavery, ancient or modern, Anglican or American;--that in the statute books of all slave states there were sundry laws and enactments that no Christian man could sanction or practise;--alleging, also, that no Christian man in America was either obliged to approve them or to put them into practice in his own case. I had myself emancipated several slaves that came into my possession, had bought others with a reference to their emancipation, and had emancipated them, and for several years had not had any property in any human being except in my wife and children.

      I also gave a summary of Dr. Wayland's and Dr. Fuller's debate on slavery; my own views of their respective merits, and the ground on which they closed that controversy. I then took up the Patriarchal, Jewish, and Christian enactments on the subject, and showed that no man had ever been enjoined on pain of excommunication to emancipate his slaves;--demonstrating from the last precept of the Decalogue and from the first precept of the Jewish civil code, that the Lord did recognize and sanction, in certain cases, that one man might have property in another man as his bond servant, both for a term of years, even though he was his own natural and religious brother, and that he might own an alien for life. So decreed the Apostles also, and, therefore, no one church or individual could, with any show of divine authority, make it sinful to hold property in man or enact it into a term of communion, provided only, that the Christian duties due to a Christian or Pagan servant were duly and faithfully performed.--Christianity regulated, but did not annihilate the relation of master and bond servant; and that although I was constitutionally, politically, economically, and morally opposed to all forms of slavery, ecclesiastic and political, English and American, I could not legislate on the subject beyond the pages of scripture which I read--viz: 1 Cor. vii. 22; chap. xii. 13; Gal. iii. 28; iv. 22-30; Eph. vi. 5-8; [630] Col. iii. 11-22; 1 Tim. vi. 1-3; Titus ii. 9; Philemon 16th verse. On these I commented at some length opening and alleging that Paul enjoined continuance in the relation, except a bond servant had it in his power to be emancipated, and in that case he might prefer it. He also commanded obedience to all masters, especially to Christian masters, enjoining upon masters the duty of paying to their servants what is just and equal to the value of their labor, knowing that there was in heaven a master to whom they should all account. With regard to those without the church, as Christian men, we have nothing to do. I believe that it would be much more advantageous to masters than to most slaves that emancipation was practicable, and that in all grain growing states slavery was an incubus on their industry, and a great state misfortune, and that I would give my vote for its final abolition; but I must dissent wholly from the ground taken by the Scotch Anti-Slavery Society, as from that assumed by many American abolitionists.

      Such were my views, and I feared not to avow them; but I came not to Scotland to open my mouth upon such questions, and regretted, extremely regretted, the means taken to elicit my opinions on the subject. I farther said that I did not believe the question was now mooted in Edinburgh out of humanity, or from sympathy with the slave, but from hostility to my views of reformation, and of the present condition of Christianity in Great Britain, by those who were unable to oppose them, and therefore agitated this question rather to turn away the ears of the people from listening to me than to profit African or any other slaves in Europe or America.

      Such, in substance, were my remarks, and such were the documents produced and commented on during a discussion of some two hours, often interrupted with every sort of feeling and expression of feeling--hisses, cheers, groans, clapping of hands, questions, objections, inquiries, and long continued commotions of mingled feeling, some crying hear, hear, others, no, no, &c. &c., evidently having a decided majority against my views at times, but always a much more respectable minority than I had anticipated. I gave in proof that ecclesiastic intrigue more than anti-slavery conscientiousness or sympathy was now predominating;--the fact that other men, such as Dr. Beecher, and sundry members of the alliance Evangelical were allowed to preach here without interruption, although differing nothing in theory or in practice from myself. Some one muttered that Dr. Beecher and some other person were called to explain their views in some other places, if not in Edinburgh. But were they placarded in advance!! This had not been so done.

      Meantime Mr. Robertson and his friend Mr. Kennedy, and other brethren of that connection, using their feet, eyes, and hands to keep alive the anti-slavery spirit, while some of them were crying for Mr. Robertson to speak, even before I got through, annoyed me no little. I was obliged to say that it was rather strange that after all the means taken to publish and placard my alleged pro-slavery views--after all the pressing importunities that I should deliver one lecture on my position to American slavery--that the gentleman himself who requested me, would not allow me one evening without interruption, to develope my views before an audience to which he had [631] invited me, and which himself and others were continually haranguing on the subject; that they could not trust them to me one night, but must demand half of the time allotted to a single lecture, even half of the only evening I had to spend in this city!

      Mr. Robertson had the recklessness of what was due to truth and to himself to stand up and deny that he invited me to lecture one evening on the subject; so oppressed with the occasion, pale and ghastly, and in great perturbation of mind, he seemed to forget alike the decencies of social life and what he himself had positively and repeatedly said to me. But, indeed, the whole display on the part of the anti slavery society was more mobocratic than philosopical, more tumultuous than sedate, more fanatical than rational, more rude and violent than polished or humane; alike disgraceful in the superlative degree to the age and to the city in which such scenes were enacted; more like a French Jacobin or revolutionary tribunal than to a cool, deliberative, and candid people.

      On several occasions during the evening, so excited was the assembly, so clamorous and so noisy, that I was obliged to eulogize their new logic, their new mode of proving a proposition by three claps of the hands and one of the feet, and of disproving what they did not like by three logical hisses and one rhetorical groan, instead of the old fashioned way of offering the evidence of reason, the force of argument, or the energy of truth in support of their position or in opposition to mine. By such means I was enabled to protract my discourse, through numerous interruptions, with perfect composure till after ten o'clock,--when my strength lagging and their passions rising, some cried one thing and some another; some saying I was speaking against time, others invoking Mr. Robertson. I made a pause, Robertson arose, and with much gesticulation, said that since time had been denied him, he would appeal to the press. To the press, said I. The press is just what I want--to that I am always prepared to appeal when a proper antagonist appears. The concourse being in great commotion, much like one at Ephesus, I gathered up my documents when myself and friends beginning to move, the congregation broke up in much disorder; and here I must bid you good night, referring you to my next letter, accompanying this, made up of documents printed in the Christian Messenger for this month. These documents are my correspondence with Mr. Robertson, read in Edinburgh, during my lecture; also a letter from me, afterwards written from Dundee, addressed to the editor of the Edinburgh Weekly Journal, giving a succinct view of my position, and indicating a challenge from me to the Scottish Anti-Slavery Society to select their man, and I would meet him, either orally or in writing, on the Bible alone, and seek to sustain all my allegata.

[The Millennial Harbinger, Third Series, 4 (November 1847): 625-632.]