George Thompson, an English co-laborer with Garrison, is quoted as saying in a public address in 1835 that "Southern slaves ought, or at least had a right, to cut the throats of their masters."* Such utterances are rare, and they express a passing mood not in the least characteristic of the general spirit of the abolition movement; yet the fact that such statements did emanate from such a source made it comparatively easy for extremists of the opposition to cast odium upon all abolitionists.The only type of abolition known in South Carolina was that of the extreme Garrisonian agitators, and it furnished at least a shadow of excuse for mob violence in the North and for complete suppression of discussion in the South.To encourage slaves to cut the throats of their masters was far from being a rhetorical figure of speech in communities where slaves were in the majority.Santo Domingo was at the time a prosperous republic founded by former slaves who had exterminated the Caucasian residents of the island.Negroes from Santo Domingo had fomented insurrection in South Carolina.The Nat Turner incident was more than a suggestion of the dire possibilities of the situation.Turner was a trusted slave, a preacher among the blacks.He succeeded in concealing his plot for weeks.When the massacre began, slaves not in the secret were induced to join.A majority of the slain were women and children.Abolitionists who had lived in slave States never indulged in flippant remarks fitted to incite insurrection.This was reserved for the few agitators far removed from the scene of action.
* Schouler, "History of the United States under the Constitution," vol.V, p.217.
Southern planters who had determined at all hazards to perpetuate the institution of slavery were peculiarly sensitive on account of what was taking place in Spanish America and in the British West Indies.Mexico abolished slavery in 1829, and united with Colombia in encouraging Cuba to throw off the Spanish yoke, abolish slavery, and join the sisterhood of New World republics.
This led to an effective protest on the part of the United States.Both Spain and Mexico were advised that the United States could not with safety to its own interests permit the emancipation of slaves in the island of Cuba.But with the British Emancipation Act of 1833, Cuba became the only neighboring territory in which slavery was legal.These acts of emancipation added zeal to the determination of the Southern planters to secure territory for the indefinite extension of slavery to the southwest.When Lundy and Birney discovered these plans, their desire to husband and extend the direct political influence of abolitionists was greatly stimulated.To this end they maintained a moderate and conservative attitude.They took care that no abuse or misrepresentation should betray them into any expression which would diminish their influence with fair-minded, reasonable men.They were convinced that a clear and complete revelation of the facts would lead a majority of the people to adopt their views.
The debate in the Virginia Legislature in the session which met three months after the Southampton massacre furnishes a demonstration that the traditional anti-slavery sentiment still persisted among the rulers of the Old Dominion.It arose out of a petition from the Quakers of the State asking for an investigation preparatory to a gradual emancipation of the slaves.The debate, which lasted for several weeks, was able and thorough.No stronger utterances in condemnation of slavery were ever voiced than appear in this debate.Different speakers made the statement that no one presumed to defend slavery on principle--that apologists for slavery existed but no defenders.
Opposition to the petition was in the main apologetic in tone.
