Mr. Thompson in conversation with some of the students
repeatedly averred that every slaveholder in the United
States OUGHT TO HAVE HIS THROAT CUT; or DESERVED TO HAVE HIS
THROAT CUT; although he afterwards publicly denied that he
had said so. But the proof is direct and positive. In
conversation with one of the theological students in regard
to the moral instruction which ought to be enjoyed by the
slaves, he distinctly declared THAT EVERY SLAVE SHOULD BE
TAUGHT TO CUT HIS MASTER'S THROAT! I state the fact--knowing
the responsibility I am assuming, and challenge a legal
investigation.
On this tremendous document, I make but two remarks--The first is that
Francis Hall & Co. the publishers of the Spectator, were in character
and fortune, perfectly responsible to Mr. Thompson. The second is,
that if Mr. Thompson's rule of judgment was just, in that branch of
this same case--in the exercise of which he declared that another
paper in New York could never be got to publish his exculpatory
certificates in regard to this very transaction, _because_ the
publisher knew them to be true; then we are irresistibly bound on his
own showing to conjecture, that for the same reason he declined taking
up the challenge of the Spectator. There was only one more topic on
which he seemed called on to remark; and that he had several times
passed over, out of consideration of delicacy. It had all along been
his aim to use as little freedom as possible with the names of
individuals--and he could declare, that he had implicated by name, no
one except out of absolute necessity--that he had forborne to say true
but severe things of several who had been most unjustly commended
during this discussion--and had omitted of the very few he had
censured by name, decidedly worse things, than those he had uttered of
them--and which he might have uttered both truly and pertinently.
Amongst the cases of rather peculiar forebearance, was the oft cited
one, of a misguided young man, by the name of Thome, who went from
Kentucky to New York to repeat a most audacious speech which was no
doubt prepared for him, before an assembly literally the most _mixed_
that was ever convened in that city: having delivered which, he
departed with the pity or contempt of 9 10ths of all the decent people
in it, and went I know not whither, and dwells I know not where. The
victory as there trumpeted, and now celebrated, of which he was part
gainer, consisted of two portions--the destruction of the colonization
cause--and the degradation of Kentucky, his native state. The death of
the Society was signalised by a subscription of six thousand dollars
on the part of its friends; and the infamy of Kentucky was
illustrated by the ready stepping forward of four of her sons to
confront and confound the ingrate who commenced his career of manhood
by smiting his parent in the face. Who made the defence, may be
surmised from Mr.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account