John Brown, Soldier of Fortune: A CritiqueWilson, Hill Peebles
History
John Brown, Soldier of Fortune: A Critique
Wilson, Hill Peebles
Brown, John, 1800-1859
To the men from the Pottawatomie, a massacre was simply a means to an
end. Brown and his sons harbored no feelings of animosity toward the
Doyles, the Shermans, and Wilkinson; but they knew that these men would
not give up to them, peaceably, the property which they coveted,
therefore they murdered them and took their horses. They knew that the
owners of slaves and lands in the Southern States would not, peaceably,
relinquish their ownership of this property; therefore they planned to
incite the slaves to kill their masters while they slept--and having
_thus emancipated_ the slaves, confiscate the estates of the
slave-holders, and put the assassins and themselves in possession of
them. This massacre, the most horrible that was ever seriously
contemplated in the brain of man, was to be executed under the pretense
that it was an humanitarian measure. In the name of humanity, they
proposed to undertake the midnight assassination of millions of men,
women, and children, and to contend for justification for their actions.
The word, with Brown, was a convenience, or an interchangeable term. A
definition of it, in the sense in which he used the word, is found in
his personal understanding, or interpretation rather, of its
co-relation, "The Golden Rule." He is quoted by Sanborn and others as
having stated "more than once": "I believe in the Golden Rule and the
Declaration of Independence. I think that both mean the same thing; and
it is better that a whole generation should pass off the face of the
earth--men, women and children--by a violent death than that one jot of
either should fail _in this country_. I mean exactly _so_, sir."[420]
The possibility that the blacks in the South might attempt to gain their
freedom by a general massacre of the whites, was a condition co-existent
with their enslavement. After 1831 that possibility became a fixed
impending probability; and the question of means to prevent the
inevitable cataclysm of blood, was a matter of constant concern in the
economy of the Southern States; with the result that various preventive
measures were adopted to discourage the possibility of attempts, by the
slaves, to organize for such undertakings, or to fit themselves, by
education or otherwise, to promote such organizations.
In the philosophy of John Brown, what Nat Turner had done in a section
of Southampton County, Virginia, could, if properly promoted, be done in
any other section or locality; and, if in any locality, then in every
locality, or throughout the whole South. Therefore, an insurrection by
the slaves, having for its object the overthrow of the existing State
governments of the South, was a venture, from his point of view, which
might be undertaken with reasonable prospects for success; the ultimate
result depending largely upon his ability to organize the slaves
effectively for revolt; to equip them for the initial uprising, and
thereafter to capably direct the movement.
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