It ought to be clear by this time that Congregationalism is under bonds to do its best to fit the Freedmen for their new condition and duties. They _are freemen_ and _citizens_ largely through the influence of the Congregational churches. No small part of the anti-slavery sentiment of the country which gripped the conscience and put into the word “_right_” an almost omnipotent meaning can be traced to the teaching of our pulpits. They were behind no others in preparing the people to carry into their political action what they thought in their hearts and uttered in their closets. But with every gain to freedom in the Northern mind a new pang was wrung out of the heart of the slave. The laws became more severe, the punishments more cruel, the tasks more exacting. The two sections were being driven asunder with a repulsive force which could only end in war. The South saw it and threatened; but the Northern conscience, quickened by the principles of religion and of the “higher law,” would concede nothing. The people said, “No more slave States; no more slave territory. If we _must_ have war, let it come; but slavery shall not be national.” This stern resolution carried a million and a half of men to our battle-fields, and held them there till the slave was free! It is not claimed that the convictions of equality and right which swayed the Northern mind were the result of Congregational teaching alone, but only that Congregationalism marched abreast of those moral forces which made the North equal to the work and sacrifice to which it was called. The responsibility, nevertheless, is the same as if our churches _alone_ had taught the doctrines which brought freedom to the slave. This, however, is only the first step in the work they did for the negro. No sooner was he made free than they insisted that he should be invested with all the dignities and rights of citizenship. They urged this upon the Government when nothing but the _direst_ necessity could justify it in putting the ballot into the hands of a million ignorant voters. The change in the negro’s condition was so radical—so above his capacity and education—that the highest moral obligation rested upon those who brought it about, to see that he was fitted for its duties. This was so clear to the Southern people that they have said, with as much force as logic: “We were ready to take care of the negro as a slave, in our way; but the North took him out of our hands by violence, and now let it take care of him in its way.” And why not? Especially, why should not the Congregational churches, foremost in arousing the conscience of the North against slavery, and in spurring the Government to smite the system and enfranchise the slave, now come to the front and lead him into the better future?