Soon after this, a paper in Baltimore fell into the hands of William Lloyd Garrison and was called the "Genius of Emancipation." Now, who was Wm. Lloyd Garrison? He was the grandson of a Tory during our revolutionary war, who, when peace was declared was compelled to flee the country to Nova Scotia, where this grandson was brought up, and in after years came back to Boston to seek a livelihood. The virus of abolitionism took deep in this foreigner who was a young enthusiast. On assuming the editorship of his paper he attacked all of the colonization and emancipation societies as being in the way of the great move of abolitionism, and farther said; "that the union of the States was also an obstacle."

Some people though these sentiments were treason, and others thought they were in accord with the Tory sentiments of his grandfather, who had done all he could to prevent our independence. In the year 1830 this same Garrison founded a new journal in Boston, and called it the Liberator. It was in this bitter sheet that he spread broadcast his most extreme views.

In 1831 the New England Anti-slavery society was formed, and in a short time the American Anti-slavery society was brought into existence under the management of that great triumvirate, Viz, Garrison, Tappan, and Berney.

The Sunday schools of New England now took up the abolition question, and sent out by the thousands their inflammatory appeals and highly colored engravings of blacks, undergoing all kinds of punishments inflicted by the Southern people.

All such stuff as this was sent through the Federal mails, and disciples of these men became so obnoxious in New York In 1832, that the dwelling of Arthur Tappan and the church of Dr. Cox were both demolished by a mob, and this action was approved by Mr. Jas. Watson Webb, in his great paper, The Courier and Enquire.

Garrison was sent by the Anti-slavery Societies to England in 1834, to obtain money for their cause and he soon returned, bringing home with him one Geo. Thompson, who was a member of parliament and a lecturer on abolitionism. This led to such an outcry that Thompson became alarmed for his safety and soon returned to England.

South Carolina had a law to detain all free blacks who came into her ports. Massachusetts claimed that all those that were detained were her citizens and as such South Carolina had no right to detain them.

While Massachusetts objected to South Carolina detaining her free blacks, she did not say a word about Ohio, Illinois and other Northern States for keeping them out of their territory, or giving a $500 bond for bringing a Negro into these States.

All of this is in perfect keeping with Puritanical inconsistency.

Mr. Hoar was sent by Massachusetts to Charleston to lay in formal complaints, but was at once dismissed. On his return he expressed great indignation and appealed to the Massachusetts legislature, and in revenge it passed the "Personal Liberty Bill" which was done to obstruct the "Fugitive Slave Law," which was then in force.

Up to this time abolitionism was only discussed as a moral question, but now it had gained such a headway that its leaders had determined to carry it into politics, where they expected to make it a stepping stone to power and emolument.

In 1838 they reckoned their strength and found that they were to weak to form a political ticket of their own in the state of New York for Governor, so they began dickering with leading politicians. At this time Mr. Marcy and Mr. Seward were the candidates for Governor of the opposing parties in the state. Now

the proper thing for the abolitionist to do at that time, would be to see which one of these candidates would commit himself to their doctrine. This, W. H. Seward readily did, and was elected Governor. It so happened that at that time in the State of New York there was a law called the "Sojournment Act" which allowed a slave holder to bring his black servants with him and remain in the State of New York for nine months, without prejudice to his rights.

When Mr. Seward was interrogated about this law in 1838, he sustained it; but in 1840, after he was elected Governor, he changed his mind, and refused to honor a requisition for a fugitive slave from the state of Virginia.

As late as 1840 the state of Ohio passed a resolution by its legislature, to the effect that slavery was an institution recognized by the Constitution, and the unlawful, unwise and un- constitutional interference by the fanatical abolitionists of the North with the institutions of the South were highly criminal.

What could have been plainer, more truthful and more manly, than that resolution, yet twenty years later Ohio sent 317,133. soldiers to overthrow it.

The abolition party of New England was becoming so embittered toward the South, that it forced some of the Southern States to change their sentiments toward emancipation; for instance Alabama had so changed as to pass an act in 1840 en- slaving all free blacks who remained in the State after Aug.1, 1840. In 1838, when the abolitionists met, they concluded that they were two weak to put out a State ticket in New York, but the next year they met at Warsaw , N. Y. I and set on foot a political party with a candidate of their own for president of the United States, and this candidate was Mr. Berney, who received in the presidential election in Nov. 1840, as its first abolition candidate 7000 votes.

The discussion of the slavery question in the campaign in 1840 also received a new stimulus from the Texas revolt.

In 1816 an insurrection headed by Americans broke out and the independence of Texas soon followed, and a scheme was set on foot to annex it to the United States.

At first Daniel Webster favored this scheme, but he was afterwards induced to change his mind, just as Mr. Seward, when Governor of Ne\v York changed his mind about the "Sojournment Act," when it was to the interest of his party to do so.

The New Englanders opposed the annexation of Texas as they did the Louisiana case in 1305, more on the ground of jealousy of the South than any thing else.

At this time the leading politicians did not know whether to support annexation or not. Henry Clay who opposed it lost the presidency in 1844. Martin Van Buren who opposed it failed to be re-nominated by the Democratic party in 1844.

Texas was admitted March 3. 1845, but with the agreement that four States should be formed out of the territory besides the one already in existence. and that the States so formed should be admitted with or without slavery, as their inhabitants might decide. but slavery should not exist north of latitude 36. 3°.