THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 IN MEMORY OF 
 ALEXANDER GOLDSTEIN 
 
 
PAPERS 
 
 RELATING TO 
 
 THE GARRISON MOB. 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 THEODORE LTMAN, 3 D . 
 
 CAMBRIDGE : 
 WELCH, BIGELOW, AND COMPANY, 
 
 I KINTERS TO THE UNIVERSITY. 
 
 1870. 
 
LOAN STACK 
 
 UNIVERSITY PRESS : WELCH, BIGELOW, & Co., 
 CAMBRIDGE. 
 
f- 
 
 HARDLY a night passes in any of our large cities 
 without greater violence done to person and to 
 property than occurred in the so-called "Garrison 
 mob." Although its results scarcely entitle it to the 
 name of a riot, it has more historical importance 
 than can be claimed by some battles. This wretched 
 street fight was indeed the first muttering of that 
 awful storm which was to burst over this country a 
 quarter of a century later. 
 
 In October of 1835 there had come to Boston 
 Mr. George Thompson, a Scotchman, who proposed 
 to speak publicly in favor of the abolition of negro 
 slavery. This was a discussion which few people 
 then heard patiently, especially from the lips of a 
 foreigner ; and a considerable excitement followed. 
 
 There was to be a meeting of the Female Anti- 
 slavery Society, and the Mayor, Theodore Lyman, Jr., 
 sent a messenger to Mr. Garrison, editor of an anti- 
 slavery paper called the Liberator, to ask if Thomp 
 son would then speak; because, in such a case, it 
 would be necessary to provide additional police. 
 Mr. Garrison replied that Thompson would not be 
 
 132 
 
present, and consequently no unusual precautions 
 were taken. The meeting took place at the rooms 
 of the Society, No. 46 Washington Street, in the 
 afternoon of October 21st. 
 
 The Mayor was soon told that the few constables 
 on the spot were not enough to preserve order, and 
 he went in person with more men. The mob be 
 came larger and more threatening, but was prevented 
 by the police from entering the building. Mr. Gar 
 rison, considering his person in imminent danger, es 
 caped by a back window into Wilson s Lane, where 
 he was seized and roughly handled by the rioters, 
 and was dragged into State Street. There he was 
 rescued by the authorities, and taken into the Old 
 State House, a portion of which was then used as a 
 City Hall. As night was drawing on, and the mob 
 seemed likely to grow too strong for the constables, 
 it was thought best to place Mr. Garrison for safety 
 in the jail, and to this end he was committed, pro 
 forma., as implicated in a riot. He was taken from 
 the City Hall, placed by dint of hard fighting in a 
 carriage, and driven safely to the jail. The next 
 morning he was set free, having sustained certain 
 damage to his clothing, but none in his person. 
 
 Such is a sketch of this riot, and one that all 
 parties will assent to as true. But there are other 
 and important points which are by no means so 
 easily settled. The following newspaper articles will 
 bring out, quite emphatically, some of these points, 
 and will serve to introduce a general consideration 
 of the affair. 
 
5 
 
 No. I. 
 
 [From the Boston Daily Advertiser of Wednesday, November 3, 1869.] 
 THE GARRISON MOB. 
 
 To THE EDITORS OF THE BOSTON DAILY ADVERTISER : 
 
 In your report of Mr. Phillips s lecture on the 
 Question of To-morrow, he is made to say, concern 
 ing the Garrison or " Gentleman s " riot, " He saw 
 the Mayor of the city, cap in hand, almost on his 
 knees, entreating the men who were his social com 
 panions to have the kindness to obey the laws." 
 
 I beg to say that the above statement is false. 
 The Mayor of the city, with the slender police force 
 of that time, rescued Mr. Garrison by main force, and 
 saved his life. 
 
 This statement I make for the information of the 
 present generation. Those who knew the Mayor 
 knew also that he was not a.man to go on his knees 
 to anybody, certainly not to mobs. 
 
 It seems a little hard, when there are so many 
 living men at whom Mr. Phillips can throw mud, that 
 he should not confine his pastime to them. 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 THEODORE LYMAN. 
 
No. II. 
 
 THE GARRISON MOB. 
 
 To THE EDITORS OF THE BOSTON DAILY ADVERTISER : 
 
 I see the present Mr. Theodore Lyman denies the 
 correctness of my statement as to his father s con 
 duct at the Garrison mob. I said that Mayor Ly 
 man " besought, instead of commanding, that day, 
 and was, metaphorically speaking, on his knees to 
 the mob." His son disbelieves this, because such 
 conduct would be very unlike his father. He was 
 in his cradle that day. I was in Washington Street. 
 I saw his father beg and sue ; I heard him beseech 
 and entreat that mob to disperse and preserve order. 
 He never once commanded or sought to control it. 
 He never vindicated his office by even attempting 
 to rally a force and maintain order. Had he issued 
 one command, even one that was disobeyed, he 
 would have done all that in him lay to redeem 
 Boston, and I should have honored him. I saw him 
 consent, if not assist, at tearing down the antislavery 
 sign and throwing it to the mob, to propitiate its 
 rage. The city was mine as well as his, and I hung 
 my head, ashamed of it and him. 
 
 He was lamentably wanting on that occasion in 
 all that befits a magistrate. Pie broke his pledge, 
 made a week before, to the Female Antislavery 
 Society. The only order he issued that day was 
 one ordering its members, legally met in their own 
 hall, to disperse. He never commanded the mob to 
 disperse. 
 
The Mayor did well in giving Mr. Garrison the 
 only refuge which Boston, under such a mayor, 
 could furnish, its jail. He would have done his 
 duty had he vindicated, or died in the attempt to 
 vindicate, Mr. Garrison s right to speak what and 
 where he pleased, and to sleep under his own roof 
 in safety. 
 
 Then his career would have stood an honor to 
 that generation and an example to all coming ones. 
 He had ample means to control that mob. Ten 
 men shot and sent to deserved graves would have 
 scattered the mob in ten minutes. I could name a 
 dozen men who would have been equal to that 
 emergency. Mr. Hayes, lately of the Boston po 
 lice, standing in Lyman s place, would have reversed 
 the record of that hour. Mr. Garrison would have 
 slept that night at home. Some of the gentlemen 
 mobocrats would have slept in graves, and some 
 would have filled Mr. Garrison s cell in the Boston 
 jail. 
 
 Twenty years ago I said, " The time will come 
 when sons will deem it unkind and unchristian to 
 remind the world of acts their fathers take pride in." 
 That hour has come. I refer to old shames, not to 
 insult the dead, but to control the living. I have 
 no ill-will toward Mayor Lyman. His services to 
 the cause of education are an honor to his memory ; 
 and, if report can be trusted, he bitterly repented 
 his weakness on that shameful day. 
 
 But evil-doers have one motive more to restrain 
 them, if they can be made to feel that their children 
 will blush for the names they inherit. I bring these 
 
8 
 
 things up to show the world that reformers have 
 terrible memories, and that, even if base acts win 
 office and plaudits to-day, the ears of the actor s 
 children will tingle at the report of them half a 
 century hence. 
 
 WENDELL PHILLIPS. 
 November 3, 1869. 
 
 No. III. 
 
 [From the Boston Daily Advertiser of Monday, November 8, 1869.] 
 THE GARRISON MOB. 
 
 To THE EDITORS OF THE BOSTON DAILY ADVERTISER : 
 
 Mr. Wendell Phillips must take a flattering view 
 of his past life when he assumes that any judicial 
 mind will accept his statements as reliable. 
 
 Although I was " in my cradle " when the Garri 
 son riot took place, and was therefore unable to raise 
 my infant voice in beseeching the multitude, I have 
 not written without various and abundant docu 
 mentary evidence of the truth of my assertions, 
 assertions further confirmed by letters since received 
 from an eyewitness. 
 
 I have also a minute account of the whole affair 
 in the handwriting of the Mayor, whose word, I 
 may be allowed to think, is not more prejudiced 
 than, and certainly as generally reliable as, that of 
 Mr. Phillips, who says he was present. 
 
 I will not fill your columns with a matter merely 
 personal, by printing letters or other testimony. I 
 will simply state that I am prepared to prove to the 
 satisfaction of any reasonable person, 
 
1. That the Mayor did not humble himself before 
 the mob, but that, on the contrary, he told them, 
 from the door of the Old State House, that the law 
 should be maintained if it cost him his life. 
 
 2. That he did not assist in, or consent to, the 
 throwing of the Liberator sign to the mob. 
 
 3. That, with his own hands, and not without per 
 sonal risk, he rescued Mr. Garrison from a furious 
 crowd. 
 
 4. That he did a very sensible thing in keeping 
 Mr. Garrison in jail overnight ; and that Mr. Gar 
 rison himself, at that particular moment, was the 
 person who most clearly appreciated this happy con 
 trivance. 
 
 5. That the Mayor never " repented " his action, 
 but always felt grateful to have been able to over 
 come so considerable a crisis without loss of life. 
 
 In conclusion, allow me to say that I do not blush 
 for my father ; but, in a spirit of Christian charity, 
 I would gladly blush for Wendell Phillips, were he 
 not past all such help. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 THEODORE LYMAN. 
 
10 
 
 No. IY. 
 THE MOB OF 1835. 
 
 To THE EDITORS OF THE BOSTON DAILY ADVERTISER : 
 
 Mr. Theodore Lyman considers my testimony of 
 no value. If it concerned only a private matter, I 
 should ask no further hearing. But the mob of 
 1835 is one of grave interest and importance. I 
 will not, however, burden your columns with evi 
 dence ; but, choosing one of the statements he says 
 he can prove, I will show your readers how utterly 
 he is mistaken on that point, and leave them to 
 draw their own inferences as to the other assertions 
 he makes. The sacrifice of the sign "Antislavery 
 Rooms" was a decisive act, showing, far better 
 than words could, the attitude of the Mayor towards 
 the mob. I said Mayor Lyman consented to it, if 
 he did not assist in it. His son says he is prepared 
 to prove, 
 
 " 2. That he [Mayor Lyman] did not assist in, nor 
 consent to, the throwing of the Liberator sign to the 
 mob." 
 
 Let us see how the evidence stands. The mob 
 took place October 21, 1835. The Boston Atlas of 
 October 22, 1835, says : " Several gentlemen, at 
 the suggestion of the Mayor, took down the sign 
 bearing the words Antislavery Rooms, and .threw 
 it into the street. It was dashed into a thousand 
 splinters in a moment." 
 
 The New England Galaxy of that week says ; 
 " Down with the sign ! (Antislavery Rooms) was at 
 
11 
 
 length shouted, and two or three gentlemen, at the 
 request of the Mayor, took it down and lowered it 
 into the street, where it was speedily demolished." 
 
 Mr. Lucius B. Marsh, No. 210 Warren Avenue, 
 Boston, writes me this morning : " I saw Mr. Harry 
 Williams leave the Mayor s office (Old State House), 
 and he went directly to the stairs which led up to 
 the Antislavery Rooms, followed by a large number 
 of people, who evidently knew, or seemed to know, 
 the programme. (One of them carried a hammer.) 
 Mr. Williams in a moment or two appeared at the 
 window with his friend with the hammer. Mr. Wil 
 liams opened the window, and they both commenced 
 to take down the sign. He handed the sign towards 
 the sidewalk, where it was broken to pieces. Mr. 
 Williams then said : Fellow-citizens, I have been 
 directed by his Honor the Mayor to take down this 
 obnoxious sign. And you are now requested to go 
 to your homes. " 
 
 Mr. J. B. Palmer, No. 91 Devonshire Street, says 
 in a letter to me, dated also this morning : " Mr. 
 Williams appeared at the window of the Antislavery 
 Rooms, and said that, by the order of the Mayor the 
 sign would be removed, or words to the same pur 
 port. This I am positive of. The sign was loosened, 
 .... jumped on, broken in pieces, and carried off by 
 the mob." 
 
 Mr. N. B. Chamberlain, No. 310 Washington Street, 
 in a letter to me, just received, says: "I can 
 assure you that I went with Harry Williams to the 
 Old State House, and met Mayor Lyman on the 
 steps, during the afternoon of the Garrison mob. 
 
12 
 
 Mr. Williams asked permission to take down the 
 antislavery sign. I protested against such submis 
 sion to the mob, repeating my protest as often as 
 Mr. Williams urged the measure. Mr. Lyman ap 
 peared exceedingly agitated, and in fearful doubt 
 what to do ; but at last reluctantly consented. Mr. 
 Williams immediately left, I following to the stairs 
 of the Antislavery Kooms. Mr. Williams went up 
 with hammer in hand, appeared at the window, and 
 commenced tearing down the sign. It was soon 
 accomplished, when he exultingly declared the work 
 done by order of the Mayor." 
 
 This afternoon I have been favored with the fol 
 lowing note from my friend Mr. Garrison : 
 
 " In case you make any rejoinder to Mr. Lyman s 
 reply to you in the Advertiser of this morning, I 
 desire you to state, in my behalf, that the assertion 
 of Mr. L. in regard to my having been sent to jail 
 by his father, at the time of the mob in 1835, 
 Mr. Garrison himself, at that particular moment, 
 was the person who most clearly appreciated this 
 happy contrivance, is without any foundation. A 
 happy contrivance, indeed, to shut up an innocent 
 man in jail in order to save his life, and omit to 
 arrest any of the rioters who were seeking his life ! 
 And this a faithful discharge of official duty by one 
 sworn to execute the laws of the Commonwealth ! 
 You are certainly right in your criticisms of Mayor 
 Lyman s conduct." 
 
 I leave the decision on this point to your readers. 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 WENDELL PHILLIPS. 
 
 November 8, 1869. 
 
13 
 
 It is proper first to see what charges Mr. Phillips 
 brings forward. In his lecture he made only one, 
 which I will call 
 
 A. That the Mayor meanly entreated rioters to 
 obey the laws (see No. I.). 
 
 In No. II. it will be found that he has added as 
 follows : 
 
 B. That the Mayor never sought to command the 
 mob, nor did he issue any order. 
 
 C. That he consented, if he did not assist, at tear 
 ing down the antislavery sign, and throwing it to 
 the mob, to propitiate its rage. 
 
 D. That he broke his pledge (what pledge ?) made 
 to the Female Antislavery Society. 
 
 E. That he ordered said Society to disperse. 
 
 F. That he had ample means to control the mob, 
 and should have shot ten men ; but did not control, 
 and did not shoot. 
 
 Before considering these charges, it will be well 
 to introduce two or three accounts of this affair. 
 The first of these (No. V.) is in the handwriting of 
 Mayor Lyman, and was found among his papers. 
 The second (No. VI.) is an article signed " Abolition 
 ist," published in the Liberator, November, 1835. 
 It was written by Hon. Samuel E. Sewall, in reply 
 to a singularly scurrilous attack on the Mayor, in 
 the same paper. Mr. Sewall is well known as one 
 of the " Original Abolitionists," and his testimony is 
 particularly important, because he was in the build 
 ing during the riot and assisted Garrison in his 
 escape. The third account (No. VII.) is that of Mr. 
 Garrison himself. A few passages, which do not af- 
 
14 
 
 feet the present discussion, are omitted. The origi 
 nal will be found in Mrs. Stowe s " Men of our Times/ 
 page 172. 
 
 No. V. 
 ACCOUNT BY MAYOR LYMAN, 
 
 IN HIS OWN HANDWRITING, FOUND AMONG HIS PAPERS. 
 
 I think it was on the 18th of October that a 
 notice appeared in the Transcript, a daily evening 
 paper, that a meeting of the Female Abolition So 
 ciety would be held in the Society s room in Wash 
 ington Street on the 21st instant, at three o clock in 
 the afternoon, and that addresses might be expected 
 from leading friends of the cause. In the course of 
 the morning of the last-mentioned day an anony 
 mous handbill * was distributed, stating that Thomp 
 son would address this meeting, and calling on the 
 citizens to " snake him out " and carry him to the 
 tar-kettle. Neither the author of the handbill nor 
 
 * THOMPSON, THE ABOLITIONIST. 
 
 That infamous foreigner known as Thompson will hold forth this after 
 noon at the Liberator office, No. 48 Washington Street. The present is 
 a fair opportunity for the friends of the Union to snake Thompson out. 
 It will be a contest between Thompson and the friends of the Union. 
 A purse of 100 dollars has been raised by a number of patriotic citizens, 
 to reward the individual who shall first lay violent hands on Thompson, 
 so that he may be brought to the tar-kettle before dark. 
 
 Friends of the Union, be vigilant. 
 
 BOSTON, Wednesday, 12 o clock. 
 
15 
 
 the mode of its circulation was, at the time, known, 
 or could be traced. 
 
 In the forenoon of the 21st instant I sent one of 
 the Deputy-Marshals * to the Liberator office, a well- 
 known Abolition paper, in order to ascertain whether 
 Thompson was in town or not. The officer was 
 assured by Garrison, one of the editors of the paper, 
 that Thompson was not, and that he would not be 
 present at the meeting in the afternoon. On re 
 ceiving this information I thought that, as Thomp 
 son was the object of popular disfavor, no serious 
 disturbance of the peace was to be feared at a meet 
 ing it was known he did not attend. I took, there 
 fore, no other precaution than to have a small num 
 ber of police-officers assembled for the afternoon. 
 More especially I conceived there was no danger of 
 a riot, as, but a short time before, the same Society, I 
 believe, held a meeting, where quiet and order were 
 maintained by a few constables, though a number 
 of noisy, ill-disposed persons attempted to interrupt 
 the proceedings. 
 
 During the summer and autumn, the public mind 
 being in a very heated, irritable state, the city had 
 now and then been menaced with a riot. On seeing 
 meetings announced that I thought likely to lead to 
 tumult and disorder, I had, on several occasions, 
 expressed that opinion to the persons concerned, at 
 the same time admitting their right to hold these 
 meetings, and acknowledging that it was my duty 
 and purpose to protect them in the exercise of their 
 right. I expressed these sentiments to some gentle- 
 
 * See No. XIV. 
 
16 
 
 men of the Methodist connection, when it was pub 
 licly announced that Avery,* who had been recently 
 tried in Rhode Island for a murder of a very aggra 
 vating description, would preach on a week-day 
 evening ; once, also, to some members of the 
 Colonization Society, and twice, at least, to mem 
 bers of Abolition Societies. Some of the meetings 
 proposed took place, others did not; and though 
 there was once or twice a good deal of noise and 
 crowding, nothing like a riot occurred. 
 
 In the afternoon of the 21st I went to the Mayor 
 and Aldermen s room a few minutes before three 
 o clock, and as I passed across Washington Street, 
 seeing that a number of people had assembled in 
 the neighborhood of the Abolition Room, I sent Mr. 
 Pollard to the spot with several officers, with instruc 
 tions to send for me if he thought necessary. I was 
 soon informed that the crowd was increasing very 
 rapidly, and that the Society could not proceed in 
 their business. In fact, on reaching the ground, I 
 found the street literally full opposite the door lead 
 ing to the Society s room, which was on the third 
 story. Of this door and passage-way I took posses 
 sion, by the aid of the officers already on the spot 
 and of the few that came with me. I placed myself 
 on the third or fourth step of the staircase, where I 
 could see all in the street opposite the door, and 
 some distance to the right and left. The crowd 
 greatly increasing, and the excitement exceedingly 
 
 * A clergyman tried for the mysterious murder of a young woman, 
 but acquitted, both by the court and by his p^yn sect. He died in Ohio 
 during the past year. ED. 
 
17 
 
 so, I stated to the people within the sound of my 
 voice, that Thompson was not in town, supposing 
 that this declaration might induce some to go away 
 and render others more quiet, but it had no such 
 effect. The mob becoming more boisterous and 
 inflamed, I was well satisfied that we were menaced 
 with a serious riot. The passage-way was, however, 
 maintained by the officers, but by no means with 
 out the exercise of great strength as well as spirit. 
 Having no doubt of what was approaching, I went 
 up stairs with the intention of representing the 
 state of things to the females assembled, and of ad 
 vising them to withdraw. I found twenty or thirty 
 persons (perhaps one half lads) crowding about the 
 door of the room. I was not aware till that time 
 that these individuals were in the building, but I 
 suppose that they entered before Mr. Pollard reached 
 the spot. And in consequence of the dense throng 
 now in front, it was very difficult to get them out. 
 On entering the room, I found twenty-five or thirty 
 women assembled there, mostly white, but some 
 negroes and mulattoes. They were all seated except 
 the chairman ; but, on speaking to them, several rose 
 and came towards me. One said in substance, that 
 if it was necessary to die in that cause, they might 
 as well die there and then. Not considering these 
 women in any danger of their lives or of personal 
 injury, at the worst, exposed only to insult and 
 to be the spectators of a disgraceful riot, I smiled 
 and replied, " At any rate they could not die there." 
 Another said that they would withdraw, if I would 
 secure them a passage. To effect this I went down 
 
 3 
 
18 
 
 stairs to the street door, and after some difficulty a 
 lane was opened in the crowd through which the 
 women passed. There were some groans and some 
 hissing by the mob, but more laughter. The 
 women appeared to be very willing to leave the 
 room. I heard no objection expressed beyond the 
 remark, already mentioned, in regard to martyrdom. 
 
 But the mob did not disperse. On the contrary, 
 they now began to cry vehemently, even furiously, 
 for Garrison. At this time I did not know that he 
 was in the building. It was now perhaps four 
 o clock,* and the afternoon was dark and cloudy. 
 We had the prospect before us of a most stormy 
 night. I had no police beyond what was necessary 
 to keep the street door during daylight, and to 
 guard the upper rooms of the building, nor any 
 means of procuring an additional force till after 
 dark, and in season to prevent immediate and great 
 outrages and damage both to persons and property. 
 
 Thompson not being in town, Garrison now ap 
 peared to be the object of popular vengeance. I 
 ascertained, also, about this time, that there were 
 two or three gentlemen in the building that were 
 his friends, and that felt very solicitous for his safety, 
 but they said that he could not get out on the roof 
 or escape by the rear. A person, also, that I thought 
 owned the building or property in it, was very 
 anxious for Garrison s removal, for fear of injury to 
 the premises by the mob. Up to this time I had 
 left my position on the staircase but once. Seeing, 
 however, more and more of the menacing, raging 
 
 * The sun sets, at that season, a few minutes past five. ED. 
 
19 
 
 state of the mob, which, as far as I could judge from 
 the place where I stood, increased continually in 
 numbers, and being exceedingly anxious for Gar 
 rison, for whom a cry was often raised, I went up 
 again to the upper part of the building, and in the 
 Abolition Koom I now saw Garrison, and about him 
 his friends that I have mentioned. There were also 
 in the same room several individuals that had ob 
 tained admittance before the passage-way was occu 
 pied by the constables. Whether the latter knew 
 Garrison or not I cannot say. I spoke to him, how 
 ever, and as his friends had told me that there was 
 no means of escape for him by the roof or the rear of 
 the building, I asked him if he could not find $ place 
 in the garret where he could remain concealed. He 
 said that he would see, and went up the attic stairs 
 with alacrity. This is all that I said to Garrison 
 during the afternoon. 
 
 I returned to my position at the bottom of the 
 staircase in the passage-way, which I did not again 
 quit till the mob rushed up Washington Street. 
 
 From the time that the females withdrew I ob 
 served that the sign of the Society now and then 
 attracted the notice of this angry mob, their ill-tem 
 per displaying itself in the shape of shouts and yells. 
 I suppose it was the only thing they could see that 
 reminded them of the object of their vengeance. I 
 thought, too, that as soon as it became dark, it might 
 occur to these rioters, that, if they could get stones 
 (and there were plenty there, as State Street had 
 been recently macadamized) they would commence 
 a pelting of this sign, and from the sign proceed to 
 
20 
 
 the windows of the building, and then, perhaps, to 
 the constables and others engaged in maintaining 
 order. I therefore sent a person up the stairs to see 
 if this sign could be taken into the room from the 
 window. Instead of that being done, the man was 
 interfered with by some of the lads and men, already 
 mentioned as being in the building, the sign-board 
 torn off the hooks and thrown down into the street.* 
 In the mean time Garrison had escaped. By the 
 aid of his friends. he got out of the back window of 
 a bookseller s shop upon a shed in the rear of the 
 building, and thence fled to Wilson s Lane. I was in 
 formed of this fact as soon as the escape was effected, 
 though I did not witness the transaction. I thought 
 the danger of a boisterous night was now much di 
 minished ; Garrison, I supposed, was safe, and I had 
 little doubt but that sufficient men could be assem 
 bled in season to prevent, at any rate to check and 
 stop, serious mischief. 
 
 * I think that Garrison in one of his papers in the Liberator says that 
 I " ordered " the ladies to retire from the Abolition room. " An Ab 
 olitionist " says, " he urged the ladies to retire." " An Abolitionist " is 
 Mr. Samuel E. Sewall. He was in the building the whole time, but 
 neither he nor Garrison were in the Abolition room at the time I went 
 in; but Mr. Sewall was as likely to have correct information from the 
 ladies themselves as Garrison. He was doubtless as much in their friend 
 ship and confidence. He states the fact correctly. 
 
 Garrison, I think, also says, or intimates, that I directed the sign of the 
 Society to be thrown into the street. 
 
 " An Abolitionist " says, the Mayor, " in sanctioning the removal of the 
 Society s sign." This is far from saying that I ordered it to be thrown 
 into the street. Mr. Sewall was very active the whole afternoon in efforts 
 for Garrison s security, and finally did a great deal towards aiding him to 
 escape. He probably saw what was done about the sign. Garrison 
 could not, for he was concealed. He must have heard from others, or 
 imagined it. 
 
21 
 
 Perhaps ten minutes after I was told that Gar 
 rison had escaped a person informed me that the 
 mob had caught him. I said, " No, he has been gone 
 eight or ten minutes." The gentleman repeated his 
 remark, and said that he was in the upper story of 
 the building looking out of a back window, and 
 from the movement of the crowd he was satisfied 
 they had found him. I thought this very improb 
 able, not knowing that Wilson s Lane was beset. 
 While speaking, however, to Mr. Pollard, I observed 
 the whole crowd in front of the building turn and run 
 up Washington Street. I no longer had any doubt 
 but that Garrison, or some one, was found. I left 
 the passage-way instantly, told the officers to follow, 
 and ran with the mob. When I reached the street 
 on the north side of the City Hall, I looked down 
 and saw a vast throng passing to the south along 
 the head of State Street. I continued on past the 
 Post-Office. 
 
 On my way from the Liberator office to the City 
 Hall, a short distance, say one hundred and fifty 
 yards, several persons said to me, " They are going 
 to hang him ; for God s sake, save him ! " at least, ten 
 or fifteen said this. I turned down the street south 
 of the City Hall, and there I saw Garrison, without 
 his hat, in the midst of what seemed a prodigious 
 concourse of people. I rushed to his rescue. I met 
 him a little to the east of the south door of the 
 Hall. He was in the hands of two men, one hold 
 ing him with great strength on each side. As soon 
 as I reached Garrison, he looked up (before, his head 
 was bent to the earth) and smiled. I said to the 
 
22 
 
 men who held him, " Take him into my office." I 
 placed myself before him and backed, as well as I 
 could, towards the steps of the Hall. After a short 
 struggle, and in the midst of a vast deal of noise 
 and clamor, we reached the steps. Going up the 
 steps, I sank partly down on a man that had fallen. 
 Garrison was forced into the City Hall, and the doors 
 were shut. This was only effected by the use of 
 great physical strength. The mob made no attempt 
 to come in at the south door, but great numbers ran 
 round and entered at the north so as to fill the 
 lower hall. Garrison was, however, carried up stairs. 
 I took my station at the foot of the staircase leading 
 to the Mayor and Aldermen s room. The crowd 
 was extreme for a minute. I spoke to the people 
 and said in substance, that the law must be main 
 tained, the order of the city preserved, and that I 
 would lay down my life on that spot to effect these 
 objects. These remarks were well received. The 
 crowd continued intense in the street on the south 
 side of the Hall. I therefore went to the window 
 over the south door, and got out on the ledge or cap 
 over that door, where I was able to stand, though 
 the position was anything but safe. I here again 
 spoke to the people very much as in the Hall. 
 These remarks were also well received. The mob 
 now appeared to be waiting for a movement on the 
 part of the city authorities. . It was nearly dusk, and 
 the moment was critical ; for if Garrison was kept in 
 the City Hall till night, no one could doubt but that 
 there would be a great tumult. The mob had, in 
 the first place, been roused to fresh vigor by having 
 
23 
 
 found Garrison, and then greatly inflamed by having 
 had him taken out of their grasp. After careful 
 deliberation no suitable place could be thought of 
 but the jail. Sheriff Parkman, who was present, 
 said that he would commit him as a rioter. The 
 usual law paper was made out, and Garrison agreed 
 to go to jail on the condition (as I was informed by 
 Parkman) that he should not be subject to any ex 
 pense. A carriage was procured, and, after a prodi 
 gious deal of resistance on the part of the mob, he 
 was placed in it ; and, after a second severe strug 
 gle, the carriage was driven off. The hackman 
 luckily had good horses, and had good courage 
 himself, for in the course of a hundred yards or so 
 he got his horses into a gallop, and then, instead of 
 going towards the jail, he drove towards Cam 
 bridge bridge. The mob (or a part of it) followed 
 the carriage, but the manoeuvre of the hackman dis 
 tracted them, and a large portion stopped in Bow- 
 doin Square. 
 
 Running the greater part of the way, I reached 
 the jail before the carriage, which, however, soon 
 came up, but not before between two and three 
 hundred persons had assembled there. But a line 
 was made to the jail by officers, and, on the door 
 being opened, Garrison seemed to bound from the 
 carriage to the jail door with a single leap. Mob 
 about the jail then dispersed. 
 
 I went to my office and took all the precautions 
 in my power for the quiet of the town during the 
 night, having all the watch on the alert, and having 
 officers placed in the neighborhood of Garrison s 
 
24 
 
 house and the Liberator office. The night passed 
 off without disturbance, though there was a very 
 large collection of people on Washington Street till 
 towards ten o clock. 
 
 Throughout the whole of this riot Garrison ac 
 ceded cheerfully and readily to the measures pro 
 posed for his security and protection. 
 
 The property destroyed on this occasion, so far as 
 I have been informed, was a panel of a door broken 
 in, a wooden partition somewhat injured, and the 
 sign of the Society broken up. The whole to the 
 amount, perhaps, of fifteen or twenty dollars. 
 
 Garrison himself received no personal injury. 
 His trousers w r ere torn, and I believe he lost his hat. 
 
 Mr. Pollard, the city marshal, remained the whole 
 time by the door of the building while the mob 
 were in Washington Street ; Sheriff Parkman in the 
 upper rooms. Being in the office when I was sent 
 for early in the afternoon, he volunteered to go and 
 aid in keeping the peace. He contributed much to 
 that object by the courage he displayed, as well as 
 good-nature, which never left him, though he was 
 once or twice roughly handled. It was intended 
 that Sheriff Parkman should go to the jail in the 
 carriage with Garrison, but he could not be got in. 
 
25 
 
 No. VI. 
 
 ARTICLE, BY HON. SAMUEL E. SEWALL, SIGNED "AN ABOLITION 
 IST," PUBLISHED IN THE LIBERATOR IN NOVEMBER, 1835. 
 
 CONDUCT OF THE MAYOR. 
 
 MR. GARRISON : 
 
 I read with deep feelings of pain and regret an 
 article in the last Liberator, signed " Hancock/ in 
 which the writer charges Mr. Lyman, the Mayor of 
 Boston, with being a co-operator with the mob in 
 this city of the 21st ult., and makes a show of 
 labored argument to substantiate his accusation. 
 
 I am neither the eulogist nor the apologist of 
 Mr. Lyman. But I believe that he was as sincerely 
 desirous of suppressing the riot as any man in the 
 city, and adopted such measures as seemed to him 
 calculated to effect the object. % 
 
 If he committed any errors on the occasion, it is 
 just that they should be pointed out, but with the 
 kindness and courtesy which are due to every man 
 who means to do his duty. To those who are dis 
 posed to judge harshly of his conduct in a new and 
 difficult emergency, I would say, Have you ever at 
 tempted to put down a mob yourselves ? 
 
 The writer of the piece referred to argues, in the 
 first place, that the Mayor was accessory to the mob, 
 from his previous conduct. 
 
 He says that the Mayor exerted all his private 
 personal influence for some time previous to Homer 
 and Palmer s call for the mob, to dissuade Abolition- 
 
 4 
 
26 
 
 ists from holding public meetings. Is it fair from 
 this to conclude that the Mayor wished for mobs ? 
 His desire obviously was the very reverse, that is, 
 to persuade the Abolitionists to forego their meet 
 ings, and thus afford no excuse for mobs. The writer 
 ought to have added in this connection, if he was 
 aware of the fact, that Mr. Lyman always said, if the 
 Abolitionists chose to have meetings, in spite of 
 the excited state of public feeling, he would defend 
 the right of free discussion at the peril of his life. 
 
 Mr. Ly man s next offence is, that he was chairman 
 of the proslavery Faneuil Hall meeting.* I regret 
 that he should have aided 011 that disgraceful occa 
 sion ; but I am not aware that he or any other per 
 son who addressed that assembly was in favor of 
 mobs. Now, although the tendency of such a meet 
 ing, when the public mind was in a state of effer 
 vescence, was probably to encourage lawless violence 
 against Abolitionists, yet it seems to me most un 
 charitable to charge men like Mr. Lyman, whom we 
 know to have been always opposed to such violence, 
 with a design to promote it, without some more 
 direct evidence to substantiate the charge. 
 
 In regard to the gallows erected before Mr. Gar 
 rison s door, it would, it seems to me, have been 
 proper for the city government to have made efforts 
 to detect the offenders who placed it there. But I 
 cannot say that the city authorities were in favor 
 
 * " A meeting not called for the purpose of exciting a mob against the 
 Abolitionists, but for the expressed purpose of discountenancing them 
 
 , a meeting the call for which was signed by some of the most 
 
 upright and pious men in this city." 
 
 "ANOTHER ABOLITIONIST," in the Liberator, November, 1835. 
 
27 
 
 of mobs because they might think the course I ap 
 proved unnecessary or inexpedient. The gallows, it 
 should be recollected, was very promptly removed 
 by the city officers. 
 
 Hancock next contends that the conduct of the 
 Mayor, between the direct call for the mob and its 
 assembling, shows him to have been accessory to it. 
 Hancock contends that when the Mayor knew of 
 the call for violence, he was bound to say that the 
 ladies should have their meeting, and if appearances 
 demanded, he was bound by the laws of the city to 
 have called out the military, and to have lined the 
 streets with bayonets and cannon. Here, it seems to 
 me, Hancock is altogether wrong. I do not know 
 whether there is any law of the city which author 
 izes the Mayor to assemble a military force, because 
 a mob is anticipated. But supposing there is such a 
 law, the occasion did not seem to require a military 
 force to be assembled in anticipation of the meeting. 
 The Mayor, I believe, had made such arrangements 
 as he thought would be sufficient to quell the mob, 
 if any should arise. Was he bound to do more ? 
 He was promptly on the spot, soon after the com 
 mencement of the tumult, with the City Marshal and 
 constables, a force which he probably supposed 
 was sufficient for the emergency. 
 
 The conduct of the Mayor during the mob is 
 charged as proof of his being accessory to it. But 
 does Hancock give us any detailed account of the 
 Mayor s conduct at this time, in support of the 
 charge ? no. He offers a long imaginary (!!!) 
 dialogue, which he says he thinks is a just inference 
 
28 
 
 from the Mayor s conduct during this period. A 
 more unfair course than that adopted by your cor 
 respondent could scarcely have been conceived of. 
 
 The Mayor is held up to ridicule and contempt by 
 words put into his mouth which he confessedly never 
 uttered. Suppose a man on trial for any offence, 
 and a witness should undertake to tell what he 
 thinks, judging from the prisoner s conduct, he might 
 have said. Would such a witness be listened to for 
 a moment ? Yet this is the mode in which Hancock 
 proposes to try the Mayor. 
 
 Perhaps I might conclude without any further 
 answer to this branch of the accusation. But let us 
 examine the real course of the Mayor s conduct, and 
 see if it affords any proof of his co-operating with 
 the mob. 
 
 He urged the ladies to retire. 
 
 Whether this was the most judicious course or 
 not I shall not stop to inquire. I believe many 
 Abolitionists think it was right for the ladies to 
 quit the room. It certainly affords us no reason 
 for doubting the Mayor s good faith, that he rec 
 ommended this course. 
 
 The Mayor, with his officers, certainly cleared the 
 building of the rioters, and defended its entrance 
 afterwards, for a long time, against repeated and 
 violent assaults. 
 
 He thus protected Mr. Garrison s life, and the 
 property of the Society, and so far, it seems to me, 
 he deserves commendation. 
 
 I will not, for a moment, justify the Mayor in 
 sanctioning the removal of the Society s sign. But I 
 
29 
 
 have no doubt he acted honestly, in the hope that 
 this course might pacify the mob, and tend to pre 
 vent further outrage. For such an error of judg 
 ment, it seems to me most uncharitable to charge 
 him with being leagued with the mob. 
 
 The Mayor has been very much blamed for not 
 taking the course for suppressing the riot which is 
 directed by a recent statute.* I know not what his 
 motive was for this neglect of duty. I certainly 
 shall not attempt to justify it. Yet, taking the whole 
 of his conduct on the occasion into view, and know 
 ing that he was, in fact, using exertion to oppose 
 and disperse the mob, it seems to be absurd to con 
 tend that he could feel any sympathy with a lawless 
 rabble, who were endeavoring to prostrate his au 
 thority. 
 
 In the imaginary dialogue, Hancock most unfairly 
 represents the Mayor as having betrayed Mr. Garri 
 son s escape from the building, and thus induced the 
 crowd to pursue him. The charge is wholly ground 
 less. 
 
 When Sheriff Parkman stated to the multitude 
 that he could not find Mr. Garrison in the building, 
 it was supposed by those who saw Mr. Garrison 
 escape out of the window that he was already safe 
 from pursuit. The communication was made for 
 the purpose of dispersing the crowd. No inti 
 mation, I am confident, was given by the Mayor 
 or Sheriff Parkman that Mr. Garrison had escaped 
 from the building. The conduct of the Mayor after 
 Mr. Garrison was brought to his office seems to 
 
 * See page 62. ED. 
 
30 
 
 have been dictated by an anxious desire to promote 
 his safety. His measures at this time seem to have 
 been in the main prompt and judicious. I should 
 have preferred that Mr. Garrison should have been 
 sent out of town rather than to the jail. But the 
 great object of saving Mr. Garrison was success 
 fully accomplished. The Mayor is charged by Han 
 cock with false imprisonment of Mr. Garrison. But 
 I believe Mr. Garrison went voluntarily to the 
 jail. 
 
 The conduct of the Mayor since the mob is next 
 arraigned. He is blamed for not exerting himself 
 to bring the rioters to justice. If he is blame 
 worthy in this, it is a blame which he shares with 
 many other citizens, including some Abolitionists. 
 For it is competent for any citizen to prosecute 
 these offenders. 
 
 However, I admit that the city government is to 
 blame for not having made suitable efforts to detect 
 the rioters and the publishers of the handbills. But 
 I cannot infer from this that they were friendly to 
 the mob, but merely that in their opinion it is not 
 advisable for the city government to act on the sub 
 ject. Dislike to abolition principles has probably 
 had an influence in leading to this conclusion. Yet 
 however much I disapprove of the silence in which 
 our city authorities have passed over an enormous 
 and high-handed violation of the laws, I cannot 
 conclude from thence that they either encouraged 
 or approved of the riot. 
 
 I must conclude. We should be just even to our 
 opponents. We should endeavor to judge charita- 
 
31 
 
 bly of their conduct, and not ascribe it to the worst 
 possible motives. In looking at the course which 
 they have pursued, we should be ever on the watch 
 not to be carried into false judgment by party feel 
 ings. While truth compels us to extenuate nothing 
 either in friend or foe, we should be equally careful 
 
 to " set down naught in malice." 
 
 AN ABOLITIONIST. 
 BOSTON, Saturday, November 21, 1835. 
 
 No. VII. 
 ACCOUNT BY MR. WILLIAM L. GARRISON, 
 
 TO BE FOUND IN MRS. STOWED "MEN OF OUR TIMES." 
 
 As the meeting was to commence at three o clock, 
 p. M., I went to the hall about twenty minutes before 
 that time. Perhaps a hundred individuals had al 
 ready gathered around the street door and opposite 
 to the building, and their number was rapidly aug 
 menting. On ascending into the hall, I found about 
 fifteen or twenty ladies assembled, sitting with se 
 rene countenances, and a crowd of noisy intruders 
 (mostly young men) gazing upon them, through 
 whom I urged my way with considerable difficulty. 
 " That s Garrison," was the exclamation of some of 
 their number, as I quietly took my seat. Perceiv 
 ing that they had no intention of retiring, I went 
 to them and calmly saicl, " Gentlemen, perhaps you 
 are not aware that this is a meeting of the Boston 
 Female Antislavery Society, called and intended 
 exclusively for ladies, and those only who have 
 been invited to address them. Understanding this 
 
32 
 
 fact, you will not be so rude or indecorous as to 
 thrust your presence upon this meeting. If, gen 
 tlemen" I pleasantly continued, "any of you are 
 ladies in disguise, why, only apprise me of the 
 fact, give me your names, and I will introduce you 
 to the rest of your sex, and you can take seats 
 among them accordingly." I then sat down, and 
 for a few moments their conduct was more orderly. 
 However, the stairway and upper door of the hall 
 were soon densely filled with a brazen-faced crew, 
 whose behavior grew more and more indecent and 
 outrageous. Perceiving that it would be impracti 
 cable for me, or any other person, to address the 
 ladies ; and believing, as I was the only male Aboli 
 tionist in the hall, that my presence would serve as 
 a pretext for the mob to annoy the meeting, I held 
 a short colloquy with the excellent President of the 
 Society, telling her that I would withdraw unless 
 she particularly desired me to stay. It was her ear 
 nest wish that I would retire, as well for my own 
 safety as for the peace of the meeting. She assured 
 me that the Society would resolutely but calmly 
 proceed to the transaction of its business, and leave 
 the issue with God. I left the hall accordingly, and 
 would have left the building if the staircase had 
 not been crowded to excess. This being impractica 
 ble, I retired into the Antislavery office (which is 
 separated from the hall by aboard partition), accom 
 panied by my friend, Mr. Charles C. Burleigh. It 
 was deemed prudent to lock the door, to prevent 
 the mob from rushing in and destroying our publi 
 cations. 
 
33 
 
 In the mean time the crowd in the street had aug 
 mented from a hundred to thousands. The cry was 
 for "Thompson! Thompson!" But the Mayor had 
 now arrived, and, addressing the rioters, he assured 
 them that Mr. Thompson was not in the city, and 
 besought them to disperse. As well might he have 
 attempted to propitiate a troop of ravenous wolves. 
 None went away, but the tumult continued momen 
 tarily to increase. It was apparent, therefore, that 
 the hostility of the throng was not concentrated upon 
 Mr. Thompson, but that it was as deadly against the 
 Society and the Antislavery cause. The fact is wor 
 thy of special note, for it incontestibly proves that 
 the object of these " respectable and influential " 
 rioters was to put down the cause of Emancipation, 
 and that the prejudice against Mr. Thompson was 
 only a mere pretext. 
 
 Notwithstanding the presence and frantic behavior 
 of rioters in the hall, the meeting of the Society 
 was regularly called to order by the President. She 
 read a select and appropriate portion of Scripture, 
 and offered a fervent prayer to God for direction 
 and succor, and the forgiveness of enemies and 
 rioters. It was an awful, sublime, and soul-thrilling 
 
 scene The clear, untremulous tone of that 
 
 Christian heroine in prayer occasionally awed the 
 ruffians into silence, and was heard distinctly even 
 in the midst of their hisses, yells, and curses, for 
 they could not long silently endure the agony of 
 conviction, and their conduct became furious. They 
 now attempted to break down the partition, and par 
 tially succeeded ; but that little band of women still 
 
 5 
 
34 
 
 maintained their ground unshrinkingly, and endeav 
 ored to transact their business. 
 
 An assault was now made upon the door of the 
 office, the lower panel of which was instantly dashed 
 to pieces. Stooping down, and glaring upon me as 
 I sat at the desk, writing an account of the riot 
 to a distant friend, the ruffians cried out, " There 
 he is ! That s Garrison ! Out with the scoundrel ! " 
 &c., &c. Turning to Mr. Burleigh, I said, " You may 
 as well open the door, and let them come in and do 
 their worst." But he, with great presence of mind, 
 went out, locked the door, put the key into his 
 pocket, and by his admirable firmness succeeded in 
 keeping the office safe. 
 
 Two or three constables having cleared the hall 
 and staircase of the mob, the Mayor came in and 
 ordered the ladies to desist, assuring them that he 
 could not any longer guarantee protection, if they 
 did not take immediate advantage of the oppor^ 
 tunity to retire from the building. Accordingly they 
 adjourned, to meet at the house of one of their num 
 ber, for the completion of their business ; but as they 
 passed through the crowd they were greeted with 
 "taunts, hisses, and cheers of mobocratic triumph, 
 from gentlemen of property and standing from all 
 parts the city." Even their absence did not dimin 
 ish the throng. Thompson was not there, the ladies 
 were not there ; but " Garrison is there ! " was the 
 cry. " Garrison ! Garrison ! We must have Garrison ! 
 Out with him ! Lynch him ! " These and numberless 
 other exclamations arose from the multitude. 
 
 For a moment their attention was diverted from 
 
35 
 
 me to the Antislavery sign, and they vociferously 
 demanded its possession. It is painful to state, that 
 the Mayor promptly complied with their demand ! 
 So agitated and alarmed had he become, that in very 
 weakness of spirit he ordered the sign to be hurled 
 to the ground, and it was instantly broken in a thou 
 sand fragments by the infuriated populace. The 
 sign being demolished, the cry for Garrison was re 
 sumed more loudly than ever. It was now apparent 
 that the multitude would not disperse till I left the 
 building, and as an egress out of the front door was 
 impossible, the Mayor and some of his assistants, as 
 well as some of my friends, earnestly besought me 
 to escape in the rear of the building. 
 
 Preceded by my faithful and beloved friend, J. R. 
 C., I dropped from a back window on to a shed, 
 and narrowly escaped falling headlong to the ground. 
 We entered into a carpenter s shop, through which 
 we attempted to get into Wilson s Lane, but found 
 our retreat cut off by the mob. They raised a shout 
 as soon as we came in sight ; but the proprietor 
 promptly closed the door of his shop, kept them at 
 bay for a time, and thus kindly afforded me an 
 opportunity to find some other passage. I told Mr. 
 C. it would be futile to attempt to escape, I would 
 go out to the mob, and let them deal with me as 
 they might elect ; but he thought it was my duty to 
 avoid them as long as possible. We then went up 
 stairs, and, finding a vacancy in one corner of the 
 room, I got into it, and he and a young lad piled 
 up some boards in front of me to shield me from 
 observation. In a few minutes several ruffians broke 
 
36 
 
 into the chamber, who seized Mr. C. in a rough man 
 ner, and led him out to the view of the mob, saying, 
 " This is not Garrison, but Garrison s and Thompson s 
 friend, and he says he knows where Garrison is, but 
 won t tell." Then a shout of exultation was raised 
 by the mob, and what became of him I do not know; 
 though, as I was immediately discovered, I presume 
 he escaped without material injury. On seeing me, 
 three or four of the rioters, uttering a yell, furiously 
 dragged me to the window, with the intention of 
 hurling me from that height to the ground; but one 
 of them relented, and said, " Don t let us kill him 
 outright." So they drew me back, and coiled a rope 
 about my body, probably to drag me through the 
 streets. I bowed to the mob, and, requesting them 
 to wait patiently until I could descend, went down 
 upon a ladder that was raised for that purpose. I 
 fortunately extricated myself from the rope, and 
 was seized by two or three of the leading rioters, 
 powerful and athletic men, by whom I was dragged 
 along bareheaded (for my hat had been knocked off 
 and cut in pieces on the spot), a friendly voice in 
 the crowd shouting, " He sha n t be hurt ! He is an 
 American ! " This seemed to excite sympathy in 
 the breasts of some others, and they reiterated the 
 same cry. Blows, however, were aimed at my 
 head by such as were of a cruel spirit, and at last 
 they succeeded in tearing nearly all my clothes 
 from my body. Thus was I dragged through Wil 
 son s Lane into State Street, in the rear of the City 
 Hall. 
 
 They proceeded with me in the direction of the 
 
37 
 
 City Hall, the cry being raised, " To the Common ! " 
 whether to give me a coat of tar and feathers or to 
 throw me into the pond was problematical. As we 
 approached the south door, the Mayor attempted to 
 protect me by his presence ; but as he was unassist 
 ed by any show of authority or force, he was quickly 
 thrust aside ; and now came a tremendous rush on 
 the part of the mob to prevent my entering the 
 hall. For a time the conflict was desperate ; but at 
 length a rescue was effected by a posse that came to 
 the help of the Mayor, by whom I was carried up 
 to the Mayor s room. 
 
 In view of my denuded condition, one individual 
 in the Post-Office below stairs kindly lent me a pair 
 of pantaloons, another a coat, a third a stock, a 
 fourth a cap, &c. After a brief consultation, the 
 mob densely surrounding and threatening the City 
 Hall and Post-Office, the Mayor and his advisers 
 said that my life depended on committing me to 
 jail, ostensibly as a disturber of the peace. Accord 
 ingly a hack was got ready at the door, and I was 
 put into it, supported by Sheriff Parkman and 
 Ebenezer Bailey, the Mayor leading the way. And 
 now ensued a scene which baffles all description. 
 As the ocean, lashed to fury by a storm, seeks to 
 whelm a bark beneath the waves, so did the mob, 
 enraged at their disappointment, rush like a whirl 
 wind upon the frail vehicle in which I sat, and 
 endeavored to drag me out of it. Escape seemed 
 a physical impossibility. They clung to the wheels, 
 dashed open the doors, seized hold of the horses, 
 and tried to upset the carriage. They were, how- 
 
38 
 
 ever, vigorously repulsed by the police, a constable 
 sprang in by my side, the doors were closed, and 
 the driver, using his whip on the bodies of the 
 horses and the heads of the rioters, happily made 
 an opening through the crowd, and drove with all 
 speed to Leverett Street. 
 
 In a few moments I was locked up in a cell, safe 
 from my persecutors, accompanied by two delightful 
 associates, a good conscience and a cheerful mind. 
 
 Now to consider the original charge, 
 
 A. That the Mayor meanly entreated the rioters 
 to obey the laws. 
 
 Mr. Phillips is extremely vague in his accusation. 
 He says (No. II.) he was himself in Washington 
 Street, but does not mention the time, nor does he 
 say where the Mayor was when these degrading 
 pleadings were uttered. Such obscurity is charac 
 teristic of bad testimony the world over. 
 
 From the accounts already introduced, it is plain 
 that the Mayor was either in the entry of the Anti- 
 slavery building or on the steps of the Old State 
 House, and in either case a person in Washington 
 Street might have seen and heard him. He was for 
 a long time in the entry of the Antislavery build 
 ing, but, in his own account, there is no mention of 
 an address to the crowd, beyond the statement that 
 "Thompson was not in town" (page 17). The fol 
 lowing letter contains an important allusion to this 
 point. 
 
39 
 
 No. VIII. 
 
 LETTER FROM MR. HENRY GUILD* TO THE EDITOR. 
 
 Having read the controversy in the papers be 
 tween yourself and Mr. Phillips, and having been an 
 eyewitness to the circumstances referred to, and a 
 convert to the Antislavery cause from that date, I 
 believe I can bear witness to your father s efforts to 
 subdue the mob and rescue Mr. Garrison. 
 . My impression is that the Riot Act was read under 
 the windows of the Antislavery rooms ; at any rate, 
 I recollect distinctly your father warning the mob to 
 disperse ; this was before the seizure of Mr. Garri 
 son, who was taken from Wilson s Lane, with a rope 
 around his body (not around his neck, as has been 
 often stated), and carried up State Street, on the 
 north side, and down on the south side of the Old 
 State House ; and it was on the way down, and near 
 the old pump that the police force, not more than 
 ten or fifteen men, made a raid upon the mob and 
 took him from them. 
 
 I could not say what part your father took in the 
 arrest of Mr. Garrison from the mob, but I was 
 informed, shortly after, that Mr. Garrison, in relating 
 his experience in a public meeting, stated that he 
 never was so glad to get into a jail in his life. I 
 think your father did all that lay in his power, with 
 a mere handful of men at his command ; and 
 although, as I said before, I am, and have been, an 
 Antislavery man, I am also a lover of justice. 
 
 * Manufacturing Jeweller, Winter Street. 
 
40 
 
 These few recollections have been scratched down 
 hastily. I could give you a more extended and 
 particular account if you should think it worth 
 while to call upon me. 
 
 BOSTON, November 13, 1869. 
 
 Mr. Guild was then a clerk of Mr. Quincy Tufts, in 
 a neighboring store, and he ran out to see what was 
 going on. He says, " I recollect distinctly your father 
 warning the mob to disperse; this was before the 
 seizure of Mr. Garrison," therefore it was while the 
 Mayor was in or near the entry of the building, and 
 it was (perhaps) while Mr. Phillips was hanging his 
 head with shame ; which act seems to be the only 
 support he gave to the law and the authorities 
 on that important occasion. Such men as Colonel 
 Sever ran in and took rioters by the collar ; but Mr. 
 Phillips hung his head. 
 
 But perhaps the entreating " almost on his knees " 
 took place later, at the Old State House. The 
 Mayor writes, " I said in substance that the law must 
 be maintained, the order of the city preserved, and 
 that I would lay down my life on that spot to effect 
 these objects " (page 22). The following letters 
 bear directly on this point. 
 
41 
 
 No. IX. 
 
 LETTER FROM MR. JOHN H. THORNDIKE* TO THE 
 EDITOR. 
 
 In this morning s Advertiser is a letter over the 
 signature of Mr. Wendell Phillips, which contains 
 such gross misstatements as to what occurred at the 
 time of the " Garrison Mob," that I am impelled to 
 write you what I know upon the subject. I would 
 not say that Mr. Phillips intentionally says that 
 which is not true, for it is fair to suppose that one of 
 his excitable temperament, and taking the part which 
 he did in the antislavery movement at that time, 
 neither " saw " nor " heard " correctly. Upon the 
 afternoon of that day, as I was walking down Wash 
 ington Street, on the way to my office in State Street, 
 I saw, when near Joy s Building, a large crowd of 
 people, and curiosity led me on to the corner of 
 Court Street. I asked a laborer there what the mat 
 ter was ; he answered that there were two or three 
 men up there preaching to a lot of women about 
 slavery. I went a little farther, and found myself 
 next to Mr. John L. Dimmock, who appeared to be 
 doing what he could to allay the excitement which 
 was momentarily increasing. Men had crowded up 
 the stairs of the building where the meeting was 
 held, and there was much loud talk by some of them 
 in the mob. Cries were distinctly heard, " Tear down 
 the sign ! " Mr. Dimmock said to two men whom he 
 
 * Lately President of the Water Board. 
 6 
 
42 
 
 spoke to as if he knew them, " You had better take 
 in that sign," and very soon one or both of them 
 were at work doing it. When this was done I set 
 out again for my office, and just as I reached the 
 last corner of the Old State House there was a rush 
 of some dozen men close together from Wilson s 
 Lane, and in their midst a bareheaded man with a 
 rope round his neck. Instantly others surrounded 
 them, most of whom appeared to be well-disposed 
 citizens, crying out, " Don t hurt him," and directed 
 the bareheaded man (who I afterwards learned was 
 Mr. Garrison) to the south door of the Old State 
 House. Your father, Mayor Lyman, met them at 
 the door with only one or two on either side of him, 
 and under his direction Mr. Garrison was passed up 
 stairs. When the most excited of those present 
 tried to follow, he pressed them back, declaring in a 
 clear and loud voice, " You can go no farther, and 
 any man who passes here will have to pass over my 
 dead body." Upon this, satisfaction was manifested 
 by cheers and clapping of hands. He came in a 
 moment after to the window over the entrance and 
 again spoke to those remaining, asking them as good 
 citizens to disperse, which they did. From that 
 time I have had the highest respect for your father, 
 standing there as he did, almost alone, fearing no 
 one and caring for no one, bearing on his counte 
 nance and in the energy of his manner a determina 
 tion to protect the man and maintain the peace. 
 
 BOSTON, November 6, 1869. 
 
43 
 
 No. X. 
 
 LETTER FROM MR. OTIS CLAPP* TO THE EDITOR. 
 
 The reading of your letter this morning on the 
 " Garrison Mob " revived -my recollections of the 
 scene. 
 
 I happened to be standing on the south corner of 
 State and Washington Streets when the mob came 
 up Washington Street, with General Lyman and his 
 officers surrounding Mr. Garrison, who turned him 
 into State Street, and up the steps into the Old State 
 House (then the City Hall), when the door was 
 closed and guarded. This action produced great 
 excitement among the mob, which increased in fury 
 each moment, and threatened to break down the 
 door. Soon after, General Lyman stepped through 
 the window on the roof over the door through 
 which they had entered City Hall, and addressed 
 the multitude. 
 
 He asked all to aid in keeping the peace, and 
 advised all to quietly retire. The laws, he said, so 
 far as rested upon him, must and should be obeyed, 
 if he died in the attempt ; or words to this effect. 
 
 His figure, as he then appeared, when he straight 
 ened himself up and spoke, is impressed upon my 
 mind as though it was within a year, and the fire 
 with which he declared his determination rings in 
 my ears to this day. The effect upon the multitude 
 was electric, and all was hushed for some moments ; 
 
 * United States Assessor. 
 
44 
 
 when parties began to gather in quiet groups, and 
 talk over the matter. 
 
 I watched this transaction with intense interest, 
 as it was my first lesson in the management of 
 mobs; and I have always felt that General Lyman s 
 action in this matter was in the highest degree 
 manly and courageous. 
 
 As there are not many living witnesses of this 
 scene, I presume, it has seemed to me well to say 
 thus much upon the subject. 
 
 BOSTON, November 3, 1859. 
 
 No. XL 
 
 LETTER FROM COL. JAMES W. SEVER TO THE EDITOR. 
 
 I take great pleasure in stating to you in writing, 
 at your request, the substance of a verbal commu 
 nication made to you a few days since in reference 
 to the " Garrison Kiot," so called, which occurred in 
 this city on the 21st day of October, 1835. 
 
 Passing down State Street on the afternoon of that 
 day, I encountered a large mass of people coming 
 round the eastern end of the Old State House from 
 the direction of Wilson s Lane, having in custody 
 William L. Garrison, in his shirt-sleeves, and without 
 a hat, having a rope around his waist. 
 
 As they turned towards Washington Street they 
 were met by the Mayor and a force of constables. 
 At this moment the cry was raised, " To the Frog 
 Pond with him ! " followed by an appeal to the by 
 standers to assist the Mayor, when, among many 
 
45 
 
 others, the late Colonel Thomas C. Amory and my 
 self aided in the rescue of Mr. Garrison from the 
 crowd, and in placing him within the south door of 
 the Old State House, which was at once closed. 
 
 Immediately afterwards the Mayor appeared at 
 an open window over the door, from which he ear 
 nestly addressed the excited populace, advising and 
 commanding them to disperse and go peaceably to 
 their homes, avowing his determination to main 
 tain the peace of the city at all hazards, and notify 
 ing them in the most emphatic terms that, if any 
 attempt should be made to force an entry to the 
 building, it should be done only over his body. 
 
 At the close of his address he was heartily and 
 very generally cheered. 
 
 An intimation having been given by some of 
 the constables to those who had aided the authori 
 ties that a carriage had been ordered to the north 
 door, and that assistance might be required there, 
 we immediately repaired to that point, where we 
 found the constables in the act of putting Mr. Gar 
 rison in a carriage, and the crowd rapidly increas 
 ing, and endeavoring to prevent it, some trying to 
 overturn the carriage, large numbers hanging on to 
 the wheels and calling out to " Cut the traces ! cut the 
 reins 1 " An individual drew his knife and made an 
 attempt to do this, when he was seized by myself 
 and thrust aside. The driver effectually applied 
 his whip, and with difficulty succeeded in breaking 
 away, when he drove rapidly up Court Street to 
 the jail, followed by the mob. 
 
 I have delayed this communication in the hope of 
 
46 
 
 finding the letter which I addressed to my father, in 
 which, on the evening of this day, I gave a minute 
 account of the events and occurrences of the day, 
 " quorum parva pars fui" ; but I have not been able 
 to put my hand upon it. 
 
 I have, however, a most vivid recollection of 
 these occurrences as I have narrated them, and no 
 one could have witnessed them without the convic 
 tion that the utmost coolness, good judgment, and 
 intrepidity were conspicuously exhibited by General 
 Lyman on that occasion, and that he fully met all 
 the claims upon him as the Chief Magistrate of a 
 great city. 
 
 BOSTON, February 1, 1870. 
 
 Now here are three persons who write of their 
 own prompting and without collusion, twenty years 
 after Mr. Lyman s death, and who never read the 
 private manuscript quoted above ; yet they all con 
 firm his words in a remarkable manner. 
 
 In the face of this testimony, Mr. Phillips would 
 have us believe that this Magistrate did, in that very 
 hour, at some place not designated, employ servile 
 pleadings with these same rioters. About a matter 
 so distinct in itself, such opposite statements are 
 not to be reconciled by attributing them to faults 
 of memory or of hearing. Either, then, Mr. Phillips 
 bears false witness against his neighbor, or these 
 three persons have, without previous consultation, 
 all told exactly the same falsehood. The reader is 
 at liberty to render judgment on the evidence. 
 
47 
 
 Charge B. That the Mayor never sought to com 
 mand the mob, nor did he issue any order. 
 
 Colonel Sever (No. XL) expressly says, "com 
 manding them to disperse and go peaceably to their 
 homes " ; and the words and spirit of the other docu 
 ments (Nos. IX., X., &c.) fully bear out this expres 
 sion. In the Liberator of November, 1835, "Another 
 Abolitionist" says, "He declared that the law should 
 be supported, if it cost him his life, and ordered them 
 [the rabble] to disperse." Mr. Phillips (No. II.) says, 
 "Had he issued one command, even one that was 
 disobeyed, I should have honored him." I hereby 
 call on Mr. Phillips publicly to make good this his 
 written promise ! 
 
 Charge C. That he consented, if he did not assist, 
 at tearing down the Antistavery sign and throwing it 
 to the mob, to propitiate its rage. 
 
 That the sign was taken down and thrown to the 
 mob and broken up are facts needing no proof; 
 that the Mayor ordered the sign to be taken down I 
 do not deny, for he expressly says, "I sent a person 
 to see if this sign could be taken into the room from 
 the window," &c. (No. Y. page 20); but that he or 
 dered it thrown to the mob, or consented thereto, is 
 a petty and malignant supposition which can only 
 be admitted on the most emphatic evidence. The 
 newspaper sentences quoted in No. IV. are no evi 
 dence ; such reports are only hearsay. The testi 
 mony of Mr. L. B. Marsh does not touch the point. 
 Even supposing that Mr. Harry Williams removed 
 the sign and spoke those exact words, they do not 
 convey the meaning that the Mayor ordered the 
 
48 
 
 sign thrown down. Those who remember Mr. Wil 
 liams as well as I do will be inclined to smile at 
 seeing a person of his singularly eccentric and " in 
 dependent " character quoted as one who would be 
 likely to do as he was " directed." Mr. J. B. Palmer 
 reports the words of Williams thus, " By order of the 
 Mayor the sign would be removed" ; and this state 
 ment (by whomever uttered) was a correct one. He 
 did order the sign taken into the room, for sensible 
 reasons referred to in the passage above ; and Mr. 
 Phillips is shooting at rovers when he brings an 
 array of witnesses to prove a point that nobody 
 denies. 
 
 What I offered to prove was (No. III.) that the 
 Mayor " did not assist in, or consent to, the throwing 
 of the sign to the mob" Mr. N. B. Chamberlain 
 (No. IV.) reports that he and Harry Williams met 
 the Mayor on the steps of the Old State House, and 
 that the latter, u agitated and in fearful doubt," con 
 sented to have the sign taken down. This report 
 may be summarily dealt with. He says he saw and 
 talked with the Mayor on the steps of the Old State 
 House. If so, he talked with what the demonologists 
 call a "vicarious image," because Mr. Lyman was 
 not there. As Mr. Phillips and Mr. Garrison, both 
 principal parties in this dispute, have called them 
 selves into court as witnesses (Nos. II., IV.) it is 
 proper that another principal should be heard. The 
 Mayor may justly be supposed to know where he 
 was on that day ; and, since he had no motive for 
 falsehood in this particular case, his word should 
 have authority. He says (page 18), " Up to this 
 
49 
 
 time I had left my position on the staircase but once " 
 (to confer with the women); and again (page 19), 
 " I returned to my position at the bottom of the 
 staircase, in the passage-way, which I did not again 
 quit till the mob rushed up Washington Street." 
 That is to say, he was constantly in the Antislavery 
 building from the outset of the riot until Garrison 
 was taken ; which period, of course, includes that 
 referred to by Mr. Chamberlain. Evidently, then, 
 Mr. Chamberlain talked to somebody whom he 
 mistook for the Mayor. Mr. John H. Thorndike 
 (No. IX.) testifies that Mr. John L. Dimmock really 
 played the leading part, and said, " You had better 
 take in" (not throw down) "that sign." Mr. Garri 
 son (page 34) says the Mayor was so alarmed that, 
 in very weakness of spirit, he ordered the sign 
 hurled to the rioters. Unfortunately, Mr. Garrison 
 was just then hiding in the garret, and so his testi 
 mony is nothing ; but Mr. Sewall, who uses the 
 measured language of a trained lawyer, says (page 
 28) Mr. Lyman sanctioned the removal, which is the 
 exact truth. 
 
 In fact, the case is simple enough to any person 
 of common sense. The Mayor deemed it wise to 
 take the sign into the room ; he sent somebody (no 
 matter whether Williams or not) to do it ; this per 
 son, either from folly or because others interfered, 
 (and this again is of no consequence,) threw the 
 board into the street. 
 
 To live in 1870 and to look back with a clear eye 
 to 1835 is difficult. Consider the position of a good 
 citizen in 1835. Slavery existed, and it is the great- 
 
 7 
 
50 
 
 est mistake to think it was not then lamented as an 
 evil and a sin. But the question was how to get 
 rid of it The wise said : If we open the question, 
 the master will strain the negro s bonds tighter ; if 
 we persist, there will be civil war, and that is a 
 horror with which no one has a right to charge his 
 conscience. 
 
 And what is to-day the fact of history ? It has 
 pleased God to lead us to liberty over the dead 
 bodies of half a million men. Were our fathers 
 weak tremblers because they shrunk from giving 
 their children to the sword ? They could not know 
 that war would bring about liberty. Therefore 
 they deprecated agitation, when there was no good 
 plan for action. And in so doing they were right, 
 absolutely right! And the Extremists, who went 
 beyond patient argument and charitable thought, 
 were wrong. 
 
 When we were brought to the terrible pass of 
 civil war, the sober-minded and prudent, in fact, 
 the men of action, seeing the inevitable upon 
 them, rose in their might, and they and they 
 alone fought the good fight and saved the Union 
 and freed the slave. If any one doubts this, let 
 him think of the names of Grant, Meade, Sherman, 
 Thomas, Sheridan ; of Lincoln, Seward, Stanton, Fes- 
 senden, Adams, Andrew. And let him find, if he 
 can, the name of an Extremist who really DID any 
 thing notable in the struggle. 
 
 Charge D. That he broke his pledge made to the 
 Female Antislavery Society ? 
 
 This, in its vagueness, reminds one of the cele- 
 
51 
 
 brated accusation hurled by Dr. Johnson against the 
 fishwoman, that "she kept an isosceles triangle in 
 her back garret." We may pass over this charge, 
 until it gets its specifications. 
 
 Charge E. That he ordered said Society to dis 
 perse. 
 
 Mr. Phillips (No. II.) and Mr. Garrison (page 34) 
 say he ordered the meeting to disperse. Neither of 
 them saw anything. Mr. Phillips was hanging his 
 head, on the pavement ; Mr. Garrison was seeking a 
 refuge in the upper story. Mr. Sewall (page 28) 
 says he u urged the ladies to retire," and, as a warm 
 friend of Mr. Garrison and a man of high integrity, 
 we may safely assume that he was at pains to find 
 out the truth. Mr. Lyman (the only witness pres 
 ent) agrees to Mr. Se wall s account, and says (page 
 17) that he went up stairs to advise them to with 
 draw ; and, further on, " The women seemed very 
 willing to leave the room. I heard no objection ex 
 pressed, beyond the remark already mentioned, in 
 regard to martyrdom" (page 18). 
 
 There is nothing hard to understand in all this. 
 Here were a score of women in a room ; the street 
 was filled by a noisy and threatening mob ; night 
 was coming on ; at any moment stones might be 
 thrown through the windows, or an attempt might 
 be made to force the doors. Was it not, in such a 
 case, the part of a considerate gentleman to ad 
 vise and urge women to withdraw ? And was it 
 not a sensible thing in them to seek a place of 
 safety ? 
 
 Charge F. That he had ample means to control 
 
52 
 
 the mob, and should have shot ten men ; but did not 
 control, and did not shoot 
 
 This charge may best be considered under two 
 heads, (a) the means to control the mob; (6) the 
 propriety of shooting ten men. 
 
 The means of controlling mobs are the police and 
 the military. In 1835 Boston had no police, as we now 
 understand that word. There were about thirty night 
 watchmen who went on duty for alternate nights, 
 making some sixty men in all. They were under 
 the orders of the Captain of the Watch, who was an 
 officer independent of the City Marshal. During 
 the day they pursued their callings, most of them 
 being teamsters or truckmen ; and it was only at 
 night, when they reported for duty at their watch- 
 houses, that they could be certainly counted on. 
 When the Mayor says (page 23) that he had "all 
 the watch on the alert," he means that the whole of 
 the men, instead of one half, were put on duty dur 
 ing the night of the riot. Of day patrolmen there 
 were none ; but there were fifteen constables who 
 had offices in the city, and who gained their living 
 by keeping order in the courts, serving subpoenas, 
 writs of ejectment, and the like. Of these there 
 were five who were generally, but not always, em 
 ployed by the city to patrol the disorderly quarters 
 during the day. They were under the orders of the 
 City Marshal, who, in 1832, had been authorized to 
 command all " constables in the service of the city." 
 It is fair to assume that the Mayor could, at any 
 time, send for these five men during the day ; but, 
 beyond them, he had to rely, in sudden emergencies, 
 
53 
 
 on such of the ordinary constables as could be 
 found, and were not too old for duty, and on such 
 of the night watchmen as could be found, and were 
 willing to leave their work. 
 
 In 1835 the population of Boston was 78,603, and 
 the available day police was six men, including the 
 City Marshal. In 1869 the population, within the 
 old limits, was not far from 200,000, and the regular 
 police, exclusive of constables, about four hundred 
 and fifty men, all well armed, and subjected to a mili 
 tary discipline under their captains, lieutenants, and 
 sergeants.* 
 
 The reader will now understand the words of the 
 Mayor (page 18), when he says he had " no means of 
 procuring an additional force till after dark." 
 
 The following letter will be found to refer inci 
 dentally to the police of that time. 
 
 No. XII 
 
 LETTER FROM HON. JOSTAH QUINCY TO THE 
 EDITOR. 
 
 I herewith, at your request, send an extract from 
 my journal of Wednesday the 21st of October, 
 1835:- 
 
 " Forenoon at office. In the afternoon a mob as 
 sembled in order to prevent a meeting of the Female 
 Antislavery Society. No great outrages were com 
 mitted, although, when I saw Garrison in the hands 
 of the mob, I feared he might be seriously injured, 
 
 * Some of these details will be found in the entertaining little book 
 by Captain E. H. Savage, " Police Recollections." 
 
54 
 
 as he would have been had it not been for the 
 prompt and spirited interference of Mr. Lyman, the 
 
 Mayor Went down twice in the evening to 
 
 tender my services to the Mayor, but they were not 
 needed." 
 
 On that afternoon I was at my office. No. 27 State 
 Street, which commanded a view of the entire length 
 of Wilson s Lane : my attention was attracted by the 
 shouts of a multitude. On going to my window I 
 saw a crowd approaching, with Mr. Garrison in its 
 midst. As I was President of the Council, I rushed 
 down and forced myself into his immediate vicinity, 
 and remained at his side until he was placed in a 
 carriage, and drove off. My opinion of the action of 
 your father is stated as above, in the record I made 
 on the same evening. 
 
 In judging of the situation of the Mayor, it should 
 be remembered, that the action of the mob was 
 unexpected ; that the whole police force at that time 
 consisted of a few superannuated constables, whose 
 principal duty was to attend the courts ; and the 
 night watchmen who were not on duty. As to call 
 ing out the militia, he had no time to do it, even if 
 it had been advisable, which it was not. Fears were 
 entertained that there would be another outbreak at 
 night, and a number of citizens enrolled themselves 
 as special constables and reported during the even 
 ing to the Mayor for orders, which, fortunately, he 
 was not obliged to give. 
 
 No one who knew your father as I did could ever 
 have suspected him of a want of energy, spirit, or 
 
 courage. 
 
 BOSTON, January 7, 1870. 
 
55 
 
 Mr. Guild (No. VIII.) speaks of the force that 
 rescued Garrison as " not more than ten or fifteen 
 men/ and these embraced the Mayor, the Sheriff, the 
 City Marshal, and apparently some citizen volun 
 teers (not, however, including Mr. Wendell Phillips). 
 If this force was " ample " to control two or three 
 streets full of angry people, it is quite clear that our 
 present day police is conducted on an extravagant 
 scale, and should at once be reduced to thirteen 
 patrolmen, which would be the relative proportion 
 to the population. 
 
 (6.) The propriety of shooting ten men. One is 
 led first to ask, How were they to be shot ? The 
 authorities were having a hard time in keeping 
 the building clear. They had no guns or pistols ; 
 scarcely good stout sticks. It would not have been 
 a very usual course to send about and ask for volun 
 teers, with fowling-pieces and king s arms, to fire 
 promiscuously into the crowd. As to calling on the 
 militia, that method will presently be considered. 
 But this much may be said in regard to shooting in 
 general, a bullet does not pick and choose ; it will 
 go through a good man as likely as through a bad 
 one. Now there were in that mob many good men, 
 friends of order and friends of Mr. Garrison. The 
 Mayor testifies (page 21) that ten or fifteen persons 
 cried out, " They are going to hang him ; for God s 
 sake, save him! " and Mr. Garrison (page 36) speaks 
 of sympathy showed him by persons in the crowd. 
 There comes to us, then, this solemn question : Does 
 Mr. Phillips advocate killing certain worthy citizens, 
 in order that his ten mobocrats may be sent to their 
 
56 
 
 deserved graves ? Perhaps he thinks the good men 
 had no business there, and that they should have 
 gone home, as he did, leaving the regular authorities, 
 and the rioters, and Mr. Garrison, to settle it among 
 themselves as best they might. 
 
 As to calling out the militia, and getting the ten 
 men shot out of hand, the Mayor had no more 
 authority to do it than had Mr. Phillips himself. 
 The legal process by which the militia could be got 
 on the ground would have taken all night for its 
 execution. 
 
 It may be profitable here to examine the law in 
 regard to the conduct of the military in quelling 
 disturbances. 
 
 (1.) By what process could a Mayor call out the 
 militia to suppress a mob ? 
 
 Mayors of cities had no statute authority, under 
 the laws of the Commonwealth, to issue orders 
 directly to the militia, until the year 1840. (Ch. 92, 
 sec. 27.) 
 
 Previous to that time, judges of certain courts, 
 and the sheriff of any county, within his precinct, 
 could issue warrants to the military officer com 
 manding the battalion or company nearest the 
 scene of disturbance, to quell the riot. (Rev. Stat. 
 12, 134. But the Act of 1840 added, in explicit 
 terms, " the Mayor of any city." 
 
 By the constitution of Massachusetts (1780, ch. 
 2, sec. 1, art. 7), the militia were placed entirely 
 in the control of the Governor as commander-in- 
 chief, and this would effectually cut off any common- 
 law duties of mayors under the English system. 
 
57 
 
 Moreover, the Acts of 1787, cli. 59, point out the 
 manner in which the Mayor shall act in case the 
 militia are needed, viz. he shall notify the Governor 
 as commander-in-chief that the militia are wanted, 
 and here his power ends.* 
 
 One or two English cases are, however, instructive 
 on this point, viz. Rex v. Pinney, 5 Carrington and 
 Paine s Reports, 254. Here the judge said, " It is no 
 part of the duty of a magistrate to go out and head 
 the constables, neither is it any part of his duty to 
 marshal and arrange them; if he gives the military 
 orders to act, it is all that the law requires of him." 
 
 This was an information against the Mayor of 
 Bristol for alleged negligence in quelling a riot, and 
 seems conclusive as to the point that in England 
 much discretionary power is given to the military. 
 
 * The following is the language of the Acts of 1787, ch. 59, relative 
 to more speedy and effectual suppression of Tumults, &c., &c. 
 
 " SEC. 2. Be it enacted, &c., That if in the opinion of the sheriff, or any 
 two of the justices either of the Supreme Judicial Court, or of the Court 
 of Common Pleas in any of the Counties of this Commonwealth, it shall 
 be necessary for the suppression of any insurrection existing or appre 
 hended, as aforesaid, in said County, that a force shall be instantly raised 
 and called forth for that purpose ; and if, by reason of distance, the 
 necessary aid cannot be obtained by order of the commander-in-chief, it 
 shall be the duty of such sheriff or justices to certify the same under his 
 or their hand to the major-general or commanding officer of the division, 
 wherein such county lies, or the commanding officer of some regiment or 
 corps in the vicinity, and to request him or them to detach the whole or 
 such number of the militia under the command of such officer for the 
 support of the civil authority, as the said justices or sheriff may think 
 necessary to defeat the purposes of such insurgents, and to apprehend 
 and safely keep them for trial, and, as soon as may be, to give notice of 
 such application to the commander-in-chief, that he may take the neces 
 sary orders thereon, and it shall be the duty of such major-general or 
 commanding officer to detach such number of the militia, as shall be re 
 quested as aforesaid, armed and equipped according to law ; the militia so 
 
58 
 
 To sum up the first proposition then : in 1835, a 
 Mayor per se could not call out the militia, having 
 power only to suggest to the Governor that an 
 exigency had arisen calling for military force. 
 
 (2.) Under what circumstances may magistrates 
 fire on a mob, and after what preliminaries ? 
 
 This question is a broader one than the other, 
 and one in regard to which the authorities are 
 somewhat conflicting. 
 
 By the English Statute 2 Geo. I. c. 5 (com 
 monly called the Riot Act), it was provided that, " if 
 any riotous assembly did not disperse within one 
 hour after proclamation " (made in due form provided 
 in the act), " the officers of the law should seize and 
 apprehend them " (enumerating sheriffs, mayors of 
 cities, &c., &c., as such officers) ; and " if any persons 
 
 detached and collected shall afford their assistance to and be under the 
 control of the civil officer or magistrate, unless in case of a rebellion 
 declared by the legislature." 
 
 At this time, and until after 1835, there was no form prescribed for the 
 certificate " under the hand of said officers," but the Revised Statutes 
 gave one in substance, as follows : 
 
 WARRANT. 
 
 SEAL. 
 
 Commonwealth of Massachusetts. SUFFOLK ss. 
 
 To A. B., COMMANDING FIRST DIVISION M. V. M. 
 
 WHEREAS, it has been made to appear to me, C. D., Sheriff of said 
 County, that there is threatened a tumult, riot, and mob of a body of 
 men, acting together by force with intent to offer violence to persons and 
 property, and by force and violence to break and resist the laws of this 
 Commonwealth in said County of Suffolk, and that military force is 
 necessary to aid the civil authorities in suppressing the same. Now, 
 therefore, I command you to parade (specifying the force) in due form 
 according to law. Hereof fail not at your peril, &c., &c. 
 
 Some such form as this was probably used in 1835. 
 
59 
 
 so unlawfully, tumultuously, and riotously assembled, 
 or any of them, should happen to be killed, maimed, 
 or hurt in the dispersing, seizing, or apprehending, 
 by reason of their resisting the person so dispersing, 
 seizing, or apprehending, the said officers shall be 
 held harmless from all private action or criminal 
 prosecution on account of the killing or maiming as 
 aforesaid." 
 
 This statute only embodied the common law, for 
 Blackstone in his Commentaries (IV. 180) declares 
 that the powers of magistrates were the same before 
 the Riot Act ; it would seem, therefore, that magis 
 trates would be safe in obeying their own convictions. 
 The decisions, however, do not bear out this idea. 
 
 In 1768 (after the Riot Act), Mr. Gillam, an ex 
 cellent magistrate of the County of Surrey, was tried 
 for his life at the Old Bailey, for ordering the militia 
 to fire, in a riot in St. George s Fields, after long and 
 patiently enduring the provocations of the rioters, 
 and twice reading the Riot Act ; of this case we have, 
 unfortunately, no full report, as the Nisi Prius Re 
 ports did not begin until 1810, or thereabouts. As 
 the result of this, during the Lord Gordon riots, 
 the civil officers were unwilling to take any respon 
 sibility ; and they were therefore severely blamed. 
 
 This case shows the tenor of the judicial decisions 
 in the matter ; for every English court has been very 
 careful in its construction of the act, never justify 
 ing firing on a mob unless it is proved to be a last 
 resort. 
 
 The act itself justifies killing or maiming only 
 when the rioters resist the seizing, &c., &c. 
 
60 
 
 According to the authorities on justifiable homicide, 
 no officer, civil or military, is justified in firing on a 
 mob and killing a rioter, unless he is satisfied the 
 riot can be quelled in no other way. Judge Hoar, 
 in his charge to the Suffolk Grand Jury in 1854 (17 
 Law Reporter, 168), speaks of this point; he intimates 
 that so many lives are risked by any discharge of 
 fire-arms by military, the innocent often suffering 
 with the guilty, that officers should wait to the last 
 moment before firing. 
 
 To sum up : no order to fire should ever be given 
 while the authorities feel that any expedient remains 
 untried ; and they are so strictly responsible in their 
 exercise of discretionary power, that they are person 
 ally liable to indictment for murder if they show 
 any negligence, or too great zeal. 
 
 Now as to the preliminaries to be observed before 
 firing. In England the Riot Act, or that part em 
 bracing the proclamation, must be read as near the 
 riot as the officers can come with safety, and then, if 
 the mob does not disperse within one hour, the 
 military may fire. 
 
 This custom has, however, never been generally 
 adopted in this country.* 
 
 * On April 8, 1835, a statute was passed following almost literally the 
 words of the English Riot Act, the following being a brief abstract of 
 it: 
 
 An Act more effectually to suppress Riots. 
 
 CXL, 1835. 
 
 SEC. 1. Be it enacted, &c., &c., That if persons to the number of 
 twelve or more, armed with dangerous weapons, or if persons to the 
 number of thirty or more, armed or unarmed, shall be riotously, tumul- 
 tuously, or unlawfully assembled in any city, town, or district in this 
 
61 
 
 In this country, therefore, the preliminaries before 
 firing would vary in each case, and cannot be defined 
 in general terms ; the law, however, would demand 
 that proper warning should be given to a mob before 
 they are fired upon, and on a trial of soldiers for 
 homicide by firing on mobs, it would be a question 
 for the jury whether proper warning was given. 
 
 Having considered the charges preferred by Mr. 
 Phillips in Nos. II. and IV., I would gladly have left 
 the discussion in its simplicity, and without extend 
 ing it to other persons. And this might have been 
 done, were it not for the note of Mr. Garrison at the 
 end of No. IV. Therein he not only denies that he 
 was willing to go to jail, but uses this sweeping ex 
 pression, " You are certainly right in your criticisms 
 
 Commonwealth, it shall be the duty of the mayor of such city (select 
 men, justices of the peace, &c., &c.) to go among such persons, or as near 
 as may be safe, and to command them to disperse ; and if they do not 
 disperse, said officers may take them in custody ; said officers may also 
 command all bystanders to assist them, and persons refusing shall be 
 deemed rioters and treated accordingly. 
 
 SEC. 2. Be it enacted further, That it shall be the duty of the mayor 
 and aldermen of any city, and every justice of the peace, and selectmen 
 of any town or district, and the sheriff of the county or either of his 
 deputies, whenever any persons shall be unlawfully assembled as afore 
 said, to immediately proceed to the place of their assembling, or as near 
 thereto as safely may be, and to take such measures as are herein pro 
 vided, to disperse such assembled persons ; and each and every of the 
 aforesaid magistrates and officers, who, knowing of such unlawful and 
 tumultuous assembly, shall neglect or refuse to proceed as aforesaid, or 
 who shall wilfully or negligently omit to exercise the authority with 
 which he is invested by this act, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemea 
 nor, and shall be liable to pay a fine not exceeding $ 300 for every 
 offence, to be recovered in any court competent to try the same. 
 
 SEC. 3. That if any persons assembled as aforesaid, after command 
 given to them to disperse as above, shall refuse or neglect to do so with- 
 
62 
 
 of Mayor Ly man s conduct," which can mean 
 nothing less than that Mr. Phillips is right in his 
 charges, A to F inclusive ! 
 
 I wish Mr. Garrison could be kept out of this part 
 of the discussion. He has shown himself a notable 
 man, perhaps even a great one. He had a high and 
 noble idea which was pursued, with an almost heroic 
 constancy, to its triumph. 
 
 No one can be surprised that Mr. Garrison felt in 
 dignant, after his experience in the riot. Nothing 
 can be more annoying, or harder to bear, than that 
 mingling of the tragic and the ludicrous which ac 
 companies maltreatment by a cowardly and mis 
 chievous mob. But he should not vent his feelings 
 on the magistrate who honestly defended him ; or 
 
 out unnecessary delay, any two of the magistrates or officers aforesaid 
 may require the aid of a sufficient number of persons, in arms or other 
 wise, and may proceed to take such measures as in the judgment of such 
 two magistrates or officers are expedient to disperse said tumultuous as 
 sembly, and to seize and secure the persons composing the same ; and if 
 any such persons, or any other person then being present, as spectators 
 or otherwise, shall be killed or wounded by reason of the efforts of said two 
 magistrates or officers to disperse said assembly, said officers and magis 
 trates shall, as also persons acting under their direction, be held guiltless 
 and justified in law ; but if said magistrates or officers are killed, the 
 rioters shall be answerable therefor. 
 
 Approved by the Lieutenant-Governor^ April 8, 1835. 
 
 By comparing the above with the Riot Act, it will be seen that the 
 words of the two are almost identical, and as the Riot Act was in 1835 a 
 part of our common law, this act is plainly nothing more than an explicit 
 statement of the common law doctrine on the subject. 
 
 It is undoubtedly this act which is referred to by " Abolitionist " in 
 the Liberator (page 29) ; but he does not make clear what use the Mayor 
 could make of the act, since he already had asked the aid of good 
 citizens, had requested and commanded the crowd to disperse, and had 
 personally, and with his constables, struggled as hard as he could with 
 the mob. 
 
63 
 
 carp at the means by which his person, perhaps his 
 life, was saved. 
 
 Nobody thinks, or even pretends, that Mr. Garri 
 son was sent to prison to punish or disgrace him, or 
 to make him appear ridiculous ; he was sent there 
 for safety. Mr. Phillips talks sheer nonsense when 
 he demands that Garrison s right to sleep under his 
 own roof in safety should be "vindicated." No one 
 denied his right to do it ; the question was whether 
 he could do it on that particular night. Mr. Garri 
 son (No. IV.) speaks indignantly of " shutting an 
 innocent man up in jail in order to save his life." 
 Very well ; should the innocent man be left out-of- 
 doors in order to lose his life ? The Mayor s first 
 duty was to protect this man ; and in so doing he 
 was to run no risks, he was to see that the man 
 was returned to society alive and well. It was for 
 him to judge how strong his police was and how 
 strong the mob was, and to place the man in such 
 conditions as guaranteed his safety. And for all this 
 he was responsible under his oath.* The real fact 
 is, that Mr. Garrison, in the moment of peril, was 
 only too glad to go to jail, or to any other place 
 that promised security. But, when the danger was 
 over, he began to doubt whether he had exhibited 
 proper dignity, and had got as much martyrdom as 
 
 " In the celebrated Doctors Mob of 1788, in New York, the physicians 
 and medical students of that city were confined two days in the common 
 prison for protection from the populace. I think you [Garrison] com 
 plain without reason of a mere formality, necessary in consequence of 
 the requirements of the law, and not intended as a gratification to the 
 mob or as an injury to your feelings. I refer to the charge made against 
 you as a disturber of the peace." 
 
 " ANOTHER ABOLITIONIST " in the Liberator, December, 1835. 
 
64 
 
 was his due. Hence his outcry about false imprison 
 ment, and the studied care with which, in his ac 
 count (No. VII.), he strives to exhibit his own con 
 duct as remarkably calm, while that of the Mayor is 
 described as weak. He further tries to speak as 
 lightly as may be of the Mayor s part in the rescue ; 
 indeed, when he says (page 37) that a tremendous 
 rush was made to " prevent his entering the hall," 
 one would infer that he was then rescuing him- 
 self. _ 
 
 It is not easy to prove the mental condition of a 
 man at any particular moment; nevertheless, there 
 is documentary evidence sufficient to show us what 
 were his real sentiments during, and directly after, 
 the riot. The Mayor, whose testimony is as admis 
 sible as that of Mr. Garrison, says (page 23), " The 
 usual law paper was made out, and Garrison agreed 
 to go to jail on the condition (as I was informed by 
 Parkman) that he should not be subject to any ex 
 pense " ; and again (page 24), " Throughout the 
 whole of this riot Garrison acceded cheerfully and 
 readily to the measures proposed for his security 
 and protection." 
 
 Mr. Sewall (page 30) says, "I believe Mr. Garri 
 son went voluntarily to the jail." Mr. Garrison him 
 self writes in the Liberator (December 12, 1835), 
 "It is true that I made no objection to leaving his 
 [the Mayor s] office " ; and, inasmuch as he " left his 
 office " for no other possible purpose than to go direct 
 to the jail, we may accept this as a sort of Celtic 
 euphuism, to be translated thus, " I went to jail, 
 and was glad of the chance." As a commentary on 
 
65 
 
 this translation, there may be added an extract from 
 the letter of Mr. Guild (No. VIII), I was informed, 
 shortly after, that Mr. Garrison, in relating his ex 
 perience in a public meeting, stated, that he never 
 was so glad to get into a jail in his life." 
 
 More than this, he was (for a very short time) pos 
 itively grateful to Mr. Lyman, although he soon after 
 diligently disclaimed any such emotion. The follow 
 ing letter, with the indorsement thereon, will ex 
 plain this assertion. 
 
 No. XIII. 
 
 COPY OF A LETTER TO MR. KNAPP, ONE OF THE 
 PUBLISHERS OF THE LIBERATOR. 
 
 MY DEAK Sm : 
 
 You probably recollect, that, the morning after 
 the riot in Washington Street, in the autumn of 
 1835, you called on me in company with another 
 gentleman, Mr. Cobb [?] at my office in the City 
 Hall, where we had a long conversation on the 
 events of the preceding day. Both you and Mr. C. 
 expressed yourselves in terms, in regard to my con 
 duct, that could not but be very agreeable and flat 
 tering to me. Among other things, you said that 
 you had paid a visit to Mr. Garrison that night, 
 and that he remarked that he considered that he 
 owed his life to the exertions I made to rescue him 
 from the hands of the mob. If you still recollect 
 having made this statement in substance, I shall feel 
 much obliged to you for a reply to this note, to that 
 
 9 
 
66 
 
 effect. I ought, however, to add that, in requesting 
 the communication, nothing is further from my 
 thoughts than to make any public use of it. Hav 
 ing lived for many months a life of great solitude 
 and retirement, I have passed a portion of that time 
 in looking over and arranging the numerous papers 
 in my possession relating to the various and multi 
 fold affairs in which I was engaged, during the two 
 years I held the office of Mayor. Finding many 
 concerning the most important event that occurred 
 while in office, and, while reading them, the con 
 versation I had with you and Mr. Cobb [?] recurring 
 fresh to my recollection, I feel desirous to file away, 
 with those I already possess, any communication you 
 will take the trouble to make to me on that subject. 
 
 I am, &c. 
 
 WALTHAM, October 19, 1837. 
 
 Will you have the goodness to direct your answer 
 to this Post-Office ? 
 
 [Indorsement on the copy.] 
 
 The within is a copy of a letter to Knapp, one of 
 the editors or publishers of the Liberator. To my 
 knowledge the original note was carried to the of 
 fice of the Liberator, but I never received any answer 
 to it. 
 
 It is perfectly and distinctly fresh in my recollec 
 tion that Knapp told me, on the occasion men 
 tioned in this note, that Garrison told him, the night 
 of the riot, 21st October, 1835, that he, Garrison, 
 owed his life to my exertions to protect and rescue 
 him from the hands of the mob. 
 
67 
 
 It is also as fresh in my mind that Sheriff Park- 
 man told me, the day after the riot, that Garrison 
 made the same statement to him respecting my 
 conduct. 
 
 THEODORE LYMAN. 
 
 The following official paper will prove how accu 
 rate was the memory of Mr. Lyman. 
 
 No. XIV. 
 
 STATEMENT BY ASSISTANT-MARSHAL WELLS. 
 
 BOSTON, 1835. 
 
 I have deemed it expedient, for various reasons, 
 to make a record of the following facts : 
 
 A meeting of the Boston Female Antislavery 
 Society was notified to be held at the rooms of the 
 Massachusetts Antislavery Society, No. 46 Wash 
 ington Street, on the afternoon of October 21, 
 1835, at which time several addresses would be 
 made. In consequence of the strong prejudice ex 
 isting in the minds of the citizens of Boston against 
 the proceedings of the Abolitionists, especially those 
 of Mr. George Thompson, the Mayor of the city in 
 structed me to ascertain from the Antislavery office 
 if the said Thompson was to address the meeting, 
 or if he had left the city ; at the same time to in 
 form them of the object of the inquiry, which was, 
 that if Thompson was to make an address, that the 
 Mayor might be provided with sufficient force to 
 quell the riot which would immediately ensue, or if 
 he had left the city, that he might state that fact. 
 On receiving these instructions, I immediately called 
 
68 
 
 at their office, and obtained an interview with Wil 
 liam L. Garrison, one of the leading Abolitionists 
 and editors of the Liberator. He seemed rather to 
 question the authority of the Mayor thus to inter 
 fere in their affairs, but on my assuring him that 
 the only object the Mayor had in view, in eliciting 
 the information, was to do all he could to preserve 
 the peace of the city ; and also, stating to him 
 that, in case Mr. T. did address th.e meeting, it was 
 feared a riot would take place, and that blood might 
 be shed, he gave me the desired information, but it 
 seemed to me with great reluctance, undoubtedly 
 thinking that a different motive other than the true 
 one prompted the inquiry. 
 
 I should not omit to mention that subsequently 
 to the morning interview* both Mr. Garrison and 
 Mr. Knapp told me that he (Mr. G.) owed his life, 
 under God, to the Mayor. I more readily make this 
 last statement, having understood that Mr. Garrison 
 has indulged in very violent and ungrateful lan 
 guage upon the conduct of the Mayor of the city 
 on that day. 
 
 This is? as near as I can recollect, the substance of 
 the interview with Mr. Garrison on Wednesday, 
 October 21, 1835. I had further conversation with 
 Mr. Garrison on the expediency of holding their 
 meetings during the highly excited state of the 
 community on this occasion, but which I do not 
 think relevant to the present statement. 
 
 CHARLES B. WELLS, 
 
 One of the Assistant-Marshals^ of the City of Boston. 
 
 * That is to say, after the riot had occurred. ED. 
 | At that time there were two Assistant Marshals, and their duties 
 corresponded pretty nearly to those of our present Health Officers. ED. 
 
69 
 
 Mr. Charles B. Wells has this day informed me 
 that he wrote the paper to which this certificate is 
 attached. 
 
 I am personally well acquainted with Mr. "Wells ; 
 he has been in the service of the city over thirteen 
 years. 
 
 I know the paper to be written in his hand 
 writing, with which I am also acquainted. 
 
 SAMUEL F. McCLEARY, City Clerk. 
 BOSTON, February 14, 1848. 
 
 The foregoing testimony conclusively proves, 
 
 1. That Mr. Garrison went cheerfully, and of his 
 own free-will, to jail, as to a proper place of safety. 
 
 2. That, at one time, he was deeply grateful to 
 Mr. Lyman as the preserver of his life. 
 
 By what process of reasoning he brought himself 
 to believe that he was not frightened, and did not 
 wish to go to jail, and was not saved by the Mayor, 
 is unimportant. His friends will perhaps speak of 
 his conduct as a change of belief; I should be in 
 clined to express it by the more simple term, 
 ingratitude. 
 
 I have spoken of the matter of Mr. Phillips s 
 charges ; and it remains only to speak of their 
 manner. 
 
 In his lecture of November 1st, the style of his 
 attack on the Mayor is his normal one, it might 
 be called his average every-day abuse. (No. I.) 
 When brought suddenly to defend himself, his old 
 legal instincts rise within him, and a certain un- 
 
70 
 
 wonted caution is to be observed. The Mayor is no 
 longer "almost on his knees," but is, "metaphorically 
 speaking, on his knees " ; and he is at pains to sum 
 mon witnesses to make his case good. (Nos. II. 
 and IV.) 
 
 A couple of weeks later he delivered what he 
 was pleased to term a repetition of his discourse, at 
 Steinway Hall in New York. Here he failed not to 
 make up for any little constraint he might have felt 
 in Boston, as the following sentences will show : 
 
 Boston Lecture, Nov. 1. | Newspaper Discussion. 
 
 " He saw the Mayor 
 of the city, cap in 
 hand, almost on his 
 knees, entreating the 
 men who were his so 
 cial companions to 
 have the kindness to 
 obey the laws." 
 
 " Mayor Lyman be 
 sought instead of com 
 manding that day, and 
 was, metaphorically 
 speaking, on his knees 
 to the mob." 
 
 New York Lecture, 
 Nov. 16. 
 
 " I saw the Mayor, 
 the representative of 
 law and magistracy, en 
 treating, suing like a 
 spaniel, beseeching like 
 a beggar, this crowd of 
 his social companions, to 
 respect the law. I saw 
 the turbulent defiance, 
 the derisive laugh, with 
 which his good-natured 
 appeals were received. 
 I saw him descend 
 lower and lower in his 
 appeals to the mercy 
 of the mob, that they 
 would spare his office." 
 
 Whence these additions, this increased venom ? 
 Do they reveal the uncontrolled indignation of a 
 patriot against meanness and incornpetency ? or do 
 they betray the anger of a coward, who seeks to 
 exasperate the living by insulting the dead? 
 
 Who was this person who is spoken of as a 
 
71 
 
 spaniel, a beggar, and a panderer to the worst pas 
 sions of mobs ? 
 
 Perhaps Carlyle might have called him " an inar 
 ticulate man " ; for he never got on platforms to tell 
 how good he was, or how bad others were. He was 
 one of those whose right hand did much, and the 
 left knew it not; one who never turned the poor 
 from his door ; one who was a leader in many move 
 ments for the improvement of mankind. Even Mr. 
 Phillips, tingling though he was under the public 
 exposure of a base calumny, was forced to say of 
 him, " His services to the cause of education are an 
 honor to his memory." 
 
 Such actions go to make a good citizen. He, 
 however, did something more. First in this country 
 he established the principle that young culprits are 
 not to be cast, like lost felons, into a common prison, 
 but are to have a chance for better lives. He 
 founded the State Reform School, and endowed it 
 with seventy thousand dollars of his money. Only 
 after his death was it known who had conferred this 
 benefit on the Commonwealth. 
 
 The Rebellion was Mr. Phillips s opportunity. 
 Here was the harvest-time of the seed he had sown 
 for many seasons. How feebly did he put in the 
 sickle ! 
 
 Yet he had good models to follow. If Thucydides 
 writes true history, Mr. Phillips has copied closely 
 the oratory of a demagogue who lived more than 
 two thousand years ago. Cleon, the Athenian 
 leather-dresser, had that very way of saying what 
 
72 
 
 ought to be done, in the most violent and most 
 dogmatic words the Attic dialect could furnish. But 
 Cleon could do more than talk. Witness his con 
 duct in the affair of Pylos. "Give me/ he said, 
 " the troops now in the city, in addition to those in 
 Pylos, and I will die for it, but within three weeks 
 I bring you those Spartans prisoners of war ! " * 
 "You shall command," shouted the Demos, think 
 ing it the best joke of the season. Cleon went to 
 Pylos, stormed the Spartan camp, and was back 
 again with his prisoners within the time fixed. 
 Doubtless he was a demagogue, and a dangerous 
 one ; but he was no poltroon, and met his death at 
 last on the field. 
 
 Mr. Phillips, with a burst of Cleonian eloquence, 
 cries out that in the war he sees salvation, and that 
 every act of his life moves him to give it a hearty 
 and hot welcome.-)- 
 
 Why, then, did he not go to the war ? Was he 
 a non-resistant? Non-resistants do not wish ten men 
 sent to bloody graves for maltreating Mr. Garrison. 
 Was he sick or feeble ? An orator who can pace a 
 
 Tavra de e^oiv ecprj Trpos rols fv HuXa) orparicormj VTOS 
 fifiv AaKf8aijjioviovs a>VTas TJ avroii drroKrevflv. 
 - Kai TOV K\ea>vos KaiVep p.avia>dr)s ovaa TJ V7TO(T^eo-is a7re[3r) evrbs 
 yap fUoaiv f}/j.pcov fjyayrj rovs tivdpas wairep VTreo-rrj. 
 
 GovKvdidov Svyypdcprjs, IV. 28, 39. 
 
 f On April 21, 1861, he said in Boston: "Every act of my life has 
 tended to make the welcome I give this war hearty and hot ..... The 
 first cannon-shot upon our forts has put the war-cry of the Revolu 
 tion on her lips ..... No man can prevail against the North in the 
 nineteenth century." He also spoke of the " Abolitionists who thank 
 God that He has let them see salvation before they die." SCHOULER S 
 Massachusetts in the Civil War, p. 113. 
 
73 
 
 stage by the hour and shout slander to two thousand 
 people, might well sit on a horse and cry "Forward!" 
 to a brigade of infantry. Was he too ignorant or 
 too old ? General James Wadsworth was the older 
 man, and knew no more than he of military art. 
 I saw General Wadsworth with his gray hair, as he 
 rode, at the head of his division, into the thickets of 
 the Wilderness. And there, in the forefront of the 
 battle, he fell, a simple gentleman, who did not 
 think he could do more good by staying at home. 
 
 The War was Mr. Phillips s opportunity. Brave 
 deeds would have compelled men to bury under 
 laurels the memory of his slanderous abuse and 
 murderous eloquence. But he lost that opportunity : 
 and posterity will remember only his eloquence, his 
 bitterness, his injustice, and his cowardice. 
 
14 DAY USE 
 
 RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED 
 
 LOAN DEPT. 
 
 RENEWALS ONLY TEL. NO. 642-3405 
 This book is due on the last date stamped below, or 
 
 on the date to which renewed. 
 Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. 
 
 LD21A-60m-6, 69 
 (J9096slO)476-A-32 
 
 General Library 
 
 University of California 
 
 Berkeley