Thoughts on African Colonization

by William Lloyd Garrison

'We would say, LIBERATE THEM ONLY ON CONDITION OF THEIR GOING TO AFRICA OR TO HAYTI.'—[Idem, vol. iii. p. 26.]

'I am not complaining of the owners of slaves; IT WOULD BE AS HUMANE TO THROW THEM FROM THE DECKS IN THE MIDDLE PASSAGE, AS TO SET THEM FREE IN OUR COUNTRY.' * * * 'The Colonization Society, I undertake to show, presents such a scheme. Slaveholders have given it their approbation; they will approve it, and they can approve of no other. Any scheme of emancipation without colonization, they know and see and feel to be productive of nothing but evil; evil to all whom it affects: to the white population, to the slaves, to the manumitted themselves.' * * 'Throughout the slaveholding States there is a strong objection, even among the warmest friends of the African race, to slaves being liberated and allowed to remain among us; and some States have enacted laws against it. The objection is, in our individual opinion, well founded.'—[Idem, vol. iv. pp. 226, 300, 340.]

'In connexion with this subject, your memorialists beg leave to mention, that by an act of the Virginia Legislature, passed in 1805, emancipated slaves forfeit their freedom by remaining for a longer period than twelve months, within the limits of the Commonwealth. This law, odious and unjust as it may at first view appear, and hard as it may seem to bear upon the liberated negro, was doubtless dictated by sound policy, and its repeal would be regarded by none with more unfeigned regret, than by the friends of African Colonization. It has restrained many masters from giving freedom to their slaves, and has thereby contributed to check the growth of an evil already too great and formidable.' * * 'Under the influence of a policy, already referred to, and justified by the necessity from which it sprung, the laws of Virginia have prohibited emancipation within the limits of the State, but on condition of the early removal of the individual emancipated.' * * 'While hundreds, perhaps we might say thousands, of the free colored people, are seeking a passage to Liberia; hundreds who hold slaves, would willingly set them at liberty, were the means of their removal provided. And till those means are provided, the liberation of the slave would neither be a blessing to himself, nor the public. His liberty under any circumstances may be a debt due, in the abstract, to the claims of human nature; but when applied to him individually, it would be a calamity. We cannot conceive of a more deplorable state of society, than what our slaveholding states would present, with their black population afloat, without a home, without the means of subsistence, and without those self-relying habits, which might lead them to obtain an independent livelihood. It is not therefore incumbent upon those who hold slaves, to set them at liberty, till some means are provided for their removal, or at least for their subsistence. They owe it neither to themselves, to their country, nor the unfortunate beings around them.' * * * 'Those slaves still in my possession, I cannot conscientiously emancipate, unless they shall be removed by the Society to Liberia.'—[Idem, vol. v. pp. 20, 53, 89, 177.]

'If the question were submitted, whether there should be either immediate or gradual emancipation of all the slaves in the United States, without their removal or colonization, painful as it is to express the opinion, I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT IT WOULD BE UNWISE TO EMANCIPATE THEM.' * * 'Is our posterity doomed to endure forever not only all the ills flowing from the state of slavery, but all which arise from incongruous elements of population, separated from each other by invincible prejudices, and by natural causes? Whatever may be the character of the remedy proposed, we may confidently pronounce it inadequate, unless it provides efficaciously for the total and absolute separation, by an extensive space of water or of land, at least, of the white portion of our population from that, which is free, of the colored.' * * 'Who, if this promiscuous residence of whites and blacks, of freemen and slaves, is forever to continue, can imagine the servile wars, the carnage and the crimes which will be its probable consequences, without shuddering with horror?' * * 'Gentlemen of the highest respectability from the South, assure us, that there is among the owners of slaves a very extensive and increasing desire to emancipate them. Their patriotism, their humanity, nay their self-interest, prompt to this; but it is not expedient, it is not safe to do it, without being able to remove them.' * * 'How important it is, as it respects our character abroad, that we hasten to clear our land of our black population!'

'Some benevolent minds in the overflowings of their philanthropy, advocate amalgamation of the two classes, saying, let the colored class be freed, and remain among us as denizens of the Empire; surely all classes of mankind are alike descended from the primitive parentage of Eden, then why not intermingle in one common society as friends and brothers. No, Sir, no. I hope to prove at no very distant day, that a Southron can make sacrifices for the cause of Colonization beyond seas; but for a Home Department in those matters, I repeat, no, Sir, no. What right, I demand, have the children of Africa to an homestead in the white man's country?'[R]

'Let the regenerated African rise to Empire; nay, let Genius flourish, and Philosophy shed its mild beams to enlighten and instruct the posterity of Ham, returning "redeemed and disenthralled," from their long captivity in the New World. But, Sir, be all these benefits enjoyed by the African race under the shade of their native palms. Let the Atlantic billow heave its high and everlasting barrier between their country and ours. Let this fair land, which the white man won by his chivalry, which he has adorned by the arts and elegancies of polished life, be kept sacred for his descendants, untarnished by the footprint of him who hath ever been a slave.'—[Idem, vol. vi. pp. 5, 12, 23, 110, 364, 371, 372.]

'The idea of emancipating our slaves, and permitting them to remain within the limits of the U. S. whether as a measure of humanity or of policy, is most decisively reprobated by universal public sentiment.... Does any man in his senses desire this population to remain among us? If the whole community could reply, IT WOULD RESPOND IN ONE UNIVERSAL NEGATIVE.'—[Idem, vol. vii. pp. 230, 231.]

'In reflecting on the utility of a plan for colonizing the free people of color, with whom our country abounds, it is natural that we should be first struck by its tendency to confer a benefit on ourselves, by ridding us of a population for the most part idle and useless, and too often vicious and mischievous.... All emancipation, to however small an extent, which permits the persons emancipated to remain in this country, is an evil, which must increase with the increase of the operation, and would become altogether intolerable, if extended to the whole, or even to a very large part, of the black population. I am therefore strongly opposed to emancipation, in every shape and degree, unless accompanied by colonization.'—[First Annual Report.]

'They will annex the condition that the emancipated SHALL LEAVE THE COUNTRY.'—[Second Annual Report.]

'They require that the whole mass of free persons of color, and those who may become such with the consent of their owners, should be progressively removed from among us, as fast as their own consent can be obtained, and as the means can be found for their removal and for their proper establishment in Africa. Nothing short of this progressive but complete removal can accomplish the great objects of this measure, in relation to the security, prosperity, and happiness of the United States.'—[Seventh Annual Report.]