J[ohn] T[homas] to Frederick Douglass, April 30, 1856

For Frederick Douglass' Paper

POLITICS.

DEAR SIR:—It is long since I have written you. Indeed, I must be under compulsion to write much, and having been so long idle from compulsion, the effort is a serious one. Nevertheless, there are occasionally things I want to say, and I feel compelled to take my pen and say them. I sometimes see you, not so often your paper—but this is my fault. I will venture to say that you as well as myself have had hopes raised for the triumph of the Republican Party over rum and Slavery. I began to fear its inability or intent in the former case, and of course, its failure in the latter also. The Republican Party cannot triumph in this State, separated from the prohibitory policy, and as goes New York so goes the National Republican Party; certainly if this State is against it, it is defeated. Had the party secured its character for integrity last fall by embracing the Prohibitory Law, I should have strong hopes for it in this State. But Mr. Greeley, of the Tribune, spoke and wrote against it. Mr. Greeley's speech in the Convention, and the columns of the Tribune extinguished its fires. The zeal of the people languished in proportion as the zeal of the leaders increased. The masses act now with their eyes open. They know what they are about, and must have confidence in the motive power, or they will be their own motive power. The Greeley's policy killed the heart of his party, and as a consequence, Comstock, Slavery and Rum triumphed over Wood and Mullen, and Temperance and Freedom. I venture to predict it will be so to the end of time, should the same policy be continued so long.

What, then, is to heal the breach, and restore confidence and strength to the Republican Party of the State? One thing, and only one things can do it. Should it present Hon. A. P. GRANGER for Government at the coming election, or any available man of like reliability on the great questions of the day, the party will be sound again. Its young body doubtless will suffer from the severe test it has endured but

it will be healthy and sound, and gather irresistible strength. It will not do to give us a doubtful man. A doubtful man in a doubtful party is certain ruin. With such candidates as Gen. Granger, the party ceases to be uncertain. They will gather around the the Republican and Slavery elements of the State, while candidates less positive and certain will leave those elements scattered and powerless as they are. Had Governor Clarke been as intelligent and brave on the Slave question as on the Temperance question, and as determined in the selection of public agents as in the adoption of temperance measures, who does not see he would this moment be the most honored Governor this State ever had—the magnet of an irrestible party—with the gubernatorial chair, or any other political position in the State always at his disposal? Pity, a great pity it is, his goodness of heart had not been united to the energy and bravery of Gen. Granger; but this mission was to foster the forces which enacted a prohibitory law. It was glory enough perhaps for one day.

And now that law is in ruins—ruined in the house of its friends—sacrificed to the purblind, cruel policy which ignored its friends and embraced its enemies, for professed Anti-Kansas ends—how shall it be restored? For restored it must be. God nor man will rest until the prohibitory law is restored. Judges of the highest Courts may decide that the people shall protect their lives, liberties, and families by enactments against Slavery and rum.—Those Judges will be displaced and their opinions wiped from the record. The history of jurisprudence is black with precedents for almost every form of tyranny. In England such precedents have grown so odious to after ages

that they were ordered from the files and burned—"an order," Lord Erskine "dictated by a pious tenderness for national honor, and intended as a charitable covering for the crimes of our fathers, but instead of ordering them to be burned," said that great Lawyer, "they should have ordered them engraven on the walls of our Courts of Justice that they might enlarge and blacken in our sight to terrify us from acts of injustice." Not in after ages, but now in our day, these precedents of our Judges will be overthrown and stand for nothing but the imbecility or wickedness of their anthers. Be it remembered, the doctrine "stare decisis" (stick to precedents) in law applies only to precedents in behalf of justice and freedom, never to precedents in behalf of injustice and tyranny. As the judgement Sommerset's? case immortalized the infamy of British slavery, so will the infamy of these murderous precedents dwell forever in the light and transparent justice and glory of their reversal. Blessed be God the people are higher than the Courts of this country! Were it not so, we should not lack for tyrants, and the worst of tyrants. The Democracy govern this State, and Judges rise and fall at their bidding. The people are the Supreme Court, and they remove men for their opinions from the bench as well as other places. I have been much disgusted with the sentiment sometimes expressed, that we are not to question our Judges on the Laws of Slavery or rum, that they may take their places with full freedom to act as angels or devils. Away with the delusion. We must not hesitate to pronounce the decisions of Comstock, &c., as infamous and absurd—remove them soon as possible, and look to it that no candidate for Judge is hereafter chosen who will not establish the opposite rules as the law of the land. This is a party question not to be postponed to Kansas matters or any others. Judges' opinions upon Slavery and rum are political opinions of course and to be reversed or confirmed at the Ballot Box.

Now I am not going to condemn a National party, which from motives of mere policy, limits its platform to the admission of free States only provided, I am convinced, it does so because it is against Slavery. I want my vote to tell for freedom in Kansas; and though that point is a small pivot for a party to turn on, I will coalesce with all the Anti-Slavery men of the country to carry it, especially if I am persuaded the future legislation of the country in regard to Slavery is to turn on that point towards freedom. If the free State question is the turning point for the plurality of the nation, for God's sake let us contribute to that plurality and have a turn. It is something to get our of the nine holes, and in the right direction. If Slavery is to be swept from the continent, there is to be an initial at some time and place. There may be multitudes in the Republican Party who would restrict Anti-Slavery hostilities to free Kansas; and other multitudes who would take of all restrictions, and sweep Slavery from the earth; and others still who have not settled any limits in the matter. It is my opinion, that, when the current of Legislation is turned, no power under heaven can restrict the torrent, that power under heaven can restrict the torrent, that power and patronage will flow with it; that it will break over all banks and boundaries and deluge the land. Who shall say what is to be the fate of Slavery, when we have from free State Post-Masters, Judges, Marshalls, Ambassadors, Legislators, &c.? Men are free State men because they are Anti-Slavery men—they will occupy those places of power, not because they are for free States at one, but because they are opposed to Slavery from principle. Through this point, small as it is, Pro-Slavery men of every grade are thrust out of office, and Anti-Slavery men of every grade are let into office. The Anti-Slavery power and passion of the country will be in

possession of the Government. The question "What shall be done with Slavery" will then be discussed under far different auspices than it now is. The odds will have changed sides. Slavery, having lost the Government, will have lost all, and there will be "none so poor as to do it reverence." Take from the three hundred thousand slaveholders political power, and they have lost all political charms. Politicians will no more connect with them than with a putrid corpse. It is for such reasons I would not have Radical Abolitionists to separate from qualified ones in the Republican Party. Such qualified ones will come out of victory for free States vastly more radical than they now are. Without prejudice to separate interests, they cast money together for a free State—how inconsistent to refuse votes to the same common intent! Free States need votes as well as rifles.

This slave question is not where it was fifteen or even eight years ago, and is not to be treated as it was then treated. Fifteen or even eight years ago, with us, it was mainly a question of principles and rights. The Egyptian darkness that then enveloped the American mind as been dispelled. It is not light now that is needed. Light can scarcely be more intensified that it is on this subject. The question now is a question of action. Freedom and slavery have actually come to blows, and we want to know how to take a position to give our enemies the first dig. We want to consider now where we can hit him; and we know we can neither hit or wound him if we do no unite our strength in the blow. We want to kill him outright to be sure, and we intend to kill him; but we know we must have many rounds with him, and cripple him shocking before we reach his heart. Stratagem