To the Editor of the Liberator
Sir — I have received and read with great satisfaction the first two numbers of the Liberator, with the exception of the notice you have taken of Walker’s Appeal, which production I have ever been opposed to — opposed to, in the first place, not because he is a man of color, but because I do not believe he wrote it; ……..the matter brought forward in said pamphlet is the result of more reading than could have fallen to the lot of that man ……….he could never have read all the authors quoted in his book……….to say nothing of the excellent criticisms upon the speeches of the most talented of men of the age…….. I am opposed to the pamphlet , therefore, because I believe it to be at the bottom of the recent enactments of severe laws in the southern states, such as are too notorious to be mentioned…….. there is no man among us, who is more sensible of his political degradation than I am; but at the same time, I am unwilling to resort to any dishonorable means of deliverance — such as Walker points out.
Leo,, Philadelphia, Jan 21, 1831
“We know not wherein we differ from ‘Leo’ in his view of the pamphlet. We have repeatedly expressed our disapprobation of its general spirit. It contains, however, many valuable truths and seasonable warnings.
“Mr. Walker was personally unknown to us; but we are assured, by those who intimately knew him, that his Appeal was an exact transcript of his daily conversations; that, within the last four years, he was hurtfully indefatigable in his studies; that he was not ‘vulgar’ either in manners or language; and that he was a blameless professor or religion. The historical facts which he has collected were too familiar to have required extraordinary research. Besides, the internal evidence of the pamphlet clearly substantiates its authorship”.
For the Liberator
(Liberator,Jan 29, 1 831, pg 1)
