Ohio History Journal

THE NORTHEASTERN RELIGIOUS PRESS AND

JOHN BROWN

 

by WILLIAM S. ROLLINS

Analyst, National Research Council

 

On October 16, 1859, long-smoldering passions in North and

South, which within a year and a half would burst into the flame

of civil war, were thrown new fuel. On that day John Brown and

eighteen staunch followers raided Harper's Ferry, Virginia, "to

free the slaves."¹ After more than twenty-four hours of havoc,

Colonel Robert E. Lee, commanding a handful of United States

troops, forced the remnants of Brown's party into submission. One

week later Brown was on trial for his life; and on December 2 he

was hanged from the Charlestown, Virginia, gallows.

During this tense period northerners and southerners of all

shades of opinion concerning slavery eagerly followed the latest

developments in the John Brown story. Many southerners with

slave property were convinced that this felon must meet a speedy

death as a warning to others who might succeed where Brown had

failed, while abolitionists in the North found in Brown a martyr

to their cause.

In some quarters of the North, however, saner counsels prevailed.

Among those who offered them was the majority of the editors

of those religious journals which made it a practice to comment

on secular affairs. Their role in attempting to urge reason and

sanity, in place of indignation and hate, was certainly an important

one. These editors of the generally conservative religious press

realized that the John Brown affair, if exploited by excitable

northerners, would tend to undermine established principles of

law and order. So, they attempted to point out that Brown's deed

was unchristian, that Brown himself was a fanatic more to be

execrated than canonized. But they labored in vain, and the tide of

disunion continued to flow inexorably toward open warfare.

1 This was John Brown's answer to Senator J. M. Mason's question, "What was

your object in coming [to Harper's Ferry]?" Oswald Garrison Villard, John Brown

A Biography Fifty Years After (New York, 1943), 458.

128

• 1
 

The Religious Press and John Brown             129

But what was the nature of the religious press during this critical

period of the nation's history? In general, it was not of the highest

religious or journalistic character,² although there were many shining

exceptions. Too, there was a great number of journals; and the

Baptists, Methodists, Congregationalists, and Presbyterians, the most

active publishers at that time, each had from twenty-five to fifty

publications.³

Nearly every denomination had a complete line of the various

standard types of periodicals, including at least one theological

quarterly, a home monthly, and a weekly newspaper.⁴ Many

denominations engaged in home and foreign missionary work

published monthly journals devoted to these activities.

Religious journals arose in every state and territory,⁵ and some

of the more famous among them had subscribers in many parts of

the country. Such quarterlies, for instance, as the Methodist Quarterly

Review and the Presbyterian Biblical Repertory and Princeton

Review were undoubtedly required reading for all serious ministers

of those denominations throughout the North.

Within the range of the various types of periodicals, there were

noticeable differences in their editorial policy concerning the dis-

cussion of worldly affairs. In this respect the weeklies were most

vocal. The monthlies and quarterlies, less able to keep abreast of

fast-moving developments, devoted less attention to such current

secular affairs as that involving John Brown. Missionary monthlies

and magazines for general family reading usually refrained from

commenting on current political events and, therefore, carried little

or nothing about John Brown. The quarterlies, too, dodged politics.

As a rule, they confined their pages exclusively to theological and

literary articles, although on occasion they might appraise the state

of the Union. The majority of the weeklies, however, expressed

their views of the prevailing situation, and frequently did so with

vehemence.

 

2 Frank Luther Mott, A History of American Magazines, 1741-1885 (3 vols.,

Cambridge, Mass., 1938-39), II, 60.

3 Ibid., 61-62.

4 Ibid., 60.

⁵ Ibid., 61.

• 2
 

130    Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly

 

Many religious journals were relieved of the necessity of side-

stepping controversial issues for the sake of intra-church harmony,

since most of the large Protestant denominations had split along

sectional lines long before John Brown made his raid into Virginia.

These journals could, therefore, have supported Brown's case with-

out fear of alienating the southern wings of their churches. Never-

theless, the desire to promote social stability and to defend law

and order was, in itself, so strong among many editors of the

northeastern religious press as to make them denounce Brown and

his supporters.

Nine of the forty-six religious journals examined for this study

unequivocally damned Brown and his raid. Four of the forty-six

abhorred the deed but admired John Brown, the man. Another

three journals mentioned Brown, but their position concerning him

was not so clearly defined; and one journal referred to Brown

without passing judgment on him. The remaining twenty-nine

journals examined completely ignored Brown and the excitement

he created. This last group, however, was composed preponderantly

of quarterlies and monthlies which seldom, if ever, viewed the

political scene. Of the seventeen journals which did concern them-

selves with Brown, eleven were weeklies. Many of these editorialized

on the Harper's Ferry affair from the outset, and their comments

reached a climax shortly after Brown's hanging.

Just as some religious journals voiced their opinions of Brown,

so did other groups which felt strongly about his actions and his

fate. Many of Brown's northern sympathizers, for example, extolled

his virtues and condoned his crime, thus fomenting greater re-

sentment below Mason and Dixon's line. In the free states, after

Brown's execution, bells tolled, cannons boomed, and mass meetings

attracted those who would make an antislavery issue over John

Brown's untimely death. There were many who believed with the

famous preacher Theodore Parker, that it mattered not whether the

"American State hang his body and the American Church damn

his soul .... The road to heaven is as short from the gallows as

from the throne."⁶ Shortly before Brown's execution Emerson de-

6 Letter to Francis Jackson, November 24, 1859, quoted in Villard, John Brown,

564.

• 3
 

The Religious Press and John Brown             131

scribed him as "the new saint awaiting his martyrdom, and who, if

he shall suffer, will make the gallows glorious like the cross."⁷

While Parker, Emerson, and Yankees like them were preparing

Brown for sainthood, less excitable northerners denounced such

efforts as detrimental to the national welfare. Statements con-

demning Brown's deeds countered pro-Brown effusions; and anti-

Brown, or pro-Union, meetings opposed demonstrations sponsored

by abolitionists. Six days after Brown's execution a large pro-Union

meeting, held in Faneuil Hall and supported by many notable

Bostonians, acclaimed the Union and disavowed John Brown.⁸ On

December 19 New York was the scene of a similar meeting, which,

under the chairmanship of Mayor Daniel F. Tieman, decried "all

acts or inflammatory appeals which intend or tend to make this

Union less perfect."⁹ These, together with other pro-Union meetings

held in many northern cities and towns, helped stultify dangerous

enthusiasm for the John Brown cause.

The uproar over Brown began soon after intelligence of his raid

on Harper's Ferry reached the news rooms of the American press.

Typical of the attitude of the majority of the religious journals

which ventured their opinions concerning John Brown is that of

the Christian Mirror, a Congregational weekly of Portland, Maine.

This journal believed that the extensive preparations, the number

of men involved, and the "reckless purpose of the conspirators"

made the Harper's Ferry insurrection one of the most disgraceful

affairs of its kind in the history of the country. "We have never

had a more striking illustration of the disorganizing, diabolical

creed of those outlaws, who regard society as a mere voluntary

institution, and law subject to the caprice of everyone."¹⁰ Even with

the news of Brown's trial, his conviction, and finally, his execution,

the Christian Mirror did not relent in its denunciation of the man

and his deed. Four days after Brown met death on the gallows, this

Portland journal, in describing northern sentiment regarding John

Brown, violently revealed its own, declaring that the "expression

7 Robert Penn Warren, John Brown, The Making of a Martyr (New York, 1929),

431-432.

8 Villard, John Brown, 562-563.

9 Ibid., 563.

10 "The Week Reviewed," October 25, 1859.

• 4
 

132     Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly

of pulpit and press is that of condemnation of the Harper's Ferry

insurrection as an unmitigated outrage-unjustifiable in the sight

of God or man!" According to the New York press, only two of the

five hundred pulpits in that city were known to have given the

"sanction of their pulpits to the support of the highest crime per-

petrated in this country since the treason of Benedict Arnold. The

Northern sentiment generally," the Mirror continued, "has been

one of not only condemnation of the invasion, but also of sympathy

with the panic stricken homes, exposed to they know not what."11

A week later, in commenting upon an anti-Brown meeting at

Jayne's Hall in Philadelphia, the Christian Mirror lamented the

fact that

 

the unbecoming public demonstrations and manifestations of sympathy with

the plotter of that servile insurrection rendered necessary some counter

expression of sympathy and fraternal regard for those in the South whose

domestic peace was disturbed and whose personal safety [was] endangered.12

Equally as vehement as the Christian Mirror in its condemnation

of the Harper's Ferry episode was the New York Observer, one

of the most prominent Presbyterian weeklies. This journal, which

boasted in November 1859 a greater number of "regular sub-

scribers" than any Presbyterian, Baptist, Congregational, or Epis-

copalian "newspaper" in the world, was consistently anti-Brown.

On October 27 the Observer felt that, since the Harper's Ferry

raid was the product of abolitionist plotting, all Christians in the

North should rise up and denounce it.¹³

A little more than a month later the Observer was deeply con-

cerned over another aspect of Brown's raid: the hostile feeling

engendered in the South by the pro-Brown rantings of the

abolitionists and their allies. The Observer believed that the South,

in entertaining this hostility towards the North, was judging too

harshly. Southerners had accepted the "ravings" of noisy abolitionist

preachers like George B. Cheever and Edwin M. Wheelock as

11 December 6, 1859.

12 "The Week Reviewed," December 13, 1859.

13 "The Insurrection," October 27, 1859.

• 5
 

The Religious Press and John Brown              133

representative of the northern pulpit, and abolitionist journals like

the New York Independent and William Lloyd Garrison's Liberator

as typical of the northern press. "It would be just as fair," insisted

the Observer, "to go into the Bedlams to get the representative

mind of the country."¹⁴ After Brown had been hanged and sympathy

for him in some quarters had soared to great heights, the Observer

condemned the practice of classifying Brown as a "misguided good

man, who died in defence of his principles." To this Presbyterian

weekly such a doctrine, accepted by some pulpits and newspapers

in the North, was "more dangerous and pernicious than John

Brown's doctrine and practice .... We therefore repeat the thought,"

the Observer emphasized, "that our pulpits and newspapers are

doing a terrible wrong to society, when they eulogize the character

or motives of a criminal as an apology for his crime.^"l⁵

Following a course similar to that of the New York Observer,

two important Baptist weeklies, the Examiner of New York and the

Christian Watchman and Reflector of Boston, both heaped censure

upon Brown. The Examiner, by its own definition, was "a journal

printed in the best taste, giving complete abstracts of the news,

religious and secular, and enlisting the services of such contributors

as know how to do their part in making a highly attractive and

instructive newspaper for the family."¹⁶ On October 27 the Examiner

undertook to destroy the verdict of certain northern and southern

presses that the responsibility for the Harper's Ferry raid belonged

either to the leaders of the Republican party or to

 

the hostility to Slavery . . . so strongly expressed in the free States ...

There is no hostile opinion in the free States that would suggest, or in the

slightest degree countenance, a servile insurrection, or an attempt to abolish

Slavery by an armed force; nor do we believe there is a public man of any

influence in the whole country, who would utter a word to commend such

an undertaking.17

The following week the Examiner considered "The Lesson Taught

14 "North and South," December 1, 1859.

15 "Conscience No Excuse for Crime," December 8, 1859.

16 December 1, 1859.

l7 "The Harper's Ferry Outbreak," October 27, 1859.

• 6
 

134     Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly

 

at Harper's Ferry." Above all, the lesson of John Brown's raid

was "that of the unavoidable insecurity, and the inherent and the

ineradicable danger that belongs to slaveholding society."¹⁸ After

hearing of Brown's sentence, the Examiner was convinced that

Brown got precisely what he deserved. It seemed that "the acts

performed and meditated by Brown and his followers at Harper's

Ferry, do partake of the nature of the crimes of which they have

been convicted."19

From Boston the Christian Watchman and Reflector rebuked

John Brown as emphatically as did its sister journal, the New

York Examiner. While the Reflector, which would "ever befriend

rational and Christian progress," condemned the Harper's Ferry

raid, in the same breath it declared that Brown's crime was no

worse than the filibustering expeditions into Nicaragua, which

were abetted by southerners. Too, the Harper's Ferry raid was "no

more inhuman crime" than the capture of blacks in Africa for

slavery on southern plantations. Even so, the Reflector "ventured

to say" that honest antislavery men would not move "hand or

foot" to save Brown and the other criminals from a "righteous

doom." All those who respected good order "must condemn acts

of violence whenever they occur and by whomsoever committed,

and unite in inflicting on the offenders the utmost penalties of the

law."²⁰ Although objecting to the dispatch with which Virginia

brought Brown to trial, on November 10 the Reflector moved that

"all law-abiding citizens must condemn [Brown's act] as Quixotic

and wicked."²1 Two weeks later the Reflector shifted its attitude

slightly. While professing that it was "not set for the defence of

Brown," it warned the South not to hang him, unless they wished

"to kindle afresh the fires that burn deep into slavery."²² The

Reflector, therefore, like some other northeastern religious journals,

realized that the Brown issue was political dynamite, and it was

 

18 November 3, 1859.

19 "The Dilemma of Governor Wise," November 17, 1859.

20 "The Tragedy at Harper's Ferry," October 27, 1859.

21"The Tragedy at Harper's Ferry," November 10, 1859.

22 "Necessity of Slavery," November 24, 1859.

• 7
 

The Religious Press and John Brown                    135

 

possibly in an effort to prevent further intersectional unrest that

it offered this advice to southerners.²³

The Christian Intelligencer, the weekly spokesman for the Dutch

Reformed     Church,²⁴ was like the Examiner and           the  Christian

Watchman and Reflector in that it heartily condemned Brown.

Furthermore, it reproved the abolitionists of the Gerrit Smith

school associated with him. On November 8 the Christian In-

telligencer assured its readers that

public morals have become greatly debauched. Otherwise, how could those

men at Harper's Ferry have persuaded themselves into such a conspiracy,

for highway robbery, and murder! How else can we apologise for those

others, of high social position, who have seemed to be privy to this nefarious

scheme without exposing it!25

Similarly, the Friends' Review did not find a new martyr in

Brown. Although the Quakers were traditionally opposed to slavery,

the weekly Review could not countenance such unchristian methods

as those employed by John Brown to destroy that "great

evil." "When we consider that the means adopted as a remedy

for the great evil of Slavery were equally inconsistent with

Christianity, and totally indefensible on religious principles, we

must profoundly deplore the occurence [sic] [at Harper's Ferry]."

The Friends' Review went on to forecast:

That politicians will use it for selfish and corrupt purposes, cannot be

doubted; and its almost inevitable effect upon the minds of slaveholders

23 While the Christian Watchman and Reflector and the New York Examiner

clearly manifested their opinions concerning Brown, there were other Baptist pub-

lications which remained silent. The quarterly Christian Review, like most of its

counterparts of other denominations, believed "it neither necessary nor fitting to

make temporary and partisan questions (however seemingly important), the theme

of comment and criticism, in a strictly neutral and religious Journal." In the same

number, however, the Review, XXVI (July 1861), 491-521, deviated from its usual

policy and commented on "The National Crisis," feeling that the questions con-

fronting the country at that time were of such magnitude that they claimed the

attention of "every Christian patriot" (p. 491). Yet at that late date the Christian

Review made no mention of Brown. The chief Baptist journal in the field of missions

(Mott, History of American Magazines, II, 63-64), the Missionary Magazine, and

the Baptist Family Magazine and the Freewill Baptist Quarterly, also did not mention

the raider of Harper's Ferry.

24 Mott, History of American Magazines, II, 73-74.

25 "Public Morals," November 8, 1859.

• 8
 

136     Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly

 

can scarcely fail to be adverse to the pleadings of their conscience and the

prayers of those who seek in a truly Christian spirit to break every yoke,

proclaim liberty to the captive, and let the oppressed go free.²⁶

 

Another Quaker weekly, the Friend, also condemned Brown's

Virginia foray, referring to it as an "insanely wicked affair."²⁷

After Brown had been hanged, the Friend considered the effects

of the raid and of the events which followed in its wake. The in-

terest excited throughout the land by this whole business, the Friend

asserted, had given rise to a diversity of feelings and had led to

"very objectionable acts and expressions on the part of many, who

allow themselves to be governed by the dictates of passion rather

than by those of truth and soberness." In spite of their crimes,

Brown and his men "are to be deeply felt for," simply because

their sentence of capital punishment "shows that the laws of the

land are not yet brought into conformity with the precepts of

Christ." In order not to give the impression that it sanctioned the

deeds of Brown and his followers, the Friend insisted that "the

wrong and violence they have committed are not to be defended

or palliated because some or all of them, like Saul when making

havoc of the Church, may have thought they 'verily did God's

service.' "28

While these two Quaker weeklies were quick to editorialize on

John Brown, the powerful Catholic quarterly, Brownson's, waited

until July 1860 to do so, and then only incidentally in considering

the state of "Politics at Home." Although deploring Brown's raid,

Brownson's was satisfied that, in comparison with the filibustering

expeditions of Houston into Texas, of Walker into Nicaragua, and

of Lopez into Cuba, the Brown raid was no worse and, if anything,

perhaps a little less objectionable.²⁹

In its belief that the federal government held the territories

with a firm grip, Brownson's took a position similar to that of

26 "The Riot at Harper's Ferry," October 29, 1859.

27 "Summary of Events," October 29, 1859.

28 December 10, 1859. Unlike the Friend, the weekly Friends' Intelligencer did not

pass judgment on Brown. It did, however, caution its coreligionists to beware lest

the excitement engendered by the Harper's Ferry raid and the subsequent fate of

Brown make them betray their religious principles. December 24, 1859.

29 Third New York Series, I (July 1860), 386.

• 9
 

The Religious Press and John Brown              137

right-wing Democrats who believed that slavery in the territories

should be protected at the point of federal bayonets, if necessary,

and similar, also, to that of left-wing Republicans who believed

that the same means should be employed to keep the territories

free from slavery. Thus, motivated by a conviction which could not

tolerate such foolish notions as that of popular sovereignty,

Brownson's pointed out that the importance of Harper's Ferry

lay in the fact that it was but a sample of what should be expected

as a result of the doctrine of popular sovereignty, which was "en-

tertained in all sections of the country" and which formed "the

democratic theory, unhappily, embraced by all our political parties."³⁰

A Swedenborgian weekly, the New Jerusalem Messenger of

New York, deliberated the religious rather than the political

meanings of the Harper's Ferry raid and, in the process, whole-

heartedly censured Brown. First professing that its usual policy

was to refrain from discussing political, or even semi-political,

matters, the New Jerusalem Messenger believed, nevertheless, that

"under extraordinary circumstances it may be the duty of a religious

journal to notice civil questions; for without a united and free

country, public worship, and the dissemination of religious truths,

may be rendered wellnigh [sic) impossible." Moreover, there was

a "religious phase" to the Harper's Ferry tragedy which impelled

the Messenger to reveal its views on that subject.

 

John Brown was a "professor of religion." His memory was stored with

texts from the Sacred Scriptures; and he doubtless died in the belief that

he forfeited his life by doing God service. This, together with his physical

courage, dazzles the imagination of many who condemn his acts as an

error of judgment; it also leads a few to regard him as a saint and a hero.

But in spite of appearances, John Brown's religion was "directly

opposed to the spirit and life of Christianity." Brown's religion

was not that of the "meek and lowly Jesus," but of self-confidence

and pride. In short, John Brown's character should be admired

neither by Christians nor by any American citizens.31

 

30 Ibid., 387.

31 "The Harper's Ferry Invasion," December 24, 1859.

• 10
 

138     Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly

 

The New Jerusalem Messenger expressed also its opinion of the

anti-Brown, or pro-Union, meetings. These were "eminently season-

able and proper." As for the bulk of northern citizenry, the

Messenger was certain that they "sincerely condemn" the Harper's

Ferry raid. Even so, there was an element in the North so obsessed

with the idea of abolitionism that it believed it was "doing God

service while nourishing passions whose tendency is to bring upon

our once happy country evils in comparison with which war in its

usual forms, together with pestilence and famine, would be hailed

as blessings."³² Thus, the New Jerusalem Messenger, like many

other religious journals, saw clearly the implications of the uproar

emanating from the John Brown affair, and it did its best to point

out this folly which might lead eventually to national ruin.³³

While religious journals like the New Jerusalem Messenger

disapproved of Harper's Ferry in every way, others felt that, while

Brown's violent attempt to free the slaves was a crime, the man

himself was truly remarkable and, therefore, worthy of com-

mendation. He had believed he was inspired of God when he

attempted, almost single-handed, to destroy a despicable institution,

and he had faced death with equanimity worthy of a Christian

martyr. Among the religious journals which admired most these

qualities in Brown was the New York Independent.

Founded in 1848 to provide Congregational churches outside

New England with a periodical organ and to promote the anti-

slavery cause,³⁴ the Independent utilized the John Brown affair to

stir up further antislavery sentiment. Special contributors such as

Henry Ward Beecher, Mrs. Harriet Beecher Stowe, John Greenleaf

Whittier, and George B. Cheever, all facile writers and avowed

exponents of abolition, lent a color to the Independent such as few

periodicals, either secular or religious, could boast.

Upon receiving the first news of the raid, the Independent be-

lieved that "those who labor most earnestly for the abolition of

 

32 Ibid.

33 In contrast to the New Jerusalem Messenger, another Swedenborgian journal,

the monthly New Jerusalem Magazine, withheld any feelings it might have en-

tertained concerning John Brown.

34 Mott, History of American Magazines, II, 367-368.

• 11
 

The Religious Press and John Brown                 139

 

slavery, will be found to have no sympathy with such a movement

as this Virginia insurrection." Then, using the Harper's Ferry in-

cident as an opening for a discussion of its prime obsession, the

Independent exclaimed: "But what a system is that which provokes

such horrors, and gives such occasion for bloody insurrection!"³⁵

The following week the Independent modified its earlier position

of complete denunciation, for its was not sure that Brown's "mad

attempt" might not "result in good." Perhaps it would make

northerners and southerners alike conscious of "the fearful in-

security of slavery,-to the possibility at any hour of a bloody servile

war. . . . This terror of insurrection, this universal scare, gives the

lie to every plea in defence of slavery."³⁶ The Independent, by

November 10, was downright sympathetic to Brown, excusing him

on the basis of insanity. Applying a strange code of moral conduct,

it asserted that the wrong of Brown's act "lies neither in the

motive that prompted it, nor in the object at which he aimed-the

emancipation of the captives-but in attempting what was

desperately hopeless, and, therefore, unwarrantable."³⁷

After Brown's execution the Independent eulogized him as a

new martyr. Perhaps "the heroism of John Brown, whose self-

sacrificing zeal had perverted his judgment, may put a soul into

our degenerate and servile Christianity, and teach us that truth is

worth more than pelf, and love to man worth more than life."

Americans needed to have their "souls stirred" and their "foun-

dations shaken," to be "brought face to face with martyrdom, not

on the page of history, but as a palpable, and for us even a pos-

sible fact. John Brown may help us to learn what spirit we are of."³⁸

The quarterly New Englander, too, expressed sympathy for Brown,

but at no time did it eulogize him in the manner of the Independent.

In an article entitled "The Moral of Harper's Ferry," the New

 

35 "The Uprising at Harper's Ferry," October 20, 1859.

36 "The Great Virginia Scare," October 27, 1859.

37 "John Brown as a Hero," November 10, 1859. Italics as quoted.

38 "John Brown's Failure and His Triumph," December 8, 1859. Many of the

important Congregational journals kept silent on the affair then shaking the country.

The Home Missionary and the Missionary Herald, like most missionary magazines,

did not allude to John Brown; the Congregational Quarterly and the Bibliotheca

Sacra and Biblical Repository also remained silent.

• 12
 

140      Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly

 

Englander told its readers that John Brown's raid resulted from the

existing policy concerning slavery in the territories, which, as in

Kansas, encouraged the clashing of arms between contesting pro-

and antislavery elements. It was in the struggle for Kansas that

Brown, who fought on behalf of the antislavery forces there, "came

into connections, and was trained by an experience, which enabled

him to conceive his wild plan and to complete his arrangements for

a rising of slaves in Virginia." One of the morals of Harper's

Ferry, then, was a return to the territorial policy of the Missouri

Compromise. Under this old policy the delimitation of slave terri-

tory obviated a struggle between pro- and antislavery forces in order

to determine the status of a territory upon admission to the Union

as a state. Although the New Englander respected John Brown's

idealism and Christian motivation, it deplored the means he em-

ployed to abolish slavery. "Let all who love their country, or have

any hope for the enslaved, avoid all fellowship with men who would

abolish slavery by arms in the hands of invaders, or in the hands

of slaves."³⁹

Following a course similar to that of the New Englander, a

Presbyterian monthly edited by the Rev. Thomas H. Beveridge

of Philadelphia, the Evangelical Repository, could not condone

Brown's course, "which could only result in unavailing bloodshed

and disasterous defeat." It did, however, sympathize with his

"sincere, but misguided devotion to the cause of freedom." This

Philadelphia monthly saluted Brown's "honest integrity of purpose,

his self-sacrificing truthfulness, and his inimitable courage." More-

over, it mourned his "untimely and cruel death."⁴⁰

Another Presbyterian journal published in Philadelphia was the

Presbyterian Quarterly Review, which favored reunion with the

 

³⁹ New Englander, XVII (November 1859), 1071-1078.

40 Evangelical Repository, XVIII (December 1859), 425. Two important pub-

lications, the Presbyterian Monthly Record and the Presbyterian Magazine, both of

Philadelphia, left discussion of Brown to their politically vocal sister publications.

Like most missionary magazines, the Foreign Missionary also failed to concern itself

with Harper's Ferry. Even more staid than these journals were the Biblical Repertory

and Princeton Review and the American Theological Review. Devoted primarily to

articles of a theological and literary nature, only on rare occasions was their aloofness

from the current political scene broken by a treatise, for example, on "The State of

the Country"; but even then mention of John Brown was lacking.

• 13
 

The Religious Press and John Brown              141

 

exscinded division of the Presbyterian Church.⁴1 With the appease-

ment of disaffected Presbyterian brethren in view, this journal

assumed an anti-abolitionist attitude in one of the few articles it

devoted to politics. Attempting to determine "Who Is Responsible

for the Present Slavery Agitation?" the Presbyterian Quarterly

Review assured its readers that among those responsible were the

"ultra and rabid abolitionists." These people, the Review asserted,

claimed to represent the "honest northern party," whereas they

were really outside it. They cared little for "any moral principle"

and carried "on the war for the glory they can achieve."⁴²

But where did John Brown fit into the scheme of things as

envisioned by the Presbyterian Quarterly Review? Compared with

the rabble-rousing brand of abolitionist, John Brown fared rather

well. To the Review, "any organized efforts to tamper with southern

slaves and run them off from their masters, was a species of lynch

law; a violation of all principles of social order and comity; a

gross outrage on the spirit of the Constitution of the United States."

With John Brown, though, it was different. "He bid defiance to all

laws and compacts. He did the matter openly and bravely, and

periled the consequences." Therefore, he "occupies a position . . .

far above those who profess a respect for law and order, and ask

the protection of law as good citizens, and yet furtively engage

in dispossessing southern men of what they regard, and what their

laws regard as property."⁴³ With its position regarding abolitionism

thus clearly defined, the Review next attempted to convince southern

friends of its good intentions by stating a desire "to strengthen,

not weaken the bonds which link us to the South."⁴⁴

One of the leading Unitarian weeklies,⁴⁵ the Christian Register

of Boston, was comparable to the Presbyterian Quarterly Review

in that it qualifiedly condemned Brown. In fact, as time went on

the Register grew more sympathetic towards him, although it abided

by its conviction that the unsuccessful Harper's Ferry raid was a

 

41 Mott, History of American Magazines, II, 62.

42 Presbyterian Quarterly Review, VIII (April 1860), 534.

43 Ibid., 540.

44 Ibid., 543.

45 Mott, History of American Magazines, II, 72.

• 14
 

142      Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly

 

good example of what happens when reason is abandoned for

fanatical zeal. This journal, which labored for the "wide diffusion

of a rational and pure Christianity," on November 5 took Brown

to task for having "indulged his feelings and kept the rational

faculties in abeyance, till his virtues have done the part of vices,

and the more there was in him good the more destructive it has

been to himself and the cause he loved better than himself." The

Christian Register believed that Brown's conviction that he was an

"instrument in God's hand" might be called "piety, but it shows

that the most exalted sentiments of piety, . . . united with the most

self-forgetting philanthropy, will mislead to general ruin when

simple reason is disregarded."⁴⁶ Despite its upbraiding Brown for

his lack of reason, the Christian Register, after Brown had been

hanged, expressed genuine sympathy for him. It was certain that

a man of Brown's caliber "did not seem born for a felon's death.

It was a terrible expiation for a mistake originating in such motives

as impelled him.^"47

Differing from the Christian Register in its bent for treating

secular affairs, the Unitarian Monthly Religious Magazine only once

referred to the invader of Harper's Ferry and on that occasion pub-

lished a maudlin poem entitled "Old John Brown":

 

Not any spot six feet by two

Will hold a man like thee:

John Brown will tramp the shaking earth

From the Blue Ridge to the sea,

Till the strong angel comes at last

And opes each dungeon door,

And God's "Great Charter" holds and waves

O'er all his humble poor.

46 "Fanaticism," November 5, 1859.

47 "The Last of John Brown," December 10, 1859. Two other Unitarian journals,

the Christian Examiner and the Monthly Journal of the American Unitarian Asso-

ciation, both of Boston, did not editorialize on Brown or even mention him. The

Monthly Journal, however, did not begin publication until 1860. The Evangelical

Review, the quarterly organ of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Mott, History of

American Magazines, II, 73), and the Lutheran Home Journal, a monthly published

by the Lutheran Board of Publications, also did not editorialize on the subject then

dividing the country. (The writer has examined only the October, November, and

December, 1859, numbers of the Lutheran Home Journal.) Another Keystone State

publication which did not pass judgment on John Brown was the German Reformed

• 15
 

The Religious Press and John Brown                 143

 

And then the humble poor will come

In that far-distant day,

And from the felon's nameless grave

They'll brush the leaves away,

And gray old men will point the spot

Beneath the pine-tree shade,

As children ask with streaming eyes

Where "old John Brown" was laid.⁴⁸

Although this poem exudes sympathy for John Brown, it would

be unfair to consider the Monthly Religious Magazine as un-

equivocally pro-Brown on the basis of it. Nevertheless, it was

precisely such items as this which helped to lift John Brown to

martyrdom, whether or not it was the editor's intention to do so.

Probably with the thought of maintaining union between northern

and southern dioceses, the Episcopalian journals usually did not

go even so far as the Monthly Religious Magazine in committing

themselves on the John Brown episode. However, the Churchman,

an Episcopalian weekly of New York, referred to Brown and

passed judgment on him. "Devoted to the cause of Christian truth

in all its fulness and integrity," the Churchman rated the Harper's

Ferry raid as "one of the gravest offences that has occurred in our

history, and . . . deserves to be punished with exact justice."⁴⁹

Concerning the apparent reluctance of Episcopalian journals

to mention the subject of slavery, the Church Intelligencer of

Raleigh, North Carolina, may have reflected the attitude of most

of the journals of that denomination, both northern and southern.

"Thank God the Episcopal Church has kept perfectly free from

the fanaticism on the subject of slavery, which has more or less

affected the various denominations around her!" exclaimed the

Intelligencer, which was fully convinced that the Episcopal Church

Messenger, although it carried the latest news concerning him in its "News of the

Week" column.

48 Monthly Religious Magazine, XXII (December 1859), 417.

49 "The Outbreak in Virginia," November 3, 1859. Northern Episcopalian journals

like the Protestant Episcopal Quarterly Review and Church Register tended to avoid

committing themselves on Brown or other controversial secular issues of the day. The

semi-monthly Episcopalian Chicago Record was "devoted to the church, to literature,

and to the arts," and so left discussion of politics to other journals. Two important

Episcopalian weeklies published in New York, the Church Journal and the Protestant

Churchman, also ignored Brown.

• 16
 

144      Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly

 

will never give way to this or any other fanaticism. For while some of her

clergy, as individuals, may have decided opinions differing from those held

at the South, still they keep them to themselves as private opinions, and do

not bring them into the pulpit, where they ever preach "Christ, and Him

crucified," according to the Gospel, and not according to John Brown.⁵⁰

The frequent failure of many religious journals to discuss secular

events might well be explained by the attitude of the Philadelphia

Occident and American Jewish Advocate, which categorically stated

its abstention from political discussion. "Our paper," the Advocate

averred,

has no connection with politics, and we would consider it a degradation

of the religious press, were it to leave its proper sphere, that is to influence,

if possible, its readers in religious matters, and enter on a field of dis-

cussion which may be more properly left to those whose business it is to

wade into the pool of partizan warfare.51

Just as this Jewish journal abstained from discussing current

political events, so, as this study indicates, did the majority of the

religious press. Yet, some journals felt an obligation "to wade

into the pool of partizan warfare," if only ankle deep. These

journals were probably convinced that their duty lay in taking a

position on important secular issues of the day, that organized

religion could not withdraw from the workaday world. And so, in

conformance with these opinions, the editors of many religious

journals took a firm stand on John Brown and the Harper's Ferry

raid. The majority of these editors would probably have agreed

with the Congregational Christian Mirror, which deemed "all ex-

pression of sympathy that goes to strengthen rather than humble

50 "The Episcopal Church and Slavery," June 13, 1860. Two Methodist journals,

the Ladies' Repository and the Methodist Quarterly Review, also kept their opinions

concerning slavery and, consequently, John Brown to themselves. The Repository,

edited by the Rev. D. D. Clark and published in Cincinnati, confined its pages to

articles on religion and art, selected to please the feminine fancy. The Methodist

Quarterly Review, although not published solely for women, also did not concern

itself with politics, except on rare occasions. This was true as well of the Universalist

Quarterly Review. The interdenominational Theological and Literary Journal of

New York was yet another journal so absorbed in subjects of theology and literature

that it found little time to comment upon more mundane affairs.

51 November 8, 1860. Another prominent Jewish weekly, the New York Jewish

Messenger, apparently believed politics without its realm, too.

• 17
 

The Religious Press and John Brown 145

[Brown and his followers], as misplaced and misanthropic. All this

glorification over that miserable proceedure [sic], or its authors, is

perilous to the public welfare."⁵² These editors, fearing for the

public welfare, recognized the danger inherent in the situation.

To them the Harper's Ferry raid was an outrage, its author more to

be condemned than pitied. They held as unwarranted any attempts to

make Brown a saint or a martyr, for, as the Christian Mirror pointed

out, "the disposition to put Capt. Brown among heroes and martyrs,

so widely manifested now . . ., is to put a premium upon such

measures in future, and to move a host of reckless aspirants to

power and fame, to attempt the same thing!"⁵³

It was the effects of Brown's martyrdom upon the social order and,

ultimately, upon national peace that these editors feared. The

Unitarian Christian Register may have summarized these fears when,

shortly after Brown's execution, it prophesied that it was not "the

last of him in history; certainly not the last of him in his influence

on the destinies of our country." Brown had let the "mountain of

slavery" crush him, and with him "perhaps our national peace and

brotherhood forever."⁵⁴ Thus, in an effort to combat the forces of

violence then rending the nation, this group of religious journals

labored to discredit Brown from the very beginning. Yet, with even

this powerful molder of public opinion fighting for social tranquility,

the forces of disunion continued to gain strength. Many believed

with John Brown that "the crimes of this guilty land: will never

be purged away; but with Blood."⁵⁵ This conviction became reality

when, about a year and a half after Harper's Ferry, the guns at

Fort Sumter shattered completely the tenuous ties binding North

and South.

52 "The Harper's Ferry Tradegy [sic]," December 6, 1859.

53 Ibid.

54 "The Last of John Brown," December 10, 1859.

55 Villard, John Brown, 554.

• 18