This is, indeed a formidable “obstacle:”  and I admit, that it is as much more difficult for the impenitent slaveholder to surmount it, than it would be if there were but one million of slaves, as it is for the impenitent thief to restore the money he has stolen, than it would be, if the sum were one third as great.  But, be not discouraged, dear sir, with this view of the case.  Notwithstanding the magnitude of the obstacle, the warmest desires of your heart for the abolition of slavery, may yet be realized.  Be thankful, that repentance can avail in every case of iniquity; that it can loosen the grasp of the man-thief, as well as that of the money-thief:  of the oppressors of thousands as well as of hundreds:—­of “three millions,” as well as of one million.

But, were I to allow, that the obstacle in question, is as great, as you regard it—­nevertheless will it not increase with the lapse of years, and become less superable the longer the work of abolition is postponed?  I suppose, however, that it is not to be disguised, that, notwithstanding the occasional attempts in the course of your speech to create a different impression, you are in favor of perpetual slavery; and that all you say about “ultra abolitionists” in distinction from “abolitionists,” and about “gradual emancipation,” in distinction from “immediate emancipation,” is said, but to please those, who sincerely make, and are gulled by, such distinctions.  I do not forget, that you say, that the abolition of slavery in Pennsylvania was proper.  But, most obviously, you say it, to win favor with the anti-slavery portion of the North, and to sustain the world’s opinion of your devotion to the cause of universal liberty;—­for, having made this small concession to that holy cause—­small indeed, since Pennsylvania never at any one time, had five thousand slaves—­you, straightway, renew your claims to the confidence of slaveholders, by assuring them, that you are opposed to “any scheme whatever of emancipation, gradual or immediate,” in States where the slave population is extensive;—­and, for proof of the sincerity of your declaration, you refer them to the fact of your recent open and effective opposition to the overthrow of slavery in your own State.

The South is opposed to gradual, as well as to immediate emancipation:  and, were she, indeed, to enter upon a scheme of gradual emancipation, she would speedily abandon it.  The objections to swelling the number of her free colored population, whilst she continued to hold their brethren of the same race in bondage, would be found too real and alarming to justify her perseverance in the scheme.  How strange, that men at the North, who think soundly on other subjects, should deduce the feasibility of gradual emancipation in the slave states—­in some of which the slaves outnumber the free—­from the fact of the like emancipation of the comparative handful of slaves in New York and Pennsylvania!

You say, “It is frequently asked, what will become of the African race among us?  Are they forever to remain in bondage?  That question was asked more than half a century ago.  It has been answered by fifty years of prosperity.”