and other countries with slave-holding dependencies, all indicating that the days of slavery are numbered, should serve to encourage and stimulate us to increased exertions; and while it is a cause of profound regret, that any thing should have disturbed the harmony and unity of the real friends of emancipation in this country—­the hardest battle field of our moral warfare—­I am not without hope, that, in future, those who,—­from a conscientious difference of opinion, not as to the object, but the precise mode of obtaining it,—­cannot act in one united band, will laudably emulate each other in the promotion of our common cause, and in Christian forbearance upon points of disagreement; and that, where they cannot praise, they will be careful not to censure those, who, by a different road, are earnestly pursuing the same end.  Without entering into the controversies which have divided our friends on this side the water, I believe it would be nothing more than a simple act of justice for me to state, on my return to Europe, my conviction that a large portion of the abolitionists of the United States, who approve of the proceedings of the late General Anti-Slavery Convention, and are desirous of acting in unity with the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, from the general identity of their practice, as well as principles, with those of the British and Foreign Society, are entitled to the sympathies, and deserving of the confidence and co-operation of the abolitionists of Great Britain.  It has been my pleasure to meet, in a kindly interchange of opinion, many valuable and devoted friends of emancipation; who, while dissenting from the class above-mentioned in some respects, are nevertheless disposed to cultivate feelings of charity and good will towards all who are sincerely laboring for the slaves.  And in this connection I may state, that neither on behalf of myself, or of my esteemed coadjutors in Great Britain, am I disposed to recriminate upon another class of abolitionists, who, on some points, have so far differed from the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Committee, and the great majority of the Convention above mentioned, as to sustain their representatives in refusing to act with that Convention, and in protesting against its proceedings; and who have seen fit to censure the committee in their public meetings and newspapers in this country, as ‘arbitrary and despotic,’ and their conduct as ’unworthy of men claiming the character of abolitionists.’

“As a corresponding member of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Committee, and intimately acquainted with its proceedings, I am persuaded that its members have acted wisely, and consulted the best interest of the cause in which they were engaged, in generally leaving unnoticed any censures that have been cast upon them while in the prosecution of their labors.  Yet, before leaving this country, I deem it right to bear my testimony to the great anxiety of that committee faithfully to discharge the duties committed