December 28, 1850
The Worcester Convention
We are a poor, unfortunate creature! It is almost impossible for us to take a step without getting in somebody's way. When we are on our very best behaviour we are sure to be misbehaving most egregiously. We had given such serious offence by our stricture on the Salem [Ohio] Convention that we determined to be very conciliatory and decidedly clever to the Worcester meeting, and lo and behold we have a hornet's nest about our ears. We have mortally insulted the friends of that measure, because we objected to one word in their resolutions. We do hope these conventionists do not require their adherents to believe they have reached that state of perfection which Billy Cobbett thought belonged exclusively to the Pope and the British Parliament--"Never did do--never can do--never will do wrong." We objected to the introduction of the question of color into the Convention, as irrelavent to its object. Parker Pillsbury replied to us in a very strong anti-slavery letter- enumerating the wrongs and outrages to which negroes are subjected in this country, as the reason why this question was introduced into that Convention. He distinctly stated that it was these wrongs and outrages, especially the recent Fugitive bill, which made that introduction necessary. In other words, it was necessary to pass abolition resolutions in Woman's Rights Convention, because of the proscription and persecution to which the negroes are subjected. We had thought on first reading the resolution, that it constituted the convention as much an abolition as a woman's rights meeting, but we did not trust on our judgment and say so; but Parker Pillsbury, we thought good authority, and when he urged the propriety of the matter on this ground, and this alone, we did not suppose any one would dispte the convention's being an abolition meeting. Even then, however,