But, before we examine the work of either Walker or Douglass, let’s take a moment to better understand the exact way in which the Declaration of Independence touches on the ideas of natural law and liberalism. These two ideas take on their most recognizable form in the Declaration’s preamble, where they’re described to be “the separate but equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them” (Declaration of Independence 1). Both Walker’s pamphlet and Douglass’s speech use indirect allusion to borrow the argument being made here without having to restate it: all human beings, regardless of their status or stature, are ultimately ruled only by the laws of nature and those of their God. More simply, Walker and Douglass utilize this argument to quickly justify the idea that a slave, being born a man, should not have to answer to another man. In addition to this central idea of natural law, the Declaration of Independence represents the ideals of liberalism that Walker and Douglass hold dear: (1) all men are created equal, (2) they are endowed by God with unalienable, natural rights, (3) should the institutions of the status quo become destructive, men have the right to abolish them, (4) if subjected to abuses and usurpations, it is men’s duty to cast off the responsible government and secure a better future, and (5) if non-violent means prove to be futile, one must “acquiesce in the necessity…and hold [the usurpers] as…Enemies in War, in Peace Friends” (1). These five principles, through which we can identify the similarities and differences in our authors’ ideologies, represent the most common arguments alluded to by Walker and Douglass in their own texts.
Frederick Douglass, for instance, focuses mostly on principles one through three. David Walker, on the other hand, seems to vehemently believe in all five. In fact, the final two principles are the ones that are most pervasive throughout his “Appeal in Four Articles: Together with a Preamble, to the Coloured Citizens of the World”. He uses the fourth ideology to make a direct comparison between slavery and the abuses and usurpations suffered by Americans under British colonialism and fifth to justify the violent revolution Walker is calling for.
David Walker sets up this argument by professing his respect not only for the document, which he describes as Jefferson’s “writings for the world, and public labours for the United States of America,” but also for its author, who he describes as “one of the greatest characters that ever lived among the whites” (Walker 237). Walker has a kind of reverence for Jefferson and his work - as evidenced by Walker’s claim that the “assertions of such a man, will [not] pass away into oblivion unobserved by this people and the world” (237). Then, Walker goes on to explain his suggestion for violence by equating the violence of slaves against slave owners to that of Americans against the British during the revolution. Since the latter is acceptable under the Declaration of Independence, by the logic Walker lays out, so it the latter. In short, Walker’s numerous references to America’s founding document are meant to slowly set up the philosophical and moral framework by which Walker’s revolution is justified.
Walker, unlike Douglass who seems to reject the use of all force, sanctions the use of violence against the “natural enemies…who have stolen our rights” (235). This ‘call-to-arms’ is the purposeful end goal of Walker’s “Appeal.” He wants to encourage his fellow black brethren to rise up and revolt against their white tyrants, “whom [they] shall have to contend for [their] lawful right” (235). Walker reinforces this to be the purpose of his pamphlet by assuming the caustic, militant voice of an “impudent and restless disturber of the public peace” (228) and tries to rouse its black readership into, as the editors of The Norton Anthology describe it, a “fearless call to radical action…in the name of justice” (227).
In contrast, Douglass’s speech, which he delivered in July of 1852 to the Rochester Ladies’ Anti-Slavery Society, was (in contrast to Walker’s all-black audience) delivered to a group of forward-minded, white ladies. The speech, as a whole, uses references to natural law in such a sublime, subtle manner that is seem like Douglass is trying to hold a mirror up to society so it can better observe the hypocrisies and contradictions propagated by the existence of slavery.
The speech employs an interesting progression of tones from humble to accusatory back to hopeful. This shift in voice is one of the most obvious features of a Jeremiad. Douglass does this, whilst employing the prophetic tradition of the black jeremiad, through his use of the promises of our fathers for “justice, liberty and humanity…[and] not slavery and oppression” to denounce blacks’ enslavement, encourage reforms, and prophesize a societal calamity should no changes take place (Douglass 465). Though Walker’s piece is also considered to adhere to this specific style of narrative, it is not as identifiable as Douglass’s due to the fact that Walker ends his pamphlet on a ominous, precautionary note. Douglass’s speech, however, goes back to being hopeful and positive after its prophecy section.
The other notable feature of Douglass’s piece is his continued separation of himself from the audience. Douglass then uses this separation as a way to create tension and conflict, specifically to highlight the tension and conflict between America’s beliefs and actions. He uses the existence of this disconnect as evidence of the moral hypocrisies and national inconsistencies that are holding the country back from maturity, which proves the validity and need for the realization of his plea for the abolition of slavery.
Works Cited
Gates, Henry Louis, Jr., and Nellie Y. McKay, eds. The Norton Anthology of African American Literature. 2nd Ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. 2004. Print.
Declaration of Independence. August 2, 1776: Miscellaneous Papers of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789. Records of the Continental and Confederation Congresses and the Constitutional Convention, 1774-1789. Record Group 360: National Archives.