emancipation--at least throughout Maryland, Virginia, and North
Carolina. But the condition of the free blacks was notoriously such that
the humane master hesitated to doom his slaves to it by emancipating
them. The colonizationist hoped, by offering to the free Negro an
attractive home in Africa, to induce conscientious masters everywhere to
liberate their slaves, and to give rise to a growing popular sentiment
condemning slavery, which would in time result in its extinction. Of
course there were those in the Society who would not have subscribed to
this doctrine; on the other hand, many held views much more radical. But
it is the men who formed and guided the Society, who wielded its
influence and secured its success, whose opinions must be regarded as
stamping its policy.

The Constitution of the Society did not touch upon this subject. It was
needless to give unnecessary alarm or offense. But when in 1833 the
Maryland Society adopted its Constitution--a much larger and more
explicit one--the attitude taken is boldly announced:

"Whereas the Maryland State Colonization Society desires to hasten as
far as they can the period when slavery shall cease to exist in
Maryland, and believing that this can best be done by advocating and
assisting the cause of colonization as the safest, truest and best
auxiliary of freedom under existing circumstances," etc.

It may well be questioned whether such a plan would ever have succeeded:
but it must not too hastily be called chimerical. As a practical result
it secured the emancipation of several thousand slaves, many of whom
were supplied by former owners with money for transportation and
establishment in Africa. What further success it might have had was
prevented by the rise of the Abolition Movement. The intense