So unusual a divergence between the two foremost leaders of the anti-slavery movement naturally attracted general attention and comment, and caused no little1 disturbance of mind in some of their immediate followers; but both protested that the difference was simply one of opinion and judgment, and not of fundamental principles, and Garrison defended Phillips against some of the sharp criticisms of the press, and warmly eulogized him. “The honesty of his conviction is not to be impeached,” Lib. 34.34. he declared, ‘while its soundness may be questioned without any personal feeling.’ ‘I was glad to see that you were able to be at the anti-slavery meetings,’ wrote Samuel J. May to Mr. Garrison, “and to attempt to qualify the only expression that marred the excellence of what Mr. Phillips said. It does seem to me that Mr. Lincoln has shown himself anxious to be and to do right, though liable to err through the influences of his education, of his evil advisers, and the complicated difficulties which beset his course of action.” Ms. Feb. 10, 1864. And J. M. McKim wrote: “Wendell's speech and resolution not only laid him open to criticism, but demanded and made necessary criticism. It was due to us all that there should be some objection, some disclaimer, and you were the person to make it. We can admire genius, love virtue, and honor fidelity, without surrendering to either, or to all combined (as in this case), our judgment.” Ms. Feb. 9, to W. L. G.
