One of the principal objects of my visit to Washington was to present an Address to the President, from the Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society.  In the course of my inquiries of various official persons, members of Congress, et cet., I found that to obtain an audience for the express purpose would be very difficult, as no member of Congress appeared willing to undertake the unpopular service of introducing the bearer of such a document.  I was not disposed to apply to the British Ambassador, who on some occasions had shown a want of sympathy with the anti-slavery cause.  I found, however, that it was not contrary to etiquette, in this country, for a private individual to address a note to the President, to which, in ordinary courtesy, according to the custom of the place, he has a right to expect a reply.  I would remark, however, that nothing is more easy than to gain access to the President; but I felt that to avail myself of those facilities, to place in his hands a document which he might object to receive, would be uncandid.  I therefore addressed a note to him, stating that I was the bearer of a memorial from the Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-slavery Society, signed by Thomas Clarkson, addressed to the President of the United States, in which I said, “It may, perhaps, be right to state, that the memorial refers to slavery and the slave-trade in the United States, and that it was written before the death of General Harrison was known in Europe.”  I then asked permission to present it.

To this I received no reply.  We were afterwards introduced to the President, by a member of Congress, who evinced an anxiety that I should make no reference to the memorial; and the President, on his part, made no allusion to it, or to my letter to himself.  After this interview, we proceeded to the Senate, but it had risen just as we entered.  I had a short conversation with Henry Clay, who alluded to Joseph John Gurney’s work on the West Indies, which I need scarcely add, is written in a series of letters to this statesman.  He said that the recent short crop of sugar in Jamaica was a proof that the author had been misled in the favorable information he had collected, and also that this deficiency in the crop was a proof not only of the idleness, but of the immorality of the negroes.  He accused my companion, John G. Whittier, of deserting him, after having been his warm friend; and on J.W.’s giving his reasons for so doing, he complained that the abolitionists improperly interfered with the affairs of the South, though he made an exception in favor of the Society of Friends.  He inquired if J.G.  Whittier was a “Friend” in regular standing, evidently intimating a doubt on that point, on account of his being so decided an abolitionist.  The praise of such men is the strongest testimony that could be adduced to the declension of the Society of Friends in anti-slavery zeal.  To a great extent I fear their sentiments on this subject have been held traditionally;