is best, therefore, not to attempt to analyze the Chatham Constitution, but to admire its wording and its composition, and lay it aside as a temporary aberration of a mind that in its other manifestations defies successful classification as unhinged or altogether unbalanced. Fanatical, Brown's mind was; concentrated on one idea to the danger-point, most alienists would probably agree; but still it remained a mind capable of expressing itself with rare clearness and force, focussing itself with intense vigor on the business in hand, and going straight to the end in view.

One point of the Constitution remains to be considered. Brown maintained at his trial that he had not sought to overthrow the United States Government or that of Virginia; the Chatham Constitution was cited against him. A biographer, R. J. Hinton, insisted 59 that Brown was justified in his position by Article XLVI of the Constitution, which reads: "The foregoing Articles shall not be construed so as in any way to encourage the overthrow of any State Government or of the General Government of the United States: and look to no dissolution of the Union but simply to Amendment and Repeal. And our flag shall be the same that our Fathers fought under in the Revolution." This was the only article challenged at Chatham, and one vote was cast for the motion to strike it out. Accepting it as a disclaimer of hostility to the various governments only increases the difficulty. It then appears that he was ready to oppose, and if necessary to kill, troops of the United States, and to create a civil government over certain portions of its territory, as the best way of inducing the United States Government to adopt his view of the slavery question. The radical Abolitionists openly worked for division by peaceful means and refused to make use of their rights as citizens; John Brown sought to oppose the authority of the Union by force of arms, while denying that any one could construe his actions as treason or disloyalty.

A definite and immediate result of the Chatham convention was the complete exhaustion of Brown's treasury. His Boston friends were expecting him to "turn loose his flock" about May 15, but the day before that he was still at Chatham, and wrote to Mr. Sanborn asking for three or four hundred dollars, "without delay." 60 On the 25th he wrote to

his family that "we are completely nailed down at present for want of funds, and we may be obliged to remain inactive for months yet, for the same reason. You must all learn to be patient—or, at least I hope you will." 61 Brown's chagrin at this condition of affairs was intensified by the needs of his men. They had left Chatham on May 11 and gone to Cleveland and near-by Ohio towns, in search of work to maintain them temporarily until they got the signal to reassemble. Now, obtaining work even in the most humble capacity was not easy in the spring of 1858, when the country had not yet begun to recover from the great financial depression of the previous fall. To Gill, who had written at once of the poor outlook, there were two thousand men out of work in Cleveland, Brown replied: 62

"I will only inquire if you, any of you, think the difficulties you have experienced, so far, are sufficient to discourage a man? . . . I and three others were in exactly such a fix in the spring of 1817: between the seaside and Ohio, in a time of extreme scarcity of not only money, but of the greatest distress for want of provisions, known during the nineteenth century. . . . We are here [Realf, Kagi, Richardson and Leeman had remained in Canada] busy getting information and making other preparations. I believe no time has yet been lost. Owing to the panic on the part of some of our Eastern friends, we may be compelled to hold on for months yet. But what of that?"

Three days later, Brown expressed his satisfaction that all but three of the men had then obtained work "to stop their board bills." 63 He had received only fifteen dollars from the East, but was in "hourly expectation of help sufficient to pay off our bills here, and to take us on to Cleveland to see and advise with you." He was compelled to say in this letter that: "such has been the effect of the course taken by F. [Forbes] that I have some fears that we shall be compelled to delay further action for the present. . . . It is in such times that men mark themselves. 'He that endureth unto the end,' the same shall get his reward. Are our difficulties sufficient to make us give up one of the noblest enterprises in which men were ever engaged?"

The difficulties were not great enough to make any of the men abandon the project then, though some were indubitably in straits at times. Indeed, some of them actually

plotted to go South and raid by themselves, if help did not soon come.64 Cook was the leader in this; during his stay in Cleveland he was highly indiscreet, boasting that he was on a secret expedition; that he had killed five men in Kansas; swaggering openly in his boarding-house, and revealing much to a woman acquaintance, so that Realf feared that if the expedition were to be postponed, the greatest danger would not be from Forbes, but from Cook's "rage for talking." Richard Richardson and John A. Thomas, another colored man, who had gone to Cleveland with Brown and Realf, soon returned to Canada in fear of arrest, and are not thereafter heard from in connection with Brown.65 Realf later went to New York to watch Forbes, and to plan his trip to England to raise funds for the cause.

John Brown himself left Chatham on May 29, and went direct to Boston, after having been there just a month. He had been urged by Mr. Stearns to meet him in New York, to discuss the question of the arms in his possession, during the week beginning May 16, but he was unable to do so, and did not see any of the Boston friends until he arrived at the American House on May 31. As Brown had stated to his men, renewed activity on the part of Forbes had filled the Boston backers with consternation. Before and during the Chatham convention, Brown was writing almost daily to some one about "F.," as he referred to him in his memorandum-book. Mr. Higginson wrote on May 7 to John Brown, from Brattleboro, protesting against the postponement already talked of: 67

DEAR FRIEND

no

Sanborn wrote an alarming letter of a certain H. F. who wishes to veto our veteran friend's project entirely. Who the man is I hv. conception but I utterly protest against any postponement. If the thing is postponed, it is postponed for ever for H. F. can do as much harm next year as this. His malice must be in some way put down or outwitted- & after the move is once begun, his plots will be of little importance. I believe that we have gone too far to go back without certain failure & I believe our friend the veteran will think so too.

This was Brown's own belief. But before he reached Boston the die was cast against him, as is seen from this note of Mr. Sanborn to Mr. Higginson: 68