This article appeared in another Lowell newspaper two days after the “Manstealers” article. It takes a different perspective than Document #22a on Nathaniel Booth’s situation.
American: Refers to the Lowell Tri-Weekly American newspaper (See Document 22a)
Fabrication: Lie or falsehood
Destitute: Lacking something needed or desirable
Telegraphed: Sent a message via a telegraph machine using Morse code
We have not happened to see a copy of the
American of Wednesday, from which the pre-
ceding in a Boston paper of this morning, is
copied. The story in regard to any Southern-
ers being here, as kidnappers, either of Mr.
Booth or any one else, though probably not an
intentional fabrication, is as destitute of truth
as though it were one. Mr. B. was one of the
party that visited Montreal last week, and was
probably telegraphed by some frightened gentle-
men in the city, who takes every stranger in
the streets in the day time, and every lamp, gas
light or other post in the night— as a slave-catch-
er. The whole affair, which makes so formi-
dable an appearance on paper, is a mistake,
and the main object of the publication seems
to be to create a foolish excitement. It is prob
ably a part and parcel of the ridiculous excite-
ment in regard to the two Virginia gentlemen,
which we mentioned yesterday, as being here
on a visit to the mills. There is not the slight
est reason for believing that any slave-catch-
er has ever been in Lowell, or that any fugitive
slave in this city has been in more danger
of apprehension than the thousands who are
scattered over New England.
Who does the article say the “manstealers” were? How does the article explain their presence in Lowell?
How are the "manstealers” from Document 22a represented differently in this article? What about the “friends” of Mr. Booth?
Compare the two accounts of “manstealers” in Documents 22a and 22b. How does this article contradict the story about Booth that’s in Document 22a? Why do you think they differ so much? How could we know what really happened?
How did abolitionists use local publications to share information about the anti-slavery cause in Lowell?
The Lowell Daily Journal and Courier was a Whig-controlled newspaper. The Whigs, especially in Massachusetts, favored a peacemaking policy toward southern states and believed that the US Constitution supported the southern states’ right to slavery. Why, then, might this reporter claim that the Tri-Weekly American’s story (Document 22a) about slave catchers in Lowell is not true?
How can a political perspective affect how a story is told, or how events are explained?