THERE IS DEATH IN THE POT - The University of Texas at Arlington

the United States and Britain arguments about women’s status often relied on
comparisons with the status of black people. 12 However, Mott’s retort was an important
reminder of the different social contexts within which British and American abolitionists
worked. In the United States, abolitionists were clearly the minority and female and
African American support and leadership were vital to the abolitionist cause.
Wendell Phillips brought the question of female delegates before the full body the
next day when the convention officially opened. Garrison, delayed by the annual
meeting of the American Anti-Slavery Society, was not present. Although the London
Committee had already spoken on the status of the female delegates from the United
States, Phillips insisted that the convention as a whole should decide whether the
delegates should be recognized, a claim first made by Sarah Pugh in a written protest the
previous day. Pugh had described the female delegates as “co-equals in the advocacy of
Universal Liberty” and asserted that only the convention — not the London Committee
— had “the power of determining the validity of any claim to a seat in that body.” 13
British abolitionist George Thompson, who had been so instrumental in bringing
American women into the abolitionist movement, urged Phillips to withdraw the motion.
Phillips, however, persisted. He was supported by fellow Massachusetts representatives
William Adam and George Bradburn. Opposing admission of the female delegates were
American churchmen James G. Birney, Nathaniel Colver, and Elon Galusha. Henry
Grew, described by Mott as demonstrating some inconsistency, also opposed the
12
Tolles, Slavery and The Woman Question”, 23, 27, 28-29; Sklar, “The World Anti-Slavery
Convention,” 308.
13 Tolles, Slavery and “The Woman Question”, 28; Liberator, December 11, 1840.
192