“Let the Monster Perish!” The Rev. Henry Highland Garnet’s 1865 Address in the Congressional Chapel

Jeanette E. Sherbondy • May 23, 2023


Henry Highland Garnet was born into slavery in New Market, now Chesterville, in Kent County, Md. He escaped to freedom with his family to Delaware and Pennsylvania, and became a resident of New York City. He became educated and was ordained a Presbyterian minister. Garnet was an active abolitionist and during the Civil War helped the Black soldiers in the Union Army. He was later appointed to serve the 15th Street Presbyterian Church in Washington, D.C.

 

When he was invited to preach in 1865, Garnet became known as the first African American to address members of Congress. His sermon to them was an eloquent appeal to fulfill the mission of emancipation, presenting a to-do list that, today, is still waiting completion.

 

This sermon, “A Memorial Discourse: Delivered in the Hall of the House of Representatives, Washington City, D.C., on Sabbath. February 12, 1865” was printed along with a biography by his childhood friend James McCune Smith, M.D., “Sketch of the Life and Labors of Rev. Henry Highland Garnet.” The volume also includes Garnet’s 1843 speech to the enslaved people of the United States.

 

The following are excerpts from Smith’s account of Garnet’s life during the Civil War, and passages from Garnet’s sermon in the chapel of the House of Representatives.

 

Smith’s Account

 

Smith praised Garnet’s steadfast support for abolishing slavery in the face of strong opposition:

 

“He did not hesitate fearlessly to expose the national sin, and to declare the whole counsel of God to an unrepentant people. He was utterly unselfish.”

 

In the dark days between 1855 and 1864, there was aggressive opposition to the abolition of slavery by the national and state legislatures that enacted oppressive laws. Businessmen and the church were opposed to abolition. The press reported on the violence toward Black people during the draft riots of 1863 in New York City.

 

But Smith declared: “Throughout this frightful time, there was at least one Black man who neither cowered nor flinched. The tall form of the pastor of Shiloh [Garnet] always in front, where the blows fell thickest, seemed rather to dilate with the joys of battle, and his voice became as a trumpet’s call. By his eloquence, his high-hearted manhood, his conduct, and example, he cheered his people, not only his immediate flock, but all who heard him throughout the land.“

 

The mobs hunted for Garnet during those riots.

 

As Smith recorded, “They rushed down 30th Street where he resided, loudly calling him by name. By the lucky forethought of his daughter who wrenched off the door-plate with an axe, his house escaped sacking, and his own life and that of his family were preserved by the kind acts of some White neighbors.”

 

Five days later, there was a great turnabout by the merchants of New York, who organized a committee for the relief of the Black riot victims.

 

“They established an office at 350 Fourth Street, to which all applicants for aid were directed to apply. They wisely engaged the services of the Rev. H.H. Garnet at this office, in order that he might examine and report on each case that came up. Not less than 6,392 persons passed under his supervision, and were relieved.” The report that Garnet wrote was published in this same volume.

 

When the Civil War began, Garnet volunteered as chaplain to the Colored troops assigned to a military base on Riker’s Island. Smith wrote: “He served in this capacity until the 20th, 26th, and 31st Regiments of the United States Colored Troops marched to the field. During this time without interruption of his pastoral duties, he organized a Ladies’ Committee for the Aid of Sick Soldiers, and established a hospital kitchen on Riker’s Island.”

 

There were many problems to solve just to keep the men fed and healthy. Smith again: “The runners kidnapped boys and old men, cripples and maimed, and by collusion with the proper officers, forced them to Riker’s Island. Here the sutlers charged when he was invited to preach in 1865, after Emancipation, 50 cents for a cup of coffee, a dollar for a canteen of water; in the cold month of February they were thrust into old and worn cotton tents, compelled to sleep on the earth without even a camp-stool.” Garnet heard the complaints of the recruits and persuaded General Dix, the commanding officer of the base, to right them.

 

Garnet’s Sermon

 

On February 12, 1865, when he was pastor of the 15th Street Presbyterian Church in Washington, D.C., Garnet was invited to give a sermon to the representatives in Congress who attended the religious service held in the chapel of the Capitol. He brought his choir from the church. This was a moment in the concluding months before the official end of the war in April 1865, and within days of the adoption of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution that banned slavery.

 

Garnet’s sermon was titled, “Let the Monster Perish,” the monster being slavery. For many Whites, slavery was, and still is, referred to not as the monster but as the “peculiar institution.”

 

He addressed his sermon to the hypocrisy of leaders who did little or nothing “that accorded with the law of righteousness.” He based his speech on Matthew 23:4 which was a rebuke of the failings of the Scribes and Pharisees:

 

“For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.”

 

Garnet opened his sermon saying this about the Scribes and Pharisees: “In theory, they were right, but their practices were inconsistent and wrong. They knew their duty, but did it not. The demands which they made upon others proved that they themselves knew what things men ought to do. In condemning others, they pronounced themselves guilty. They demanded that others should be just, merciful, pure, peaceable, and righteous. But they were unjust, impure, unmerciful — they hated and wronged a portion of their fellow men and waged a continual war against the government of God. We have modern Scribes and Pharisees, who are faithful to their prototypes of ancient times.” 

 

Garnet recounted the many ways throughout history that led Americans to declare that “the best possible condition of the Negro is slavery.”

 

He recalled his own early recollections of slavery: “The first sight that met my eyes was a Christian mother enslaved by professed Christians, but thank God, now a saint in heaven. The first sound that startled my ear and sent a shudder through my soul were the cracking of the whip and the clanking of chains.” He rejoiced that Maryland is “now the free home of their liberated and happier children.”

 

Then he tackled the monster. “Let us view this demon, which the people have worshipped as a God. Come forth, thou grim monster, that thou mayest be critically examined! There he stands. Behold him, one and all. Its work is to chattelize man, to hold property in human beings. Slavery destroys families and feeds hate and prejudice. It promotes strife and internal division in the nation. It has caused the bloodiest civil war recorded in the book to time.”

 

Garnet pointed the way forward: “Let us here take up the Golden Rule, and adopt the self-application mode of reasoning to those who hold these erroneous views.”

 

Then he recounted the anti-slavery views of sages and famous men in Western history, from Plato, who said, “Slavery is a system of complete injustice,” through the ancients to Thomas Jefferson, “There is preparing, I hope, under the auspices of heaven, a way for a total emancipation,” and George Washington, “It is among my first wishes to see some plan adopted by which slavery in this country shall be abolished by law. I know of but one way by which this can be done, and that is by legislative actions, and so far as my vote can go, it shall not be wanting.” Garnet went on to list many other men who spoke out against slavery.

 

He concluded, “Let the verdict of death which has been brought in against slavery by the 38th Congress be affirmed and executed by the people. Let the gigantic monster perish.”

 

Then Garnet gave his audience of legislators his assessment of when the “demands of the reformers” could be considered fulfilled — his to-do list.

 

  • “When all unjust and heavy burdens shall be removed from every man in the land.
  • When all invidious and proscriptive distinctions shall be blotted out from our laws, whether they be constitutional, state, or municipal laws.
  • When emancipation shall be followed by enfranchisement, and all men holding allegiance to the government shall enjoy every right of American citizenship.
  • When our brave and gallant soldiers shall have justice done unto them.
  • When the men who endure the sufferings and perils of the battlefield in the defense of their country, and in order to keep our rulers in their places, shall enjoy the well-earned privilege of voting for them.
  • When in the army and navy, and in every legitimate and honorable occupation, promotion shall smile upon merit without the slightest regard to the complexion of a man’s face.
  • When there shall be no more class legislation and no more trouble concerning the Black man and his rights than there is in regard to other American citizens.
  • When, in every respect, he shall be equal before the law, and shall be left to make his own way in the social walks of life.”

 

“Let slavery die. It has had a long and fair trial. Now speedily finish the work which God has given you to do. Emancipate, enfranchise, and educate every American citizen.”

 

And addressing them directly, he blessed the senators and representatives for their legislation of emancipation and assured them of the gratitude of many people.

 

 

Jeanette E. Sherbondy is a retired anthropology professor from Washington College and has lived here since 1986. In retirement she has been active with the Kent County Historical Society and Sumner Hall, one of the organizers of Legacy Day, and helped get highway /historical markers recognizing Henry Highland Garnet. She published an article on her ethnohistorical research of the free Black village, Morgnec.

 

Common Sense for the Eastern Shore

By John Christie December 16, 2025
When I practiced law, much of my litigation involved issues arising under federal antitrust laws. The Department of Justice (DOJ) was my frequent adversary in court. In some cases, DOJ challenged a client’s conduct as anticompetitive. In others, they claimed an intended client merger would create a monopoly. Some of these DOJ court battles were won, others were not. Overall, I had great respect for DOJ lawyers. They were professional, well prepared, and dedicated to their mission of seeing justice done. They were courteous, honest, and forthright with the courts before which we argued our cases. In those days, without resorting to social media or press conferences, the DOJ spoke entirely through its court filings. Although as an advocate I took issue with various DOJ investigatory decisions as well as decisions to initiate litigation, I never thought politics was involved. Post-Watergate internal rules strictly limited communication with any figures at the White House. Not so, it seems, anymore. Beginning last January 20, all of this changed rapidly and spectacularly . On March 14, Trump triumphantly arrived at the main DOJ building in D.C. to be welcomed by a group of carefully selected VIPs. He was greeted by Pam Bondi, his chosen new attorney general, who exclaimed, “We are so proud to work at the directive (sic) of Donald Trump.” Bondi’s boast that the DOJ now worked at the president’s behest was something never said before and, in effect, surrendered the department’s long and proud independence. And Bondi’s comment was not an empty gesture. As chronicled by reporters Carol Leonnig and Aaron Davis in their new book, Injustice: How Politics and Fear Vanquished America’s Justice Department , within hours of being sworn in, Trump and his lieutenants began punishing those at the Justice Department who had investigated him or those he considered his political enemies. Career attorneys with years of experience under many administrations were fired or reassigned to lesser work, or they resigned. As Leonnig and Davis report, what followed was “the wholesale overthrow of the Justice Department as Trump insert[ed] his dutiful former defense attorneys and 2020 election deniers atop the department.” [Source: Injustice , p. xix.] In the place of years of experience, the new team appears credentialed simply by loyalty to the president’s causes. The DOJ’s conduct in court has since caused damage to judicial and public faith in the integrity and competence of the department. Just Security is an independent, non-partisan, daily digital law and policy journal housed in the Reiss Center on Law and Security at the New York University School of Law. Since January 20, it has documented federal judicial concerns about DOJ conduct. In 26 cases, judges raised questions about DOJ non-compliance with judicial orders and in more than 60 cases, judges expressed distrust of government-provided information and representations. This count was taken the day after a federal court dismissed the DOJ cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. [Source: Just Security , “The ‘Presumption of Regularity’ in Trump Administration Litigation,” Nov. 20, 2025.] As summarized by the Georgetown Law Center’s Steve Vladeck, “It’s one thing for the Department of Justice to so transparently pursue a politically motivated prosecution. But this one has been beset from the get-go with errors that remotely competent law students wouldn’t make. Indeed, it seems a virtual certainty that the Keystone Kops-like behavior of the relevant government lawyers can be traced directly to the political pressure to bring this case; there’s a reason why no prosecutors with more experience, competence, or integrity were willing to take it on.” [Source: One First , Nov. 24, 2025.] Rather than accept criticism and instead of trying to do better, Bondi’s DOJ and the Trump administration lash out in a fashion apparently aimed at demeaning the federal judiciary. At a recent Federalist Society’s National Lawyers Convention, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, one of Trump’s former defense attorneys, attributed the Trump administration’s myriad losses in the lower federal courts to “rogue activist judges.” He added, “There’s a group of judges that are repeat players, and that’s obviously not by happenstance, that’s intentional, and it’s a war, man.” Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller decries each adverse ruling against the Trump administration as just part of a broader “judicial insurrection.” Not to be left behind, Trump himself regularly complains of “radical left lunatic” judges. In addition to the harm these comments inflict on the federal courts, their premise is simply not true. According to a survey by Vladeck, as of Nov. 14, there were 204 cases in which federal district courts have ruled on requests for preliminary relief against the Trump administration. In 154 of them, district judges granted either a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, or both. Those 154 rulings came from 121 district judges appointed by seven presidents (including President Trump) in 29 district courts. In the 154 cases with rulings adverse to the Trump administration, 41 were presided over by 30 Republican-appointed judges, fully half of whom were appointed by President Trump. No, it is no longer your grandfather’s Department of Justice. John Christie was for many years a senior partner in a large Washington, D.C. law firm. He specialized in anti-trust litigation and developed a keen interest in the U.S. Supreme Court about which he lectures and writes.
By CSES Staff December 16, 2025
The Salisbury City Council has appointed longtime public servant Melissa D. Holland to fill the vacancy in District 2. Holland was selected on Dec. 1 after the council reviewed several applicants. A 27-year resident of Salisbury, Holland brings more than 20 years of experience in government, education, and administration. As executive assistant to the president of the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, she currently oversees operations, budgeting, communications, and planning. Before joining UMCES, Holland worked for nearly 11 years with the Wicomico County Council, gaining extensive experience in legislative procedure, constituent services, research, and budget preparation. Her background includes positions with the Wicomico County Board of Education, the State of Maryland’s Holly Center, and multiple early-learning programs. Approved by a 3-1 council vote, Holland was selected based on her administrative expertise and long-standing community involvement. (Salisbury’s City Council is now comprised of only women.) She has a bachelor’s degree in legal studies from Post University and an associate degree from Wor-Wic Community College. She has also served as PTA president at East Salisbury Elementary and Wicomico Middle School. In her application, Holland emphasized her commitment to maintaining transparency in city government and ensuring that District 2 residents remain informed and represented. “I plan to be well-informed on the issues that matter to the citizens of Salisbury and to listen to their concerns carefully,” she wrote. “I want to make a positive and lasting impact on our city.” Holland’s appointment restores the City Council to full membership as it faces debates over budgeting, infrastructure planning, and local governance initiatives. She is expected to begin constituent outreach immediately and participate fully in the selection of the next council president.
By CSES Staff November 4, 2025
Voters in Hurlock have delivered sweeping changes in this year’s municipal election, as Republican and GOP-aligned candidates won key races there. The results mark a setback for Democrats and a significant political shift in a community that has historically leaned Democratic in state and federal contests. The outcome underscores how local organizing and turnout strategies can have an outsized impact in small-town elections. Analysts also suggest that long-term party engagement in municipal contests could shape voter alignment in future county and state races. Political analysts warn that ignoring municipal elections and ceding them to the GOP could hurt the Maryland Democratic Party in statewide politics. Turnout increased by approximately 17% compared with the 2021 municipal election, reflecting heightened local interest in the mayoral and council races. Incumbent Mayor Charles Cephas, a Democrat, was soundly defeated by At-Large Councilmember Earl Murphy, who won with roughly 230 votes to Cephas’s 144. In the At-Large Council race, Jeff Smith, an independent candidate backed by local Republicans, secured a 15-point win over Cheyenne Chase. In District 2, Councilmember Bonnie Franz, a Republican, was re-elected by 40 percentage points over challenger Zia Ashraf, who previously served on the Dorchester Democratic Central Committee. The only Democrat to retain a seat on the council was David Higgins, who was unopposed. The Maryland Republican Party invested resources and campaign attention in the Hurlock race, highlighting it on statewide social media and dispatching party officials, including Maryland GOP Chair Nicole Beus Harris, to campaign. Local Democrats emphasized support for Mayor Cephas through the Dorchester County Democratic Central Committee, but the Maryland Democratic Party did not appear to participate directly.
By CSES Staff November 4, 2025
In what political observers are calling a clear break from Maryland’s moderate Republican establishment, Wicomico County Executive Julie Giordano chose former Gov. Bob Ehrlich — not former Gov. Larry Hogan — as the guest of honor at her re-election fundraiser in late October. Billed as Giordano’s annual Harvest Party, her event drew conservative activists from across the lower Eastern Shore and featured Ehrlich as keynote speaker. This was immediately read by insiders as a signal that Giordano will embrace the party’s right-wing base ahead of 2026, distancing herself from Hogan’s more centrist, bipartisan image. “Bringing in Bob Ehrlich instead of Larry Hogan wasn’t accidental,” one longtime Republican strategist said. “It shows Giordano wants to plant her flag with the MAGA-aligned wing of the party, the same voters who now dominate Maryland’s Republican primary base.” Hogan, who has hinted at another run for governor, was notably absent from this year’s Tawes Crab and Clam Bake in Somerset County, a high-profile gathering long considered essential for statewide contenders. Coupled with Giordano’s public alignment with Ehrlich, Hogan’s absence has fueled speculation that his influence within Maryland’s GOP is slipping. Those doubts were amplified by new polling data. A statewide survey commissioned by the Baltimore Banner found Gov. Wes Moore (D) leading Hogan 45% to 37% in a hypothetical 2026 matchup, with 14% undecided. The poll, conducted by phone and web from Oct. 7–10 among more than 900 registered voters, carries a margin of error of 3.2 percentage points. The results suggest that while Hogan remains popular among moderates and independents, Moore continues to hold a firm advantage statewide, particularly among Democrats and younger voters. Giordano’s decision to align herself with Ehrlich rather than Hogan further illustrates the ideological divide defining Maryland Republicans heading into 2026. As the party drifts further to the right, analysts say Hogan’s brand of pragmatic centrism may no longer have a natural home in today’s GOP. For now, Ehrlich’s appearance in Salisbury is being seen as a symbolic moment, one that cements Giordano’s status as a leading figure in the state’s Trump-aligned movement and underscores how quickly the political winds have shifted. For Hogan, once seen as the Republican best positioned to reclaim the governor’s office, that shift may mark the end of an era.
By Jan Plotczyk November 4, 2025
Can Maryland create a new congressional map that will flip the state’s sole Republican district to the Democrats? Gov. Wes Moore has created a Governor's Redistricting Advisory Commission to consider mid-cycle redistricting and Maryland has jumped into the redistricting fray. The commission will conduct public hearings, solicit public feedback, and present recommendations to the governor and Maryland General Assembly. “My commitment has been clear from day one — we will explore every avenue possible to make sure Maryland has fair and representative maps,” said Moore. “And we also need to make sure that, if the president of the United States is putting his finger on the scale to try to manipulate elections because he knows that his policies cannot win in a ballot box, then it behooves each and every one of us to be able to keep all options on the table to ensure that the voters’ voices can actually be heard .” Moore’s commission is one of those options — a response to Trump’s call to Republican-led states to create more GOP House districts before the 2026 midterm elections. Three GOP states — Texas, Missouri, and North Carolina — have completed a Trump gerrymander for a gain of seven seats and three more states — Indiana, Utah, and Ohio — could create new maps with a total of four additional Republican seats. That would make 11, should they withstand challenges. Democratic-led states made a lot of noise at first about countering these GOP efforts, but only California and Virginia have campaigns for new maps underway. California wants to flip five seats and Virginia hopes for up to four. Optimistically, that could add up to as many as nine. Maryland’s goal would be to add one Democratic seat. Other states on both sides could soon follow, in some cases taking advantage of existing redistricting deadlines or ongoing litigation. Maryland State Senate President Bill Ferguson (D-Balto City) is not in favor of mid-cycle redistricting, calling it too dicey. “Simply put, it is too risky and jeopardizes Maryland’s ability to fight against the radical Trump administration. At a time where every seat in Congress matters, the potential for ceding yet another one to Republicans here in Maryland is simply too great,” Ferguson wrote in a letter to Senate Democrats. Rep. Andrew P. Harris (R-MD01), whose district would be targeted by redistricting, called the effort "the most partisan thing you could do." He whined, “It just wouldn’t be fair.” Harris warned that any redistricting could backfire on the Democrats. “We will take this to court, it will go as high as necessary, and in the end, a judge could draw a map that actually has two or three Republican congressmen,” Harris said. “I’d caution the Democrats, be careful what you wish for.” Harris and his wife, Maryland GOP Chair Nicole Beus Harris, have perhaps already worked out a strategy. The Governor’s Redistricting Advisory Commission, last constituted by Gov. Martin O’Malley in 2011, will begin its work this month. The five-member commission includes: Chair: Senator Angela Alsobrooks Senate President Bill Ferguson or designee Speaker Adrienne A. Jones or designee Former Attorney General Brian Frosh Cumberland Mayor Ray Morriss “We have a president that treats our democracy with utter contempt. We have a Republican party that is trying to rig the rules in response to their terrible polling,” said Sen. Alsobrooks. “Let me be clear: Maryland deserves a fair map that represents the will of the people. That’s why I’m proud to chair this commission. Our democracy depends on all of us standing up in this moment.” Will Maryland’s First District finally be competitive? Can we at long last replace “AWOL Andy” Harris? Stay tuned…. Jan Plotczyk spent 25 years as a survey and education statistician with the federal government, at the Census Bureau and the National Center for Education Statistics. She retired to Rock Hall.
By CSES Staff November 4, 2025
In strong numbers, local residents turned out last month for a community information session on offshore wind hosted by the Alliance for Offshore Wind at the Ocean Pines library. The forum heard from industry experts, environmental advocates, and labor leaders to discuss how offshore wind projects can support jobs, clean energy, and coastal resilience along Maryland’s Eastern Shore. Featured were Sam Saluto of Oceantic, Jim Strong of the United Steelworkers, Ron Larsen of Sea Ink Solutions, and Jim Brown of the Audubon Society, all of whom emphasized the long-term environmental and economic benefits of wind development off Maryland’s coast. Speakers outlined how the project, once completed, is expected to create hundreds of high-paying jobs, generate clean power for tens of thousands of homes, and reduce reliance on fossil fuels that cause pollution and coastal erosion. “The potential here is extraordinary,” said Saluto, highlighting Oceantic’s ongoing work to ensure safety and sustainability standards remain at the highest level. “We’re not just talking about wind turbines. We’re talking about revitalizing local economies and protecting the Shore’s way of life.” Union representative Jim Strong echoed that sentiment, noting that Maryland’s labor community sees offshore wind as a chance to rebuild domestic manufacturing capacity while giving workers access to strong wages and long-term stability. Environmental voices, including Jim Brown of the Audubon Society, focused on how properly sited wind projects can reduce carbon emissions while coexisting with marine wildlife and migratory bird patterns. While most of the evening centered on data and community questions, the event briefly turned tense when Ocean City Mayor Rick Meehan, who is leading a lawsuit challenging Maryland’s offshore wind plans, attempted to question the panel. The mayor appeared to lose his train of thought mid-sentence and later cast doubt on the reality of climate change, drawing visible concern from several attendees. Meehan, a New Yorker who moved to Ocean City in 1971 and has held public office since 1985, has become one of the region’s most vocal opponents of offshore wind. His critics argue the lawsuit represents an effort to stall progress rather than engage with the facts presented by energy, labor, and environmental experts. Despite the brief exchange, the overall tone of the evening was forward-looking. Residents lingered after the formal discussion to review informational materials, speak with industry representatives, and learn about opportunities for community involvement. For many, the message was clear: Maryland’s transition to clean energy is not only feasible, it’s already underway, and the Eastern Shore stands to benefit.
Show More