Rev. Furness (an acquaintance of the Motts and pastor of the First Congregational Unitarian Church) like many others, had thought about abolition before the incident and had come to support the gradual movement, but at the same time to see the immediate abolition movement as radical and as threatening the stability of society and of the union. Because of these reservations, he and many others had been reluctant to embrace the new kind of antislavery. After the mobbing, a number of gradualists like Furness and poet William Ellery Channing began to think about how behavior like this attack was about more than abolition, and to see immediate abolitionists as fighting for white freedom (freedom of expression) in addition to black freedom.

The Sunday after the mobbing, Furness told his congregation that “Whether the Abolitionist are right or wrong, is comparatively speaking, a small question now” and that lawless mobs like the one that had destroyed the hall threatened “all personal freedom of thought and speech.” Eventually, Furness joined the immediate movement, partly as a result of the attack.

It is interesting that both Furness and Catharine Beecher also pointed out that such attacks as this allowed abolitionists to become martyrs. I go into more depth about this in the book, and I also discuss how abolitionist women played upon the “martyrdom” of the hall and created relics that were allegedly made of the charred wood of Pennsylvania Hall’s remains to sell at antislavery fairs. The way abolitionists were able to turn the mobbing to their favor is a fascinating aspect of the story.