Chapter. I.

Brief History of Negro Slavery.—Its inevitable effect
upon all concerned in it.

While the Portuguese were exploring Africa, in 14421442,
Prince Henry ordered Anthony Gonsalez to carry back
certain Moorish prisoners, whom he had s[Gap in transcription—three charactersflawed-reproduction]ed two years
before near Cape Bajador: this order was obeyed, and
Gonsalez received from the Moors, in exchange for the
captives, ten negroes, and a quantity of gold dust. Unluckily,
this wicked speculation proved profitable, and
other Portuguese were induced to embark on it.

In 14921492, the West India islands were discovered by
Columbus. The Spaniards, dazzled with the acquisition
of a new world and eager to come into possession of
their wealth, compelled the natives of Hispaniola to dig
in the mines. The native Indians died rapidly, in consequence
of hard work and cruel treatment; and thus a
new market was opened for the negro slaves captured by
the Portuguese. They were accordingly introduced as 1 1(1)v 2
early as 15031503. Those who bought and those who sold
were alike prepared to trample on the rights of their
fellow beings, by that most demoralizing of all influences,
the accursed love of gold.

Cardinal Ximenes, while he administered the government,
before the accession of Charles the Fifth, was petitioned
to allow a regular commerce in African negroes.
But he rejected the proposal with promptitude and firmness,
alike honorable to his head and heart. This earliest friend
of the Africans, living in a comparatively unenlightened
age, has peculiar claims upon our gratitude and reverence.
In 15171517, Charles the Fifth granted a patent for an annual
supply of four thousand negroes to the Spanish islands.
He probably soon became aware of the horrible, and ever-
increasing evils, attendant upon this traffic; for twentyfive
years after he emancipated every negro in his dominions.
But when he resigned his crown and retired to
a monastery, the colonists resumed their shameless
tyranny.

Captain Hawkins, afterward Sir John Hawkins, was
the first Englishman, who disgraced himself and his
country by this abominable trade. Assisted by some rich
people in London, he fitted out three ships, and sailed to
the African coast, where he burned and plundered the
towns, and carried off three hundred of the defenceless
inhabitants to Hispaniola.

Elizabeth afterwards authorized a similar adventure
with one of her own vessels. “She expressed her concern
lest any of the Africans should be carried off without
their free consent; declaring that such a thing would be
detestable, and call down the vengeance of Heaven
upon the undertakers.” For this reason, it has been
supposed that the Queen was deceived — that she imagined
the negroes were transported to the Spanish colonies
as voluntary laborers. But history gives us slight reasons
to judge Elizabeth so favorably. It was her system
always to preserve an “appearance” of justice and virtue.
She was a shrewd, far-sighted politician; and had in
perfection the clear head and cold heart calculated to
form that character. Whatever she might believe of the
trade at its beginning, she was too deeply read in human 1(2)r 3
nature, not to foresee the inevitable consequence of
placing power in the hands of avarice.

A Roman priest persuaded Louis the Thirteenth to
sanction slavery for the sake of converting the negroes to
Christianity; and thus this bloody iniquity, disguised
with gown, hood, and rosary, entered the fair dominions
of France. To be violently wrested from his home, and
condemnded to toil without hope, by Chistians, to whom
he had done no wrong, was, methinks, a very odd
beginning to the poor negro’s course of religious instruction!

When this evil had once begun, it, of course, gathered
strength rapidly; for all the bad passions of human nature
were eagerly enlisted in its cause. The British
formed settlements in North America, and in the West
Indies; and these were stocked with slaves. From 16801680
to 17861786 two million, one hundred and thirty thousand
negroes were imported into the British colonies!

In almost all great evils there is some redeeming feature
— some good results, even where it is not intended:
pride and vanity, utterly selfish and wrong in themselves,
often throw money into the hands of the poor, and
thus tend to excite industry and ingenutity, while they
produce comfort. But slavery is all evil — within and
without — root and branch, — bud, blossom and fruit!

In order to show how dark it is in every aspect — how
invariably injurious both to nations and individuals, —I
will select a few facts from the mass of evidence now
before me.

In the first place, its effects upon Africa have been
most disastrous. All along the coast, intercourse with
Europeans has deprived the inhabitants of their primitive
simplicity, without substituting in its place the order,
refinement, and correctness of principle, attendant upon
true civilization. The soil of Africa is rich in native
productions, and honorable commerce might have been
a blessing to her, to Europe, and to America; but instead
of that, a trade has been substituted, which operates like
a withering curse, upon all concerned in it.

There are green and sheltered valleys in Africa,—
broad and beautiful rivers, — and vegetation in its loveliest 1(2)v 4
and most magnificent forms. — But no comfortable
houses, no thriving farms, no cultivated gardens; — for
it is not safe to possess permanent property, where each
little state is surrounded by warlike neighbors, continually
sending out their armed bands in search of slaves.
The white man offers his most tempting articles of merchandize
to the negro, as a price for the flesh and blood
of his enemy; and if we, with all our boasted knowledge
and religion, are seduced by money to do such grievous
wrong to those who have never offended us, what can
we expect of men just emerging from the limited wants
of savage life, too uncivilized to have formed any habits
of steady industry, yet earnestly coveting the productions
they know not how to earn? The inevitable consequence
is, that war is made throughout that unhappy continent,
not only upon the slightest pretences, but often without
any pretext at all. Villages are set on fire, and those
who fly from the flames rush upon the spears of the enemy.
Private kidnapping is likewise carried on to a great extent;
for he who can catch a neighbor’s child is sure to
find a ready purchaser; and it sometimes happens that
the captor and his living merchandize are both seized by
the white slave-trader. Houses are broken open in the
night, and defenceless women and children carried away
into captivity. If boys, in the unsuspecting innocence of
youth, come near the white man’s ships, to sell vegetables
or fruit, they are ruthlessly seized and carried to
slavery in a distant land. Even the laws are perverted
to this shameful purpose. If a chief wants European
commodities, he accuses a parent of witchcraft; the victim
is tried by the ordeal of poisoned water;Open note a01-rota Judicial trials by the ordeal of personal combat, in which the
vanquished were always pronounced guilty, occured as late as
the 1701 < x < 1800sixteenth century both in France and England. and if he
sicken at the draught, the king claims a right to punish
him by selling his whole family. In African legislation,
almost all crimes are punished with slavery; and, thanks
to the white man’s rapacity, there is always a very powerful
motive for finding the culprit guilty. He must be
a very good king indeed, that judges his subjects impartially,
when he is sure of making money by doing otherwise!

1(3)r 5

The king of Dahomy, and other despotic princes, do
not scruple to seize their own people and sell them, without
provocation, whenever they happen to want anything,
which slave-ships can furnish. If a chief has conscience
enough to object to such proceedings, he is excited by
presents of gun-powder and brandy. One of these men,
who could not resist the persuasions of the slave traders
while he was intoxicated, was conscience-stricken when
he recovered his senses, and bitterly reproached his
“Christian” seducers. One negro king, debarred by his
religion from the use of spiritous liquors, and therefore
less dangerously tempted than others, abolished the slave
trade throughout his dominions, and exerted himself to
encourage honest industry; but his people must have
been as sheep among wolves.

Relentless bigotry brings its aid to darken the horrors
of the scene. The Mohammedans deem it right to subject
the heathen tribes to perpetual bondage. The Moors
and Arabs think Alla and the Prophet have given them
an undisputed right to the poor Caffre, his wife, his
children, and his goods. But mark how the slave-trade
deepens even the fearful gloom of bigotry! The Mohammedans
are by no means zealous to enlighten their
Pagan neighbors — they do not wish them to come to
a knowledge of what they consider the true religion —
lest they should forfeit the only ground, on which they
can even pretend to the right of driving them by thousands
to the markets of Kano and Tripoli.

This is precisely like our own conduct. We say the
negroes are so ignorant that they must be slaves; and we
insist upon keeping them ignorant, lest we spoil them for
slaves. The same spirit that dictates this logic to the
Arab, teaches it to the European and the American: —
Call it what you please — it is certainly neither of heaven
nor of earth.

When the slave ships are lying on the coast of Africa,
canoes well armed are sent into the inland country, and
after a few weeks they return with hundreds of negroes,
tied fast with ropes. Sometimes the white men lurk
among the bushes, and seize the wretched beings who
incautiously venture from their homes; sometimes they 1* 1(3)v 6
paint their skins as black as their hearts, and by this deception
suddenly surprise the unsuspecting natives; at
other times the victims are decoyed on board the vessel,
under some kind pretence or other, and then lashed to
the mast, or chained in the hold. Is it not very natural
for the Africans to say “devilish white”?

All along the shores of this devoted country, terror and
distrust prevail. The natives never venture out without
arms, when a vessel is in sight, and skulk through their
own fields, as if watched by a panther. All their worst
passions are called into full exercise, and all their kindlier
feelings smothered. Treachery, fraud and violence
desolate the country, rend asunder the dearest relations,
and pollute the very fountains of justice. The history
of the negro, whether national or domestic, is written
in blood. Had half the skill and strength employed in
the slave-trade been engaged in honorable commerce,
the native princes would long ago have directed their
energies toward clearing the country, destroying wild
beasts, and introducing the arts and refinements of civillized
life. Under such influences, Africa might become
an earthly paradise; — the white man’s avarice has made
it a den of wolves.

Having thus glanced at the miserable effects of this
system on the condition of Africa, we will now follow the
poor slave through his wretched wanderings, in order to
give some idea of his physical suffering, his mental, and
moral degradation.

Husbands are torn from their wives, children from
their parents, while the air is filled with the shrieks and
lamentations of the bereaved. Sometimes they are
brought from a remote country; obliged to wander over
mountains and through deserts; chained together in
herds; driven by the whip; scorched by a tropical
sun; compelled to carry heavy bales of merchandize;
suffering with hunger and thirst; worn down with
fatigue; and often leaving their bones to whiten in the
desert. A large troop of slaves, taken by the Sultan of
Fozzan, died in the desert for want of food. In some
places, travellers meet with fifty or sixty skeletons in a
day, of which the largest proportion were no doubt slaves, 1(4)r 7
on their way to European markets. Sometimes the poor
creatures refuse to go a step further, and even the lacerating
whip cannot goad them on; in such cases, they
become the prey of wild beasts, more merciful than
white men.

Those who arrive at the sea-coast, are in a state of
desperation and despair. Their purchasers are so well
aware of this, and so fearful of the consequences, that
they set sail in the night, lest the negroes should know
when they depart from their native shores.

And here the scene becomes almost too harrowing to
dwell upon. But we must not allow our nerves to be
more tender than our consciences. The poor wretches
are stowed by hundreds, like bales of goods, between the
low decks, where filth and putrid air produce disease,
madness, and suicide. Unless they die in great numbers,
the slave captain does not even concern himself
enough to fret; his live stock cost nothing, and he is
sure of such a high price for what remains at the end of
the voyage, that he can afford to lose a good many.

The following account is given by Dr Walsh, who accompanied
Viscount Strangford, as chaplain, on his
embassy to Brazil. The vessel in which he sailed chased
a slave ship; for to the honor of England be it said, she
has asked and obtained permission from other governments
to treat as pirates such of their subjects as are
discovered carrying on this guilty trade north of the
equator. Doctor Walsh was an eye witness of the scene
he describes; and the evidence given, at various times,
before the British House of Commons, proves that the
frightful picture is by no means exaggerated.

“The vessel had taken in, on the coast of Africa, three
hundred and thirtysix males, and two hundred and twentysix
females, making in all five hundred and sixtytwo;
she had been out seventeen days, during which she had
thrown overboard fiftyfive. They were all inclosed under
grated hatchways, between decks. The space was so
low, and they were stowed so close together, that there
was no possibility of lying down, or changing their position,
night or day. The greater part of them were
shut out from light and air; and this when the thermometer, 1(4)v 8
exposed to the open sky, was standing, in the
shade on our deck, at eightynine degrees. The space between decks was divided into two compartments,
three feet three inches high. Two hundred and
twentysix women and girls were thrust into one space two
hundred and eightyeight feet square; and three hundred
and thirtysix men and boys were crammed into another
space eight hundred feet square; giving the whole an average
of twentythree inches; and to each of the women not
more than thirteen inches; though several of them were
in a state of health, which peculiarly demanded pity.—
As they were shipped on account of different individuals,
they were branded like sheep, with the owner’s marks of
different forms; which, as the mate informed me with
perfect indifference, had been burnt in with red-hot iron.
Over the hatch-way stood a ferocious looking fellow, the
slave-driver of the ship, with a scourge of many-twisted
thongs in his hand; whenever he heard the slightest
noise from below, he shook it over them, and seemed
eager to exercise it. As soon as the poor creatures saw us looking down at
them, their melancholy visages brightened up. They
perceived something of sympathy and kindness in our
looks, to which they had not been accustomed; and
feeling instinctively that we were friends, they immediately
began to shout and clap their hands. The women
were particularly excited. They all held up their arms,
and when we bent down and shook hands with them,
they could not contain their delight; they endeavored to
scramble upon their knees, stretching up to kiss our
hands, and we understood they knew we had come to
liberate them. Some, however, hung down their heads
in apparently hopeless dejection; some were greatly
emaciated; and some, particularly children, seemed
dying. The heat of these horrid places was so great,
and the odor so offensive, that it was quite impossible to
enter them, even had there been room. The officers insisted that the poor, suffering creatures
should be admitted on deck to get air and water. This
was opposed by the mate of the slaver, who (from a feeling
that they deserved it,) declared they should be all murdered. 1(5)r 9
The officers, however, persisted, and the poor
beings were all turned out together. It is impossible to
conceive the effect of this eruption — five hundred and
seventeen fellow-creatures, of all ages and sexes, some children,
some adults, some old men and women, all entirely
destitute of clothing, scrambling out together to taste the
luxury of a little fresh air and water. They came swarming
up, like bees from a hive, till the whole deck was
crowded to suffocation from stom to stern; so that it was
impossible to imagine where they could all have come
from, or how they could have been stowed away. On
looking into the places where they had been crammed,
there were found some children next the sides of the
ship, in the places most remote from light and air, they
were lying nearly in a torpid state, after the rest had
turned out. The little creatures seemed indifferent as to
life or death; and when they were carried on deck,
many of them could not stand. After enjoying for a
short time the unusual luxury of air, some water was
brought; it was then that the extent of their sufferings
was exposed in a fearful manner. They all rushed like
maniacs towards it. No entreaties, or threats, or blows,
could restrain them; they shrieked, and struggled, and
fought with one another, for a drop of this precious liquid,
as if they grew rabid at the sight of it. There is nothing
from which slaves in the mid-passage suffer so much as
want of water. It is sometimes usual to take out casks
filled with sea-water as ballast, and when the slaves are
received on board, to start the casks, and re-fill them with
fresh. On one occasion, a ship from Bahia neglected to
change the contents of their casks, and on the mid-passage
found, to their horror, that they were filled with
nothing but salt water. All the slaves on board perished!
We could judge of the extent of their sufferings from the
afflicting sight we now saw. When the poor creatures
were ordered down again, several of them came, and
pressed their heads against our knees, with looks of the
greatest anguish, with the prospect of returning to the
horrid place of suffering below.”

Alas! the slave-captain proved by his papers that he
confined his traffic strictly to the south of the Line, 1(5)v 10
where it was yet lawful; perhaps his papers were forged;
but the English officers were afraid to violate an article
of the treaty, which their government had made with
Brazil. Thus does cunning wickedness defeat benevolence
and justice in the world! Dr Walsh continues:
“With infinite regret, therefore, we were obliged to restore
his papers to the captain, and permit him to proceed,
after nine hours’ detention and close investigation. It
was dark when we separated, and the last parting sounds
we heard from the unhallowed ship, were the cries and
shrieks of the slaves, suffering under some bodily infliction.”

I suppose the English officers acted politically right;
but not for the world’s wealth, would I have acted politically
right, under such circumstances!Open note a02-rota Dr Walsh’s book on Brazil was published in 18311831. He says:
“Notwithstanding the benevolent and pursevering exertions of
England, this horrid traffic in human flesh is surely as extensively
carried on as ever, and under circumstances perhaps of a more revolting
character. The very shifts at evasion, the necessity for
concealment, and the desperate hazard, cause inconveneience and
sufferings to the poor creatures in a very aggravated degree.”

Arrived at the place of destination, the condition of
the slave is scarcely less deplorable. They are advertised
with cattle; chained in droves, and driven to market
with a whip; and sold at auction, with the beasts of
the field. They are treated like brutes, and all the
influences around them conspire to make them brutes.

“Some are employed as domestic slaves, when and how
the owner pleases; by day or by night, on Sunday or
other days, in any measure or degree, with any remuneration
or with none, with what kind or quantity of food
the owner of the human beast may choose. Male or
female, young or old, weak or strong, may be punished
with or without reason, as caprice or passion may prompt.
When the drudge does not suit, he may be sold for some
inferior purpose, like a horse that has seen his best days,
till like a worn-out beast he dies, unpitied and forgotten!
Kept in ignorance of the holy precepts and divine consolations
of Christianity, he remains a Pagan in a Christian
land, without even an object of idolatrous worship—
‘having no hope, and without God in the world.’”

1(6)r 11

From the moment the slave is kidnapped, to the last
hour he draws his miserable breath, the white man’s
influence directly cherishes ignorance, fraud, treachery,
theft, licentiousness, revenge, hatred and murder. It
cannot be denied that human nature thus operated upon,
must necessarily yield, more or less, to all these evils. —
And thus do we dare to treat beings, who, like ourselves,
are heirs of immmortality!

And now let us briefly inquire into the influence of
slavery on the white man’s character; for in this evil
there is a mighty re-action. “Such is this constitution of
things, that we cannot inflict an injury without suffering
from it ourselves: he, who blesses another, benefits himself;
but he, who sins against his fellow creature, does
his own soul a grievous wrong.” The effect produced
upon slave captains is absolutely frightful. Those who
wish to realize it in all its awful extent, may find abundant
information in Clarkson’s History of Slavery: the
authenticity of the facts there given cannot be doubted;
for setting aside the perfect honesty of Clarkson’s character,
these facts were principly accepted as evidence
before the British Parliament, where there was a very
strong party of slave owners desirous to prove them false.

Indeed when we reflect upon the subject, it cannot
excite surprise that slave-captains become as hard-hearted
and fierce as tigers. The very first step in their business
is a deliberate invasion of the rights of others; its pursuit
combines every form of violence, bloodshed, tyranny
and anguish; they are accustomed to consider their victims
as cattle, or blocks of wood;Open note a03-rota I have read letters from slave-captains to their employers, in
which they declare that they shipped such a number of “b[Gap in transcription—two to five charactersflawed-reproduction]s of
wood”, or “pieces of ebony”, on the coast of Africa. Near the office of the Richmond Enquirer in Virginia, an auction
flag was hoisted one day this last winter, with the following curious
advertisement: “On ---11Monday the 11th inst., will be sold in front
of the High Constable’s office, one bright mulatto woman, about
twentysix years of age; also, some empty barrels, and sundry old
candle boxes.” and they are invested
with perfectly despotic powers.

There is a great waste of life among white seamen
employed in this traffic, in consequences of the severe 1(6)v 12
punishment they receive, and diseases originating in the
unwholesome atmosphere on board. Clarkson, after a
long and patient investigation, came to the conclusion
that two slave voyages to Africa, would destroy more
seamen than eightythree to Newfoundland; and there is
this difference to be observed, that the loss in one trade
is generally occasioned by weather or accident, in the
other by cruelty or disease. The instances are exceedingly
numerous of sailors on board slave-ships, that have
died under the lash or in consequence of it. Some of
the particulars are so painful that it has made me sicken
to read them; and I therefore forbear to repeat them.
Of the Alexander’s crew, in 17851785, no less than eleven
deserted at Bonny, on the African coast, because life had
become insupportable. They chose all that could be endured
from a most inhospitable climate, and the violence
of the natives, rather than remain in their own ship.
Nine others died on the voyage, and the rest were exceedingly
abused. This state of things was so universal
that seamen were notoriously averse to enter the hateful
business. In order to obtain them it became necessary
to resort to force or deception. (Behold how many
branches there are to the tree of crime!) Decoyed to
houses where night after night was spent in dancing,
rioting and drunkenness, the thoughtless fellows gave
themselves up to the merriment of the scene, and in a
moment of intoxication the fatal bargain was sealed.
Encouraged to spend more than they owned, a jail or the
slave-ship became the only alternatives. The superiority
of wages was likewise a strong inducement; but this
was a cheat. The wages of the sailors were half paid
in the currency of the country where the vessel carried
her slaves; and thus they were actually lower than in
other trades, while they were nominally higher.

In such an employment the morals of the seamen of
course became corrupt, like their masters; and every
species of fraud was thought allowable to deceive the
ignorant Africans, by means of false weights, false measures,
adulterated commodities, and the like.

Of the cruelties on board slave-ships, I will mention
but a few instances; though a large volume might be filled 2(1)r 13
with such detestable anecdotes perfectly well authenticated.

“A child on board a slave-ship, of about ten months
old, took sulk and would not eat; the captain flogged it
with a cat-o’-nine-tails; swearing that he would make it
eat, or kill it. From this, and other ill-treatment, the
limbs swelled. He then ordered some water to be made
hot to abate the swelling. But even his tender mercies
were cruel. The cook, on putting his hand into the
water, said it was too hot. Upon this the captain swore
at him, and ordered the feet to be put in. This was
done. The nails and skin came off. Oiled cloths were
then put around them. The child was at length tied to
a heavy log. Two or three days afterwards, the captain
caught it up again, and repeated that he would make it
eat, or kill it. He immediately flogged it again, and in
a quarter of an hour it died. And after the babe was
dead, whom should the barbarian select to throw it overboard,
but the wretched mother! In vain she tried to
avoid the office. He beat her, till he made her take up
the child and carry it to the side of the vessel. She
then dropped it into the sea, turning her head the other
way, that she might not see it.”Open note q019-rota Clarkson’s History of the Abolition of the Slave Trade.

“In 17801780, a slave-trader, detained by contrary winds
on the American coast, and in distress, selected one
hundred and thirtytwo of his sick slaves, and threw them
into the sea, tied together in pairs, that they might not
escape by swimming. He hoped the Insurance Company
would indemnify him for his loss; and in the lawsuit,
to which this gave birth, he observed that ‘negroes
cannot be considered in any other light than as beasts of
burden; and to lighten a vessel it is permitted to throw
overboard its least valuable effects.’ Some of the unhappy slaves escaped from those who
attempted to tie them, and jumped into the sea. One of
them was saved by means of a cord thrown by the
sailors of another vessel; and the monster who murdered
his innocent companions had the audacity to claim him 2 2(1)v 14
as his property. The judges, either from shame, or a
sense of justice, refused his demand.” Open note q020-rota The Abbé Grégoire’s Inquiry into the Intellect and Morals of
Negroes.

Some people speculate in what are called refuse slaves;
i. e. the poor diseased ones. Many of them die in the
piazzas of the autioneers; and sometimes, in the
agonies of death, they are sold as low as a dollar.

Even this is better than to be unprotected on the wide
ocean in the power of such wild beasts as I have described.
It may seem incredible to some that human
nature is capable of so much depravity. But the confessions
of pirates show how habitual scenes of blood
and violence harden the heart of man; and history
abundantly proves that despotic power produces a
fearful species of moral insanity. The wanton cruelties
of Nero, Caligula, Domitian, and many of the
officers of the Inquisition, seem like the frantic acts of
madmen.

The public has, however, a sense of justice, which
can never be entirely perverted. Since the time when
Clarkson, Wilberforce and Fox made the horrors of the
slave trade understood, the slave captain, or slave jockey
is spontaneously and almost universally regarded with
dislike and horror. Even in the slave-holding States it is
deemed disreputable to associate with a professed slave-
trader, though few perhaps would think it any harm to
bargain with him. This public feeling makes itself felt
so strongly, that men engaged in what is called the
African traffic, kept it a secret, if they could, even before
the laws made it hazardous.

No man of the least principle could for a moment
think of engaging in such enterprises; and if he have
any feeling, it is soon destroyed by familiarity with
scenes of guilt and anguish. The result is, that the
slave-trade is a monopoly in the hands of the very
wicked; and this is one reason why it has always been
profitable.

Yet even the slave trade has had its champions — of
course among those who had money invested in it. 2(2)r 15
Politicians have boldly said that it was a profitable branch
of commerce, and ought not to be discontinued on account
of the idle dreams of benevolent enthusiasts. They
have argued before the House of Commons, that others
would enslave the negroes, if the English gave it up—as
if it were allowable for one man to commit a crime because
another was likely to do it! They tell how merciful
it is to bring the Africans away from the despotism and
wars, which desolate their own continent; but they do
not add that the white man is himself the cause of those
wars, nor do they prove our right to judge for another
man where he will be the happiest. If the Turks or the
Algerines saw fit to exercise this right, they might
carry away captive all the occupants of our prisons and
penitentiaries.

Some of the advocates of this traffic maintained that
the voyage from Africa to the slave-market, called the
Middle Passage, was an exceedingly comfortable portion of
existence. One went so far as to declare it “the happiest
part of a negro’s life.” They aver that the Africans, on
their way to slavery, are so merry, that they dance and sing.
But upon a careful examination of witnesses, it was found
that their singing consisted of dirge-like lamentations for
their native land. One of the captains threatened to flog
a woman, because the mournfulness of her song was too
painful to him. After meals they jumped up in their
irons for exercise. This was considered so necessary
for their health, that they were whipped, if they refused
to do it. And this was their dancing! “I,” said one of
the witnesses, “was employed to dance the men, while
another person danced the women.”

Those pretences, ridiculous as they appear, are worth
about as much as any of the arguments that can be
brought forward in defence of any part of the slave system.

The engraving on the next page will help to give a
vivid idea of the Elysium enjoyed by negroes, during the
Middle Passage. Fig. A represents the iron hand-cuffs,
which fasten the slaves together by means of a little bolt
with a padlock.

B represents the iron shackles by which the ancle of 2(2)v 16 FigureIron hand-cuffs, marked as Figure A. They are made of two loops, bolted in the center into a rectangular block. FigureIron shackles, marked as Figure B. They are made of two horseshoe-shaped loops through which a large bolt is fastened. FigureA thumb screw, marked as Figure E, with parts D and C. The letter E in printed within the figure of a key which is lowered into a cylinder. Two small horseshoe-shaped loops are attached to a base (C) above which floats a similarly shaped piece (D) with slits through which the loops pass. This figure is positioned to the left of the next (I, G, F, H). FigureA speculum oris, marked as Figure I, with parts G, F, and H. The figure is printed with two sorts of lines, to represent two positions simultaneously. There are two pointed pieces (G, H) which join to form a single point (F). Its design is similar to a pair of scissors, but instead of a pair of handles there is a knob to twist (I). This figure is positioned to the right of the previous (E, D, C). FigureMerely a sillouhette in this copy, this figure, marked as K, depicts a human figure seated partially within and to the left of a dark rectangle. Printed sideways along the right side of the rectangle, reading from bottom to top, is: “3 ft 3 in. high”. 2(3)r 17
one is made fast to the ancle of his next companion.
Yet even thus secured, they do often jump into the sea,
and wave their hands in triumph at the approach of
death. E is a thumb-screw. The thumbs are put into two
round holes at the top; by turning a key a bar rises from
C to D by means of a screw; and the pressure becomes
very painful. By turning it further, the blood is made
to start; and by taking away the key as at E, the tortured
person is left in agony, without the means of helping
himself, or being helped by others. This is applied in
case of obstinacy, at the discretion of the captain. I, F,
is a speculum oris. The dotted lines represent it when
shut; the black lines when open. It opens at G, H, by a
screw below with a knob at the end of it. This instrument
was used by surgeons to wrench open the mouth in
case of lock-jaw. It is used in slave-ships to compel the
negroes to take food; because a loss to the owners would
follow their perservering attempts to die. K represents
the manner of stowing in a slave-ship.

According to Clarkson’s estimate, about two and a half
out of a hundred human beings die annually, in the
ordinary course of nature, including infants and the
aged: but in an African voyage, where few babes and
no old people are admitted, so that those shipped are at
the firmest period of life, the annual mortality is fortythree
in a hundred. In vessels that sail from Po[Gap in transcription—one characterflawed-reproduction]ny,
Benin, and the Calabars, whence a large proportion
of slaves are brought, this mortality is so much increased
by various causes, that eightysix in a hundred die yearly.
He adds, “It is a destruction, which if general but for
ten years, would depopulate the world, and extinguish the
human race.”

We next come to the influence of this diabolical system
on the slave-owner; and here I shall be cautioned
that I am treading on delicate ground, because our own
countrymen are slave holders. But I am yet to learn
that wickedness is any the better for being our own. —
Let the truth be spoken — and let those abide its presence
who can.

The following is the testimony of Jefferson, who had 2* 2(3)v 18
good opportunities for observation, and who certainly
had no New England prejudices: “There must, doubtless,
be an unhappy influence on the manners of the
people, produced by the existence of slavery among us.
The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual
exercise of the most boisterous passions; the most
unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading
submission on the other. Our children see this, and learn
to imitate it; for man is an imitative animal. The parent
storms; the child looks on, catches the lineaments
of wrath, puts on the same airs in a circle of smaller
slaves, gives loose to the worst of passions; and thus
nursed, educated, and daily exercised in tyranny, cannot
but be stamped by it with odious peculiarities. The man
must be a prodigy, who can retain his morals and manners
undepraved in such circumstances.”

In a community where all the labor is done by one
class, there must of course be another class, who live in
indolence; and we all know how much people that have
nothing to do are tempted by what the world calls
pleasures; the result is, that slave-holding states and
colonies are proverbial for dissipation. Hence too the
contempt for industry, which prevails in such a state of
society. Where none work but slaves, usefulness becomes
degradation. The wife of a respectable mechanic,
who accompanied her husband from Massachusetts to
the South, gave great offence to her new neighbors by
performing her usual household avocations; they begged
her to desist from it, (offering the services of their own
blacks,) because the sight of a white person engaged in
any labor was extremely injurious to the slaves; they
deemed it very important that the negroes should be
taught, both by precept and example, that they alone
were made to work!

Whether the undue importance attached to merely
extenal gentility, and the increasing tendency to indolence
and extravagance throughout this country, ought
to be attributed, in any degree, to the same source, I am
unable to say; if any influence comes to us from the
example and ridicule of the slave-holding States, it certainly
must be of this nature.

2(4)r 19

There is another view of this system, which I cannot
unveil so completely as it ought to be. I shall be
called bold for saying so much; but the facts are so
important, that it is a matter of conscience not to be
fastidious.

The negro woman is unprotected either by law or
public opinion. She is the property of her master, and
her daughters are his property. They are allowed to
have no conscientious scruples, no sense of shame, no
regard for the feelings of husband, or parent; they must
be entirely subservient to the will of their owner, on
pain of being whipped as near unto death as will comport
with his interest, or quite to death, if it suit his
pleasure.

Those who know human nature would be able to conjecture
the unavoidable result, even if it were not
betrayed by the amount of mixed population. Think
for a moment, what a degrading effect must be produced
on the morals of both blacks and whites by customs like
these!

Considering we live in the 1801 < x < 1900nineteenth century, it is
indeed a strange state of society where the father sells
his child, and the brother puts his siter up at auction!
Yet these things are often practised in our republic.

Doctor Walsh, in his account of Brazil, tells an anecdote
of one of these fathers, who love their offspring at
market price. “For many years,” says he, “this man
kept his son in slavery, and maintained the right to dispose
of him, as he would of his mule. Being ill, however,
and near to die, he made his will, left his child
his freedom, and apprised him of it. Some time after,
he recovered, and having a dispute with the young man,
he threatened to sell him with the rest of his stock.
The son, determined to prevent this, assassinated his
father in a wood, got possession of the will, demanded his
freedom, and obtained it. This circumstance was perfectly
well known in the neighborhood, but no process
was instituted against him. He was not chargeable, as
I could hear, with any other delinquency than the horrible
one of murdering his father to obtain his freedom.” 2(4)v 20
This forms a fine picture of the effects of slavery upon
human relations!Open note a06-rota A short time ago a reverend and very benevolent gentleman
suggested as the subject of a book, The Beauty of Human Relations.
What a bitter jest it would be, to send him this volume, with the
information that I had complied with his request!

I have more than once heard people, who had just
returned from the South, speak of seeing a number of
mulattoes in attendance where they visited, whose resemblance
to the head of the family was too striking not
to be immediately observed. What sort of feeling must
be excited in the minds of those slaves by being constantly
exposed to the tyranny or caprice of their own
brothers and sisters, and by the knowledge that these
near relations will, on a division of the estate, have power
to sell them off with the cattle?

But the vices of white men eventually provide a
scourge for themselves. They increase the negro race,
but the negro can never increase theirs; and this is one
great reason why the proportion of colored population is
always so large in slave-holding countries. As the ratio
increases more and more every year, the colored people
must eventually be the stronger party; and when this
result happens, slavery must either be abolished, or government
must furnish troops, of whose wages the free
States must pay their proportion.

As a proof of the effects of slavery on the temper, I
will relate but very few anecdotes.

The first happened in the Bahamas. It is extracted
from a despatch of Mr Huskisson the Governor of
those islands: “Henry and Helen Moss have been found
guilty of a misdemeanor, for their cruelty to their slave
Kate; and those facts of the case, which seem beyond
dispute, appear to be as follows:

Kate was a domestic slave, and is stated to have
been guilty of theft: she is also accused of disobedience,
in refusing to mend her clothes and do her work: and
this was the more immediate cause of her punishment.
On the 1826-07-22twentysecond of July, eighteen hundred and
twentysix, she was confined in the stocks, and she was
not released till the 1827-08-08eighth of August following, being 2(5)r 21
a period of seventeen days. The stocks were so constructed
that she could not sit up or lie down at pleasure, and
she remained in them night and day. During this period
she was flogged repeatedly, one of the overseers thinks
about six times; and red pepper was rubbed upon her
eyes, to prevent her sleeping. Tasks were given her,
which, in the opinion of the same overseer, she was incapable
of performing; sometimes because they were
beyond her powers, at other times because she could not
see to do them, on account of the pepper having been
rubbed on her eyes; and she was flogged for failing to
accomplish these tasks. A violent distemper had prevailed
on the plantation during the summer. It is in
evidence, that one of the days of Kate’s confinement she
complained of fever; and that one of the floggings she
received was the day after she made the complaint.
When she was taken out of the stocks, she appeared to
be cramped, and was then again flogged. The very day
of her release, she was sent to field labor (though heretofore
a house-servant); and on the evening of the third day
ensuing was brought before her owners, as being ill, and
refusing to work; and she then again complained of
having fever. They were of opinion that she had none
then, but gave directions to the driver, if she should be
ill, to bring her to them for medicines in the morning.
The driver took her to the negro-house, and again flogged
her; though at this time apparently without orders
from her owners to do so. In the morning at seven
o’clock she was taken to work in the field, where she
died at noon.

The facts of the case are thus far incontrovertibly
established; and I deeply lament, that, heinous as the offences
are which this narrative exhibits, I can discover
no material palliation of them amongst the other circumstances
detailed in the evidence.”

A bill of indictment for murder was preferred against
Mr and Mrs Moss: the grand jury threw it out. Upon
two other bills, for misdemeanors, a verdict of guilty was
returned. Five months’ imprisonment, and a fine of
three hundred pounds was the only punishment for this
deliberate and shocking cruelty!

2(5)v 22

In the next chapter, it will be seen that similar “misdemeanors”
are committed with equal impunity in this
country.

I do not know how much odium Mr and Mrs Moss
generally incurred in consequence of this transaction;
but many of “the most respectable people in the island
petitioned for a mitigation of their punishment, visited
them in prison, did everything to identify themselves with
them, and on their liberation from jail, gave them a public
dinner as a matter of triumph!” The witnesses in
their favor even went so far as to insist that their character
stood high for humanity among the neighboring planters.
I believe there never was a class of people on earth so
determined to uphold each other, at all events, as slave-
owners.

The following account was originally written by the
Rev. William Dickey of Bloomingsburgh, to the Rev.
John Rankin, of Ripley, Ohio. It was published in
18261826, in a little volume of letters, on the subject of
slavery, by the Rev. Mr Rankin, who assures us that
Mr Dickey was well acquainted with the circumstances
he describes.

“In the country of Livington, Kentucky, near the mouth
of Cumberland river, lived Lilburn Lewis, the son of
Jefferson’s sister. He was the wealthy owner of a considerable
number of slaves, whom he drove constantly,
fed sparingly, and lashed severely. The consequence
was, they would run away. Among the rest was an ill-
grown boy, about seventeen, who, having just returned
from a skulking spell, was sent to the spring for water,
and, in returning, let fall an elegant pitcher, which dashed
to shivers on the rocks. It was night, and the slaves
were all at home. The master had them collected into
the most roomy negro-house, and a rousing fire made.”
(Reader, what follows is very shocking; but I have already
said we must not allow our nerves to be more
sensitive than our consciences. If such things are done
in our country, it is important that we should know of
them, and seriously reflect upon them.) “The door was
fastened, that none of the negroes, either through fear or
sympathy, should attempt to escape; he then told them 2(6)r 23
that the design of this meeting was to teach them to
remain at home and obey his orders. All things being
now in train, George was called up, and by the assistance
of his younger brother, laid on a broad bench or
block. The master then cut off his ancles with a broad
axe. In vain the unhappy victim screamed. Not a
hand among so many dared to interfere. Having cast
the feet into the fire he lectured the negroes at some
length. He then proceeded to cut off his limbs below
the knees. The sufferer besought him to begin with his
head. It was in vain — the master went on thus, until
trunk, arms, and head, were all in the fire. Still protracting
the intervals with lectures, and threatenings of
like punishment, in case any of them were disobedient,
or ran away, or disclosed the tragedy they were compelled
to witness. In order to comsume the bones, the fire
was briskly stirred until midnight: when, as if heaven
and earth combined to show their detestation of the
deed, a sudden shock of earthquake threw down the
heavy wall, composed of rock and clay, extinguished the
fire, and covered the remains of George. The negroes
were allowed to disperse, with charges to keep the secret,
under the penalty of like punishment. When his wife
asked the cause of the dreadful screams she had heard,
he said that he had never enjoyed himself so well at a
ball as he had enjoyed himself that evening. Next
morning, he ordered the wall to be rebuilt, and he himself
supeintended, picking up the remains of the boy,
and placing them within the new wall, thus hoping to
conceal the matter. But some of the negroes whispered
the horrid deed; the neighbors tore down the wall, and
finding the remains, they testified against him. He was
bound over to await the sitting of the court; but before
that period arrived, he committed suicide.”

“N.B. This happened in 18111811; if I be correct, it
was on the 1811-12-1616th of December. It was on the Sabbath.”

Mr Rankin adds, there was little probability that Mr
Lewis would have fallen under the sentence of the law.
Notwithstanding the peculiar enormity of his offence,
there were individuals who combined to let him out of
prison, in order to screen him from justice.

2(6)v 24

Another instance of summary punishment inflicted on
a runaway slave, is told by a respectable gentleman from
South Carolina, with whom I am acquainted. He was
young, when the circumstance occurred, in the neighborhood
of his home; and it filled him with horror. A
slave being missing, several planters united in a negro
hunt, as it is called. They set out with dogs, guns, and
horses, as they would to chase a tiger. The poor fellow,
being discovered, took refuge in a tree; where he
was deliberately shot by his pursuers.

In some of the West Indies, blood-hounds are employed
to hunt negroes; and this fact is the foundation of one
of the most painfully interesting scenes in Miss Martineau’s
Demerara. A writer by the name of Dallas
has the hardihood to assert that it is mere sophistry to
censure the practice of training dogs to devour men.
He asks, “Did not the Asiatics employ elephants in
war? If a man were bitten by a rabid dog, would he
hesitate to cut off the wounded part, in order to save his
life?”

It is said that when the first pack of blood-hounds
arrived in St Domingo, the white planters delivered to
them the first negro they found, merely by way of experiment;
and when they saw him immediately torn in
pieces, they were highly delighted to find the dogs so
well trained to their business.

Some authentic records of female cruelty would seem
perfectly incredible, were it not an established law of
our nature that tyranny becomes a habit, and the scenes of
suffering, often repeated, render the heart callous.

A young friend of mine, remarkable for the kindness
of his disposition and the courtesy of his manners, told
me that he was really alarmed at the change produced
in his character by a few months’ residence in the West
Indies. The family who owned the plantation were
absent, and he saw nothing around him but slaves; the
consequence was that he insensibly acquired a dictatorial
manner, and habitual disregard to the convenience
of his inferiors. The candid admonition of a friend
made him aware of this, and his natural amiability was
restored.

3(1)r 25

The ladies who remove from the free States into the
slave-holding ones almost invariably write that the sight
of slavery was at first exceedingly painful; but that they
soon become habituated to it; and after a while, they are
very apt to vindicate the system, upon the ground that it is
extremely convenient to have such submissive servants.
This reason was actually given by a lady of my acquaintance,
who is considered an unusually fervent Christian.
Yet Christianity expressly teaches us to love our neighbor
as ourselves. This shows how dangerous it is,
for even the best of us, to become “accustomed” to what is
wrong.

A judicious and benevolent friend lately told me the
story of one of her relatives, who married a slave owner,
and removed to his plantation. The lady in question
was considered very amiable, and had a serene, affectionate
expression of countenance. After several years’
residence among her slaves, she visited New England.
“Her history was written in her face,” said my friend;
“its expression had changes into that of a fiend. She
brought but few slaves with her; and those few were of
course compelled to perform additional labor. One
faithful negro woman nursed the twins of her mistress,
and did all the washing, ironing, and scouring. If, after
a sleepless night with the restless babies (driven from the
bosom of their own mother,) she performed her toilsome
avocations with diminished activity, her mistress, with
her own lady-like hands, applied the cow-skin, and the
neighborhood resounded with the cries of her victim.
The instrument of punishment was actually kept hanging
in the entry, to the no small disgust of her New
England visitors. For my part,” continued my friend,
“I did not try to be polite to her; for I was not hypocrite
enough to conceal my indignation.”

The following occured near Natchez, and was told to
me by a highly intelligent man, who, being a diplomatist
and a courtier, was very likely to make the best of national
evils; A planter had occasion to send a female
slave some distance on an errand. She did not return so
soon as he expected, and he grew angry. At last he gave
orders that she should be severely whipped when she came 3 3(1)v 26
back. When the poor creature arrived, she pleaded for
mercy, saying she had been so very ill, that she was
obliged to rest in the fields; but she was ordered to
receive another dozen of lashes, for having had the impudence
to speak. She died at the whipping post; nor
did she perish alone — a new born baby died with her.
The gentleman who told me this fact, witnessed the poor
creature’s funeral. It is true, the master was universally
blamed and shunned for the cruel deed; but the
laws were powerless.

I shall be told that such examples as these are of rare
occurence; and I have no doubt that instances of excessive
severity are far from being common. I believe
that a large proportion of masters are as kind to their
slaves as they can be, consistently with keeping them in
bondage; but it must be allowed that this, to make the
best of it, is very stinted kindness. And let it never be
forgotten that the negro’s fate depends entirely on the
character of his master; and it is a mere matter of
chance whether he fall into merciful or unmerciful hands;
his happiness, nay, his very life, depends on chance.

The slave owners are always telling us that the accounts
of slave misery are abominably exaggerated; and
their plea is supported by many individuals, who seem to
think that charity was made to cover sins, not to cure
them. But without listening to the zealous opposers of
slavery, we shall find in the judicial reports of the Southern
States, and in the ordinary details of their newspapers,
more than enough to startle us; besides, we must
not forget that where one instance of cruelty comes to
our knowledge, hundreds are kept secret; and the more
public attention is awakened to the subject, the more
caution will be used in this respect.

Why should we be deceived by the sophistry of those
whose interest it is to gloss over iniquity, and who from
long habit have learned to believe that it is no iniquity?
It is a very simple process to judge rightly in this matter.
Just ask yourself the question where you could find a set
of men, in whose power you would be willing to place
yourself, if the laws allowed them to sin against you with
impunity?

3(2)r 27

But it is urged that it is the interest of planters to
treat their slaves well. This argument no doubt has
some force; and it is the poor negro’s only security.
But it is likewise the interest of men to treat their cattle
kindly; yet we see that passion and short-sighted avarice
do overcome the strongest motives of interest. Cattle
are beat mercifully, sometimes unto death; they are
ruined by being over-worked; weakened by want of
sufficient food; and so forth. Besides, it is sometimes
directly for the interest of the planter to work his slaves
beyond their strength. When there is a sudden rise in
the prices of sugar, a certain amount of labor in a given
time is of more consequence to the owner of a plantation,
than the price of several slaves; he can well afford
to waste a few lives. This is no idle hypothesis — such
calculations are gravely and openly made by planters.
Hence, it is the slave’s prayer that sugars may be cheap.
When the negro is old, or feeble from incurable disease,
is it his master’s interest to feed him well, and clothe him
comforably? Certainly not: it then becomes desirable
to get rid of the human brute as soon as convenient.
It is a common remark, that it is not quite safe, in most
cases, for even parents to be entirely dependent on the
generosity of their children; and if human nature be
such, what has the slave to expect, when he becomes a
mere bill of expense?

It is a common retort to say that New Englanders,
who go to the South, soon learn to patronize the system
they have considered so abominable, and often become
proverbial for their severity. I have not the least doubt
of the fact; for slavery contaminates all that comes
within its influence. It would be very absurd to imagine
that the inhabitants of one State are worse than the inhabitants
of another, unless some peculiar circumstances,
of universal influence, tend to make them so. Human
nature is everywhere the same; but developed differently,
by different incitements and temptations. It is the
business of wise legislation to discover what influences
are most productive of good, and the least conducive to
evil. If we were educated at the South, we should no
doubt vindicate slavery, and inherit as a birthright all 3(2)v 28
the evils it engrafts upon the character. If they lived on
our rocky soil, and under our inclement skies, their
shrewdness would sometimes border upon knavery, and
their frugality sometimes degenerate into parsimony.
We both have our virtues, and our faults, induced by the
influences under which we live, and, of course, totally
different in their character. Our defects are bad enough;
but they cannot, like slavery, affect the destiny and rights
of millions.

All this mutual recrimination about horse-jockeys,
gamblers, tin-pedlers, and venders of wooden nutmegs,
is quite unworthy of a great nation. Instead of calmly
examining this important subject on the plain grounds of
justice and humanity, we allow it to degenerate into a
mere question of sectional pride and vanity. [Pardon
the Americanism, would we had less use for the word!]
It is the system, not the men, on which we ought to bestow
the full measure of abhorrence. If we were willing
to forget ourselves, and could, like true republicans,
prefer the common good to all other considerations, there
would not be a slave in the United States, at the end of
half a century.

The arguments in support of slavery are all hollow
and deceptive, though frequently very specious. No one
thinks of finding a foundation for the system in the principles
of truth and justice; and the unavoidable result
is, that even in policy it is unsound. The monstrous
fabric rests on the mere appearance of present expediency;
while, in fact, all its tendencies, individual and
national, present and remote, are highly injurious to the
true interests of the country. The slave owner will not
believe this. The stronger the evidence against his favorite
theories, the more strenuously he defends them.
It has been widely said, “Honesty is the best policy; but
policy without honesty never finds that out.”

I hope none will be so literal as to suppose I intend to
say that no planter can be honest, in the common acceptation
of that term. I simply mean that all who ground
their arguments in policy, and not in duty and plain
truth, are really blind to the highest and best interests of
man.

3(3)r 29

Among other apologies for slavery, it has been asserted
that the Bible does not forbid it. Neither does it
forbid the counterfeiting of a bank-bill. It is the spirit
of the Holy Word, not its particular expressions, which
must be a rule for our conduct. How can slavery be
reconciled with the maxim, “Do unto others, as ye would
that others should do unto you”? Does not the command,
“Thou shalt not steal,” prohibit kidnapping?
And how does whipping men to death agree with the
injunction, “Thou shalt do no murder”? Are we not
told “to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the
heavy burdens, to let the oppressed go free, and to break
every yoke”? It was a Jewish law that he who stole a
man, or sold him, or he in whose hand the stolen man
was found, should suffer death; and he in whose house a
fugitive slave sought an asylum was forbidden to give
him up to his master. Modern slavery is so unlike Hebrew
servitude, and its regulations are so diametrically
opposed to the rules of the Gospel, which came to bring
deliverance to the captive, that it is idle to dwell upon
this point. The advocates of this system seek for arguments
in the history of every age and nation; but the
fact is, negro slavery is totally different from any other
form of bondage that ever existed; and if it were not so,
are we to copy the evils of bad governments and benighted
ages?

The difficulty of subduing slavery, on account of the
great number of interests which become united in it, and
the prodigious strength of the selfish passions enlisted in
its support, is by no means its least alarming feature.
This Hydra has ten thousand heads, every one of which
will bite or growl, when the broad daylight of truth lays
open the secrets of its hideous den.

I shall perhaps be asked why I have said so much
about the slave trade, since it was long ago abolished in
this country? There are several good reasons for it. In
the first place, it is a part of the system; for if there
were no slaves, there could be no slave trade; and while
there are slaves, the slave trade will continue. In the
next place, the trade is still briskly carried on in Africa,
and slaves are smuggled into these States through the 3* 3(3)v 30
Spanish colonies. In the third place, a very extensive internal
slave trade is carried on in this country. The
breeding of negro cattle for the foreign markets, (of
Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, Arkansas, and Missouri,)
is a very lucrative branch of business. Whole coffles of
them, chained and manacled, are driven through our
Capital on their way to auction. Foreigners, particularly
those who come here with enthusiastic ideas of
American freedom, are amazed and disgusted at the
sight.Open note a07-rota See the second volume of Stuart’s Three Years in North
America. Instead of being angry at such truths, it would be wise
to profit by them. A troop of slaves once passed through Washington
on the --07-04fourth of July, while drums were beating,
and standards flying. One of the captive negroes raised
his hand, loaded with irons, and waving it toward the
starry flag, sung with a smile of bitter irony, “Hail Columbia!
‘happy’ land!”

In the summer of 18221822, a co[Gap in transcription—three to five charactersflawed-reproduction] of slaves, driven
through Kentucky, was met by the Rev. James H.
Dickey, just before it entered Paris. He describes it
thus: “About forty black men were chained together;
each of them was handcuffed, and they were arranged
rank and file. A chain, perhaps forty feet long, was
stretched between the two ranks, to which short chains
were joined, connected with the hand-cuffs. Behind
them were about thirty women, tied hand to hand. Every
countenance wore a solemn sadness; and the dismal
silence of despair was only broken by the sound of two
violins. Yes — as if to add insult to unjury, the foremost
couple were furnished with a violin apiece; the
second couple were ornamented with cockades; while
near the centre our national standard was carried by
hands literally in chains. I may have mistaken some of
the punctilios of the arrangement, for my very soul was
sick. My landlady was sister to the man who owned
the drove; and from her I learned that he had, a few
days previous, bought a negro woman, who refused to go
with him. A blow on the side of her head with the butt
of his whip, soon brought her to the ground; he then 3(4)r 31
tied her, and carried her off. Besides those I saw, about
thirty negroes, destined for the New Orleans market,
were shut up in the Paris jail, for safe keeping.”

But Washington is the great emporium of the internal
slave trade! The United States jail a perfect store-
house for slave merchants; and some of the taverns may
be seen so crowded with negro captives that they have
scarcely room to stretch themselves on the floor to sleep.
Judge Morrel, in his charge to the Grand Jury at Washington,
in 18161816, earnestly called their attention to this
subject. He said, “the frequency with which the streets
of the city had been crowded with manacled captives,
sometimes even on the Sabbath, could not fail to shock
the feelings of all humane persons; that it was repugnant
to the spirit of our political institutions, and the
rights of men; and he believed it was calculated to impair
the public morals, by familiarizing scenes of cruelty
to the minds of youth.”

A free man of color is in constant danger of being
seized and carried off by these slave dealers. Mr
Cooper, a Representative in Congress from Delaware,
told Dr Torrey of Philadelphia, that he was often afraid to
send his servants out in the evening, lest they should be
encountered by kidnappers. Wherever these notorious
slave jockeys appear in our Southern States, the free people
of color hide themselves, as they are obliged to do on
the coast of Africa.

The following is the testimony of Doctor Torrey,
of Philadelphia, published in 18171817:

“To enumerate all the horrid and aggravating instances
of man-stealing, which are known to have occurred
in the state of Delaware, within the recollection of many
of the citizens of that State, would require a volume. In
many cases, whole families of free colored people have
been attacked in the night, beaten nearly to death with
clubs, gagged and bound, and dragged into distant and
hopeless captivity, leaving no traces behind, except the
blood from their wounds. During the last winter, the house of a free black
family was broken open, and its defenceless inhabitants
treated in the manner just mentioned, except, that 3(4)v 32
the mother escaped from their merciless grasp, while on
their way to the state of Maryland. The plunderers, of
whom there were nearly half a dozen, conveyed their
prey upon horses; and the woman being placed on one
of the horses, behind, improved an opportunity, as they
were passing a house, and sprang off. Not daring to
pursue her, they proceeded on, leaving her youngest
child a little farther along, by the side of the road, in
expectation, it is supposed, that its cries would attract the
mother; but she prudently waited until morning, and
recovered it again in safety. I consider myself more fully warranted in particularizing
this fact, from the circumstances of having been at
Newcastle, at the time that the woman was brought
with her child, before the grand jury, for examination;
and of having seen several of the persons against whom
bills of indictment were found, on the charge of being
engaged in the perpetration of the outrage; and
also that one or two of them were the same who
were accused of assisting in seizing and carrying off
another woman and child whom I discovered at Washington.
A monster in human shape, was detected in
the city of Philadelphia, pursuing the occupation of
courting and marrying mulatto women, and selling
them as slaves. In his last attempt of this kind,
the fact having come to the knowledge of the African
population of this city, a mob was immediately
collected, and he was only saved from being torn in
atoms, by being deposited in the city prison. They
have lately invented a method of attaining their object,
through the instrumentality of the laws: — Having
selected a suitable free colored person, to make a
pitch upon, the kidnapper employs a confederate, to
ascertain the distinguishing marks of his body; he
then claims and obtains him as a slave, before a magistrate,
by describing those marks, and proving the
truth of his assertions, by his well-instructed accomplice.
From the best information that I have had opportunities
to collect, in travelling by various routes through
the states of Delaware and Maryland, I am fully convinced 3(5)r 33
that there are, at this time, within the jurisdiction
of the United States, several thousands of
legally free people of color, toiling under the yoke of
involuntary servitude, and transmitting the same fate
to their posterity! If the probability of this fact could
be authenticated to the recognition of the Congress
of the United States, it is presumed that its members,
as agents of the constitution, and guardians of the
public liberty, would, without hesitation, devise means
for the restoration of those unhappy victims of violence
and avarice, to their freedom and constitutional personal
rights. The work, both from its nature and magnitude,
is impracticable to individuals, or benevolent
societies; besides, it is perfectly a national business,
and claims national interference, equally with the captivity
of our sailors in Algiers.”

It may indeed be said, in palliation of the internal
slave trade, that the horrors of the middle passage are
avoided. But still the amount of misery is very great.
Husbands and wives, parents and children, are rudely
torn from each other; — there can be no doubt of this
fact: advertisements are very common, in which a
mother and her children are offered either in a lot or
separately, as may suit the purchaser. In one of these
advertisements, I observed it stated that the youngest
child was about a year old.Open note a08-rota In Niles’s Register, vol. xxxv. page 4, I find the following:
“Dealing in slaves has become a large business. Establishments are
made at several places in Maryland and Virginia, at which they are
sold like cattle. These places are strongly built, and well supplied
with thumbscrews, gags, cow-skins, and other whips, oftentimes
bloody. But the laws permit the traffic, and it is suffered.”

The captives are driven by the whip, through toilsome
journeys, under a burning sun; their limbs fettered;
with nothing before them but the prospect of toil more
severe than that to which they have been accustomed.Open note a09-rota In the sugar-growing States the condition of the negro is much
more pitiable than where cotton is the staple commodity.

The disgrace of such scenes in the capital of our republic
cannot be otherwise than painful to every patriotic
mind; while they furnish materials for the most pungent 3(5)v 34
satire to other nations. A United States senator declared
that the sight of a drove of slaves was so insupportable
that he always avoided it when he could; and
an intelligent Scotchman said, when he first entered
Chesapeake Bay, and cast his eye along our coast, the
sight of the slaves brought his heart into his throat.
How can we help feeling a sense of shame, when we
read Moore’s contemptuous couplet, “The fustian flag that proudly waves, In splendid mockery, o’er a land of slaves”?
The lines would be harmless enough, if they were false;
the sting lies in their truth.

Finally, I have described some of the horrors of the
slave trade, because when our constitution was formed,
the government pledged itself not to abolish this traffic
until 18081808. We began our career of freedom by granting
a twenty years’ lease of iniquity — twenty years of
allowed invasion of other men’s rights — twenty years
of bloodshed, violence, and fraud! And this will be
told in our annals — this will be heard of to the end of
time!Open note a10-rota It ought to be remembered to the honor of Denmark that she
abolished the slave trade as early as 18031803.

Every man who buys a slave promotes this traffic, by
raising the value of the article; every man who owns a
slave, indirectly countenances it; every man who allows
that slavery is a lamentable “necessity”, contributes his
share to support it; and he, who votes for admitting a
slave-holding State into the Union, fearfully augments
the amount of this crime.

Chapter II.

Comparative View of Slavery, in Different Ages and
Nations.

Between ancient and modern slavery there is this
remarkable distinction — the former originated in motives
of humanity; the latter is dictated solely by avarice.
The ancients made slaves of captives taken in war, as
an amelioration of the original custom of indiscriminate
slaughter; the moderns attack defenceless people, without
any provocation, and steal them, for the express
purpose of making them slaves.

Modern slavery, indeed, in all its particulars, is more
odious than the ancient; and it is worthy of remark
that the condition of slaves has always been worse just
in proportion to the freedom enjoyed by their masters.
In Greece, none were so proud of liberty as the Spartans;
and they were a proverb among the neighboring
States for their severity to slaves. The slave code of the
Roman republic was rigid and tyrannical in the extreme;
and cruelties became so common and excessive, that the
emperors, in the latter days of Roman power, were
obliged to enact laws to restrain them. In the modern
world, England and America are the most conspicuous
for enlightened views of freedom, and bold vindication
of the equal rights of men; yet in these two countries 3(6)v 36
slave laws have been framed as bad as they were in Pagan,
iron-hearted Rome; and the customs are in some respects
more oppressive; —modern slavery unquestionably wears
its very worst aspect in the Colonies of England and the
United States of North America. I hardly know how
to decide their respective claims. My countrymen are
fond of preëminence, and I am afraid they deserve
it here — especially if we throw into the scale their
loud boasts of superiority over all the rest of the world
in civil and religious freedom. The slave codes of the
United States and of the British West Indies were originally
almost precisely the same; but their laws have
been growing milder and milder, while ours have increased
in severity. The British have the advantage
of us in this respect — they long ago dared to describe
the monster as it is; and they are now grappling with it,
with the overwhelming strength of a great nation’s concentrated
energies.—The Dutch, those sturdy old friends
of liberty, and the French, who have been stark mad for
freedom, rank next for the severity of their slave laws
and customs. The Spanish and Portuguese are milder
than either.

I will give a brief view of some of our own laws on
this subject; for the correctness of which, I refer the
reader to Stroud’s Sketch of the Slave Laws of the United
States of America. In the first place, we will inquire
upon what ground the negro slaves in this country are
claimed as property. Most of them are the descendants
of persons kidnapped on the coast of Africa, and
brought here while we were British Colonies; and as
the slave trade was openly sanctioned more than twenty
years after our acknowledged independence, in 17831783,
and as the traffic is still carried on by smugglers, there
are, no doubt, thousands of slaves, now living in the
United States, who were actually stolen from Africa.Open note a11-rota In the new slave States, there are a great many negroes, who
can speak no other language than some of the numerous African
dialects.

A provincial law of Maryland, enacted that any white
woman who married a negro slave should serve his master
during her husband’s lifetime, and that all their 4(1)r 37
children should be slaves. This law was not repealed
until the end of eighteen years, and it then continued in
full force with regard to those who had contracted such
marriages in the intermediate time; therefore the descendants
of white women so situated may be slaves unto
the present day. The doctrine of the common law is
that the offspring shall follow the condition of the father;
but the slave law (with the above temporary exception) reverses
the common law, and provides that children shall
follow the condition of the mother. Hence mulattoes
and their descendants are held in perpetual bondage,
though the father is a free white man. “Any person
whose maternal ancestor, even in the remotest degree of
distance, can be shown to have been a negro, Indian,
mulatto, or a mestizo, not free at the ime this law was
introduced, although the paternal ancestor at each successive
generation may have been a white free man, is
declared to be the subject of perpetual slavery.” Even
the code of Jamaica, is on this head, more liberal than
ours; by an express law, slavery ceases at the fourth degree
of distance from a negro ancestor: and in the other
British West Indies, the established custom is such, that
quadroons or mestizoes (as they call the second and
third degrees) are rarely seen in a state of slavery. Here,
neither law nor public opinion favors the mulatto descendants
of free white men. This furnishes a convenient
game to the slave-holder — it enables him to fill
his purse by means of his own vices; — the right to sell
one half of his children provides a fortune for the
remainder. Had the maxim of the common law been
allowed, — i. e. that the the offspring follows the condition
of the father, — the mulattoes, almost without exception,
would have been free, and thus the prodigious and alarming
increase of our slave population might have been
prevented. The great augmentation of the servile class
in the Southern States compared with the West India
colonies, has been thought to indicate a much milder
form of slavery; but there are other causes, which
tend to produce the result. There are much fewer white
men in the British West Indies than in our slave States;
hence the increase of the mulatto population is less rapid. 4 4(1)v 38
Here, the descendants of a colored mother never become
free; in the West Indies, they cease to be slaves in the
fourth generation, at farthest; and their posterity increases
the free colored class, instead of adding countless
links to the chain of bondage.

The manufacture of sugar is extremely toilsome, and
when driven hard, occasions a great waste of negro life;
this circumstance, together with the tropical climate of
the West Indies, furnish additional reasons for the disproportionate
increase of slaves between those islands
and our own country, where a comparatively small quantity
of sugar is cultivated.

It may excite surprise, that Indians and their offspring
are comprised in the doom of perpetual slavery; yet not
only is incidental mention of them as slaves to be met with
in the laws of most of the States of our confederacy, but
in one, at least, direct legislation may be cited to sanction
their enslavement. In Virginia, an act was passed, in
16791679, declaring that “for the ‘better encouragement of soldiers,’
whatever Indian prisoners were taken in a war, in
which the colony was then engaged, should be free purchase
to the soldiers taking them”: and in 16821682, it was
decreed that “all servants brought into Virginia, by sea
or land, not being Christians, whether negroes, Moors,
mulattoes, or Indians, (except Turks and Moors in
amity with Great Britain) and all Indians, which should
thereafter be sold by neighboring Indians, or any other
trafficking with us, as slaves, should be slaves to all
intents and purposes.” These laws ceased in 16911691;
but the descendants of all Indians sold in the intermediate
time are now among slaves.

In order to show the true aspect of slavery among us,
I will state distinct propositions, each supported by the
evidence of actually existing laws.

• 1.

  Slavery is hereditary and perpetual, to the last
  moment of the slave’s earthly existence, and to all
  his descendants, to the latest posterity.

• 2.

  The labor of the slave is compulsory and uncompensated;
  while the kind of labor, the amount of
  toil, and the time allowed for rest, are dictated solely
  by the master. No bargain is made, no wages given. 4(2)r 39
  A pure despotism governs the human brute; and even
  his covering and provender, both as to quantity and
  quality, depend entirely on the master’s discretion.

• 3.

  The slave being considered a personal chattel,
  may be sold, or pledged, or leased, at the will of his
  master. He may be exchanged for marketable commodities,
  or taken in execution for the debts, or taxes,
  either of a living, or a deceased master. Sold at
  auction, “either individually, or in lots, to suit the
  purchaser,” he may remain with his family, or be separated
  from them forever.

• 4.

  Slaves can make no contracts, and have no legal
  right to any property, real or personal. Their
  own honest earnings, and the legacies of friends belong,
  in point of law, to their masters.

• 5.

  Neither a slave, or free colored person can be a
  witness against any white or free man, in a court of
  justice, however atrocious may have been the crimes
  they have seen him commit: but they may give testimony
  against a fellow-slave, or free colored man, even
  in cases affecting life.

• 6.

  The slave may be punished at his master’s discretion
  — without trial — without any means of legal
  redress, — whether his offence be real, or imaginary;
  and the master can transfer the same despotic power
  to any person, or persons, he may choose to appoint.

• 7.

  The slave is not allowed to resist any free man
  under any circumstances: his only safety consists in the
  fact that his owner may bring suit, and recover, the
  price of his body, in case his life is taken, or his
  limbs rendered unfit for labor.

• 8.

  Slaves cannot redeem themselves, or obtain a
  change of masters, though cruel treatment may have
  rendered such a change necessary for their personal
  safety.

• 9.

  The slave is entirely unprotected in his domestic
  relations.

• 10.

  The laws greatly obstruct the manumission of
  slaves, even where the master is willing to enfranchise
  them.

• 11.

  The operation of the laws tends to deprive
  slaves of religious instruction and consolation.
4(2)v 40

• 12.

  The whole power of the laws is exerted to
  keep slaves in a state of the lowest ignorance.

• 13.

  There is in this country a monstrous inequality
  of law and right. What is a trifling fault in the
  white man, is considered highly criminal in the slave;
  the same offences which cost a white man a few dollars
  only, are punished in the negro with death.

• 14.

  The laws operate most oppressively upon free
  people of color.

Proposition 1. — Slavery hereditary and perpetual.

In Maryland the following act was passed in 17151715, and
is still in force: “All negroes and other slaves, already
imported, or hereafter to be imported into this province,
and all children now born, or hereafter to be born, of
such negroes and slaves, shall be slaves during their natural
lives.” The law of South Carolina is, “All negroes,
Indians, (free Indians in amity with this government,
and negroes, mulattoes, and mestizoes, who are
now free, excepted,) mulattoes or mestizoes, who now are,
or shall hereafter be in this province, and all their issue
born, or to be born, shall be and remain forever hereafter
absolute slaves, and shall follow the condition of the
mother.” Laws similar exist in Virginia, Georgia, Mississippi,
and Louisiana. In consequence of these laws,
people so nearly white as not to be distinguished from
Europeans, may be, and have been, legally claimed as
slaves.

Prop. 2. — Labor compulsory and uncompensated, &c.

In most of the slave States the law is silent on this
subject; but that it is the established custom is proved
by laws restraining the excessive abuse of this power, in
some of the States. Thus in one State there is a fine of
ten shillings, in another of two dollars, for making slaves
labor on Sunday, unless it be in works of absolute necessity,
or the necessary occasions of the family. There
is likewise a law which provides that “any master, who
withholds proper sustenance, or clothing, from his slaves,
or overworks them, so as to injure their health, shall
upon sufficient information” [here lies the rub] “being laid
before the grand jury, be by said jury presented; whereupon 4(3)r 41
it shall be the duty of the attorney, or solicitor
general, to prosecute said owners, who, on conviction
shall be sentenced to pay a fine, or be imprisoned, or
both, at the discretion of the court.”

The negro act of South Carolina contains the following
language: “Whereas many owners of slaves, and
others, who have the care, management, and overseeing
of slaves, do confine them so closely to hard labor, that
they have not sufficient time for natural rest; be it therefore
enacted, that if any owner of slaves, or others having
the care, &c., shall put such slaves to labor more
than fifteen hours in twentyfour, from the --03-25twentyfifth of
March to the --09-25twentyfifth of September; or more than
fourteen hours in twentyfour hours from the --09-25twentyfifth
of September to the --03-25twentyfifth of March, any such person
shall forfeit a sum of money not exceeding twenty
pounds, nor under five pounds, current money, for every
time, he, she, or they, shall offend therein, at the discretion
of the justice before whom complaint shall be
made.”

In Louisiana it is enacted, that “the slaves shall be
allowed half an hour for breakfast, during the whole
year; from the --05-01first of May to the --11-01first of November,
they shall be allowed two hours for dinner; and from
the --11-01first of November to the --05-01first of May, one hour and
a half for dinner: provided, however, that the owners,
who will themselves take the touble of having the meals
of their slaves prepared, be, and they are hereby authorized
to abridge, by half an hour a day, the time fixed for
their rest.”

All these laws, apparently for the protection of the
slave, are rendered perfectly null and void, by the fact,
that the testimony of a negro or mulatto is never taken
against a white man. If a slave be found toiling in the
field on the Sabbath, who can prove that his master commanded
him to do it?

The law of Louisiana stipulates that a slave shall have
one linen shirt,Open note a12-rota This shirt is usually made of a coarse kind of bagging. and a pair of pantaloons for the summer,
and one linen shirt and a woollen great coat and 4* 4(3)v 42
pantaloons for the winter; and for food, one pint of salt,
and a barrel of Indian corn, rice, or beans, every month.
In North Carolina, the law decides that a quart of corn
per day is sufficient. But, if the slave does not receive
this poor allowance, who can prove the fact. The withholding
of proper sustenance is absolutely incapable
of proof, unless the evidence of the sufferer himself be
allowed; and the law, as if determined to obstruct the
administration of justice, permits the master to exculpate
himself by an oath that the charges against him are
false. Clothing may, indeed, be ascertained by inspection;
but who is likely to involve himself in quarrels
with a white master because a poor negro receives a few
rags less than the law provides? I apprehend that a person
notorious for such gratuitous acts of kindness, would
have little peace or safety, in any slave-holding country.

If a negro be compelled to toil night and day, (as it is
said they sometimes are,Open note a13-rota See Western Review, No. 2, on the Agriculture of Louisiana. at the season of sugar-making)
who is to prove that he works more than his fourteen or
fifteen hours? No slave can be a witness for himself, or
for his fellow-slaves; and should a white man happen to
know the fact, there are ninetynine chances out of a
hundred, that he will deem it prudent to be silent. And
here I would remark that even in the island of Jamaica,
where the laws have given a most shocking license to
cruelty, — even in Jamaica, the slave is compelled to
work but ten hours in the day, beside having many holidays
allowed him. In Maryland, Virginia, Georgia,
Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, the convicts condemnded
to hard labor in the penitentiaries, are required by law to
toil only from eight to ten hours a day, according to the
season of the year; yet the law providing that the innocent
slave should labor but fourteen or fifteen hours a
day, professes to have been made as a merciful amelioration
of his lot! — In Rome, the slaves had a yearly festival
called the Saturnalia, during which they were released
from toil, changed places with their masters, and indulged
in unbounded merriment; at first it lasted but one
day; but its duration afterwards extended to two, three, 4(4)r 43
four, and five days in succession. We have no Saturnalia
here — unless we choose thus to designate a coffle
of slaves, on the --07-04fourth of July, rattling their chains to the
sound of a violin, and carrying the banner of freedom
in hands loaded with irons.

In Georgia, “The inferior courts of the several counties
on receiving information on oath of any infirm slave
or slaves, being in a suffering condition, from the neglect
of the owner or owners, can make particular inquiries
into the situation of such slaves, and render such relief
as they think proper. And the said courts may sue for
and recover from the owner of such slaves the amount
appropriated for their relief.” The information must, in
the first place, be given by a white man upon oath; and
of whom must the “particular inquiries” be made? Not
of the slave, nor of his companions, — for their evidence
goes for nothing; and would a master, capable of starving
an aged slave, be likely to confess the whole truth
about it? The judges of the inferior courts, if from
defect of evidence, or any other cause, they are unable
to prove that relief was absolutely needed, must pay all
the expenses from their own private purses. Are there
many, think you, so desperately enamored of justice, as
to take all this trouble, and incur all this risk, for a starving
slave?

Prop. 3. — Slaves considered personal chattels, liable
to be sold, pledged, &c.

The advertisements in the Southern papers furnish
a continued proof of this; it is, therefore, unnecessary
to go into the details of evidence.Open note a14-rota A white man engaged in a disturbance was accompanied by
three or four slaves; his counsel contended that there were not
persons enough in the affair to constitute a riot, because the slaves
were mere chattels in the eye of the law. It was however decided
that when liable to the punishment of the law, they were persons. The power to separate
mothers and children, husbands and wives, is exercised
only in the British West Indies, and the “republic”
of the United States!

In Louisiana there is indeed a humane provision in
this respect: “If at a public sale of slaves, there happen
to be some who are disabled through old age or otherwise, 4(4)v 44
and who have children, such slaves shall not be
sold but with such of his or of her children, whom he or
she may think proper to go with.” But though parents
cannot be sold apart from their children, without their
consent, yet the master may keep the parents and sell
the children, if he chooses; in which case the separation
is of course equally painful. — “By the Code Noir,
of Louis the Fourteenth, husbands and wives, parents and
children are not allowed to be sold separately. If sales
contrary to this regulation are made by process of law,
under seizure for debts, such sales are declared void;
but if such sales are made voluntarily on the part of the
owner, a wiser remedy is given — the wife, or husband,
children, or parent retained by the seller may be claimed
by the purchaser, without any additional price; and thus
the separated family may be re-united again. The most
solemn agreement between the parties contrary to this
rule has been adjudged void.” In the Spanish, Portuguese
and French colonies, plantation slaves are considered
real estate, attached to the soil their cultivate, and
of course not liable to be torn from their homes whenever
the master chooses to sell them; neither can they
be seized or sold by their master’s creditors.

The following quotation shows how the citizens of this
country bear comparison with men called savages. A
recent traveller in East Florida says: “Another trait in
the character of the Seminole Indians, is their great indulgence
to their slaves. The greatest pressure of hunger
or thirst never occasions them to impose onerous
labors on the negroes, or to dispose of them, though
tempted by high offers, if the latter are unwilling to be
sold.”

Prop. 4. — Slaves can have no legal claim to any property.

The civil code of Louisiana declares: “All that a
slave possesses belongs to his master — he possesses
nothing of his own, except his peculium, that is to say,
the sum of money or movable estate, which his master
chances he should possess.” — “Slaves are incapable of
inheriting or transmitting property.” — “Slaves cannot
dispose of, or receive, by donation, unless they have 4(5)r 45
been enfranchised conformably to law, or are expressly
enfranchised by the act, by which the donation is made
to them.”

In South Carolina “it is not lawful for any slave to
buy, sell, trade, &c. without a license from his owner;
nor shall any slave be allowed to keep any boat or canoe,
for his own benedit, or raise any horses, cattle, sheep or
hogs, under pain of forfeiting all the goods, boats, canoes,
horses, &c. &c., and it shall be lawful for any person
to seize and take away from any slave all such goods,
boats, &c. and to deliver the same into the hands of the
nearest justice of the peace; and if the said justice be
satisfied that such seizure has been made according to
law, he shall order the goods to be sold at public outcry;
one half of the moneys arising from the sale to go to the
State, and the other half to him or them that sue for the
same.” In North Carolina there is a similar law; but
half the proceeds of the sale goes to the county poor, and
half to the informer.

In Georgia, a fine of thirty dollars a week is imposed
upon any master who allows his slave to hire himself out
for his own benefit. In Virginia, if a master permit his
slave to hire himself out, he is subject to a fine, from
ten to twenty dollars; and it is lawful for any person,
and the duty of the Sheriff, to apprehend the slave. In
Maryland, the master, by a similar offence, except during
twenty days at harvest time, incurs a penalty of twenty
dollars per month.

In Mississippi, if a master allow his slave to cultivate
cotton for his own use, he incurs a fine of fifty dollars;
and if he license his slave to trade on his own account,
he forfeits fifty dollars for each and every offence. Any
person trading with a slave forfeits four times the value
of the article purchased; and if unable to pay, he receives
thirynine lashes, and pays the cost.

Among the Romans, the Grecians, and the ancient
Germans, slaves were permitted to acquire and enjoy
property of considerable value, as their own. This property
was called the slave’s peculium; and “the many
anxious provisions of the Imperial Code on the subject
plainly show the general extent and importance of such 4(5)v 46
acquisitions.”—“The Roman slave was also empowered
by law to enter into commercial and other contracts, by
which the master was bound, to the extent of the value
of the slave’s peculium.” — “The Grecian slaves had
also their peculium; and were rich enough to make
periodical presents to their masters, as well as often to
purchase their freedom.”

“The Helots of Sparta were so far from being destitute
of property, or of legal powers necessary to its
acquisition, that they were farmers of the lands of their
masters, at low fixed rents, which the proprietor could
not raise without dishonor.”

“In our own day, the Polish slaves, prior to any
recent alleviations of their lot, were not only allowed to
hold property, but endowed with it by their lords.”—“In
the Spanish and Portuguese colonies, the money and
effects, which a slave acquires, by his labor at times set
apart for his own use, or by any other honest means, are
legally his own, and cannot be seized by the master.” —
“In Africa, slaves may acquire extensive property,
which their sable masters cannot take away. In New
Calabar, there is a man named Amachree, who has more
influence and wealth than all the rest of the community,
though he himself is a purchased slave, brought from the
Braspan country; he has offered the price of a hundred
slaves for his freedom; but according to the laws of the
country he cannot obtain it, though his master, who is a
poor and obscure individual, would gladly let him have it.”

Among the Jews, a servant, or slave, often filled the
highest offices of honor and profit, connected with the
family. Indeed slavery among this ancient people was
in its mildest, patriarchal form; and the same character
is now stamped upon the domestic slavery of Africa. St
Paul says, “The heir, as long as he is a child, differeth
nothing from a servant,” [the Hebrew word translated
“servant” means slave] “though he be lord of all.” Gal. iv. 1.
Again: “A wise servant shall have rule over a son that
causeth shame, and shall have part of the inheritance
among the brethren.” Proverbs, xvii. 2. The wealthy
patriarch Abraham, before the birth of Isaac, designed
to make his head servant, Eleazer of Damascus, his heir.

4(6)r 47

Prop. 5. — No colored man can be evidence against a
white man, &c.

This is an almost universal rule of slave law. The
advocates of slavery seem to regard it as a necessary
consequence of the system, which neither admits of concealment,
nor needs it. “In one or two of our states
this rule is founded upon usage; in others it is sanctioned
by express legislation.”

So long as this rule is acted upon, it is very plain, that
all regulations made for the protection of the slave are
perfectly useless; — however grievous his wrongs, they
cannot be proved. The master is merely obliged to take
the precaution not to starve, or mangle, or murder his
negroes, in the presence of a white man. No matter if
five hundred colored people be present, they cannot testify
to the fact. Blackstone remarks, that “rights would
be declared vain, and in vain directed to be observed, if
there were no method of recovering and asserting those
rights, when wrongfully withheld, or invaded.”

Stephens says: “It seems to result from the brief and
general accounts which we have of the law of the Spanish
and Portuguese settlements, though I find it nowhere
expressly noticed, that slaves there are not, in all cases
at least, incompetent witnesses. But even in the
French Windward Islands, the evidence of negro slaves
was admitted against all free persons, the master only
excepted; and that in criminal as well as in civil cases,
where the testimony of white people could not be found
to establish the facts in dispute. The Code Noir merely
allowed a slave’s testimony to be heard by the judge,
as a suggestion which might throw light on other evidence,
without amounting of itself to any degree of legal
proof. But the Sovereign Council of Martinique, humbly
represented to his majesty that great inconveniences
might result from the execution of this law, by the impunity
of many crimes, which could not be proved otherwise
than by the testimony of slaves; and they prayed that such
evidence might be received in all cases in which there
should not be sufficient proof by free witnesses. In
consequence of this, the article in question was varied
so far as to admit the testimony of slaves, when white
witnesses were wanting, except against their masters.”

4(6)v 48

Prop. 6. — The master has absolute power to punish a
slave, &c.

Stroud says, “There was a time in many, if not in all
the slave holding districts of our country, when the
murder of a slave was followed by a pecuniary fine only.
In one State, the change of the law in this respect has
been very recent. At the present date (18271827) I am
happy to say the wilful, malicious, deliberate murder of
a slave, by whomsoever perpetrated, is declared to be
punishable with death in every State. The evil is not
that the laws sanction crime, but that they do not punish
it. And this arises chiefly, if not solely, from the exclusion
of the testimony, on the trial of a white person, of
all those who are not white.”

“The conflicting influences of humanity and prejudice
are strangely contrasted in the law of North Carolina
on this subject. An act passed in 17981798, runs thus:
‘Whereas by another act of assembly, passed in the
year 17741774, the killing of a slave, however wanton, cruel,
and deliberate, is only punishable in the first instance
by imprisonment, and paying the value thereof to the
owner, which distinction of criminality between the murder
of a white person and one who is equally a human
creature, but merely of a different complexion, is disgraceful
to humanity, and degrading in the highest degree to
the laws and principles of a free Christian, and enlightened
country, be it enacted, &c. that if any person shall
hereafter be guilty of wilfully and maliciously killing a
slave, such offenders shall, upon the first conviction
thereof, be adjudged guilty of murder, and shall suffer
the same punishment as if he had killed a free man;
Provided always, this act shall not extend to the person
killing a slave outlawed by virtue of any act of assembly
of this state, or to any slave in the act of resistanceOpen note a15-rota “It has been judicially determined that it is justifiable to kill a
slave, resisting, or offering to resist his master, by force.” — Stroud. to
his lawful owner or master, or to any slave dying under
moderate correction.’”

In the laws of Tennessee and Georgia, there is a similar
provizo. Where could such a monstrous anomaly be 5(1)r 49
found, save in a code of slave laws! Die of moderate
punishment!! Truly, this is an unveiling of consciences!

“To set the matter in its proper light, it may be added
that a proclamation of outlawryOpen note a16-rota “The outlawry of a slave is not, I believe, an unusual occurrence.
Very recently, a particular account was given of the killing
of a black man, not charged with any offence by a person in pursuit
of an outlawed slave; owing as it was stated, to the person killed
not answering a call made by his pursuers. Whether the call was
heard or not, of course could not be ascertained, nor did it appear to
have excited any inquiry.”— Stroud. against a slave is authorized,
whenever he runs away from his master, conceals
himself in some obscure retreat, and to sustain
life, kills a hog, or some animal of the cattle kind!

A pecuniary mulet was the only restraint upon the
willful murder of a slave, from the year 17401740 to 18211821, a
period of more than eighty years. I find in the case of
The State vs. M‘Gee, 1 Bay’s Reports, 164. it is said
incidentally by Messrs Pinckney and Ford, counsel for
the State, that the frequency of the offence was owing
to the nature of the punishment. This was said in the
public court-house by men of great respectability; nevertheless,
thirty years elapsed before a change of the law
was effected. So far as I have been able to learn, the
following section has disgraced the statute-book of South
Carolina from the year 17401740 to the present hour: ‘In
case any person shall wilfully cut out the tongue, put
out the eye, cruelly scald, burn, or deprive any slave of
any limb, or member, or shall inflict any other cruel
punishment, — otherwise than by whipping, or beating,
with a horsewhip, cowskin, switch, or small stick, or by
putting irons on, or confining, or imprisoning such
slave, — every such person shall for every such offence,
forfeit the sum of one hundred pounds, current money.’
Here is direct legislation to sanction beating without
limit, with horsewhip or cowskin, — the application of
irons to the human body, — and perpetual incarceration
in a dungeon, according to the will of the master; and
the mutilation of limbs is paid by a trifling penalty!

The revised code of Louisiana declares: ‘The slave
is entirely subject to the will of the master, who may 5 5(1)v 50
correct and chastise him, though not with unusual rigor,
nor so as to maim or mutilate him, or to expose him to
the danger of loss of life, or to cause his death.’” Who
shall decide what punishment is “unusual”?

In Missouri, if a slave refuses to obey his or her master,
mistress, overseer, or employer, in any lawful commands,
such slaves may be committed to the county jail, there
to remain as long as his owner pleases.

In some of the States there are indeed restraining
laws; but they are completely ineffectual from the difficulty
of obtaining the evidence of white men.

“The same despotic power can be exerted by the attorney,
manager, driver, or any other person who is, for the
time being, placed over the slave by order of the owner,
or his delegates. The following is the language of the
Louisiana code; and it represents the established customs
of all the slave holding States: ‘The condition
of a slave being merely a passive one, his subordination
to his master, and to all who represent him, is not susceptible
of any modification, or restriction, [except in
what can incite the slave to the commission of crime]
in such manner, that he owes to his master, and to all his
family a respect without bounds, and an absolute obedience;
and he is consequently to execute all the orders,
which he receives from his said master, or from them.’”

What chance of mercy the slave has from the generality
of overseers, may be conjectured from the following
testimony given by a distinguished Virginian: Mr Wirt,
in his Life of Patrick Henry, speaking of the different
classes in Virginia, says: “Last and lowest, a feculum
of beings called overseers — the most abject, degraded,
unprincipled race — always cap in hand to the Dons who
employed them, and furnishing materials for the exercise
of their pride, insolence, and spirit of domination.”

The Gentoo code, the most ancient in the world, allowed
a wife, a son, apupil, a younger brother, or a slave to
be whipped with a lash, or bamboo twig, in such a manner
as not to occasion any dangerous hurt; and whoever
transgressed the rule, suffered the punishment of a thief.
In this case, the slave and other members of the family
were equally protected.

5(2)r 51

The Mosaic law was as follows: “If a man smite
the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perrish,
he shall let him go free for his eye’s sake. And if he
smite out his man servant’s tooth, or his maid servant’s
tooth, he shall let him go free for his tooth’s sake.” Exodus,
xxi. 26, 27.

Prop. 7. — The slave never allowed to resist a white
man.

It is enacted in Georgia, “If any slave shall presume
to strike any white man, such slave, upon trial and conviction
before the justice, shall for the first offence, suffer
such punishment as the said justice thinks fit, not
extending to life or limb; and for the second offence,
death.” It is the same in South Carolina, excepting that
death is there the punishment of the third offence. —
However wanton and dangerous the attack upon the
slave may be, he must submit; there is only one proviso
— he may be excused for striking in defence of his
master, overseer, &c. and of their property. In Maryland,
a colored man, even if he be free, may have his
ears cropped for striking a white man. In Kentucky, it
is enacted that “if any negro, mulatto, or Indian, bond
or free, shall at any time lift his or her hand, in opposition
to any person not colored, they shall, the offence being
proved before a justice of the peace, receive thirty lashes
on his or her bare back, well laid on.” There is a
ridiculous gravity in the following section of a law in
Louisiana: “Free people of color ought never to insult
or strike white people, nor presume to conceive themselves
equal to the whites; but on the contrary, they
ought to yield to them on every occasion, and never
speak or answer them but with respect, under the penalty
of imprisonment, according to the nature of the offence.”

Such laws are a positive inducement to violent and vicious
white men to oppress and injure people of color.
In this point of view, a negro becomes the slave of every
white man in the community. The brutal drunkard, or
the ferocious madman, can beat, rob, and mangle him
with perfect impunity. Dr Torrey, in his Portraiture of 5(2)v 52
Domestic Slavery, relates an affecting anecdote, which
happened near Washington. A free negro walking
along the road, was set upon by two intoxicated ruffians
on horseback, who, without any provocation, began to
torture him for amusement. One of them tied him to
the tail of his horse, and thus dragged him along, while
the other followed, applying the lash. The poor fellow
died by the road-side, in consequence of this treatment.

The owner may prosecute when a slave is rendered
unfit for labor, by personal violence; and in the Reports
of these cases many painful facts come to light which
would otherwise have remained forever unknown. See
Judicial Reports.

Prop. 8. — Slaves cannot redeem themselves or change
masters.

Stroud says, “as to the right of redemption, this proposition
holds good in all the slave-holding States; and is
equally true as it respects the right to compel a change of
masters, except in Louisiana. According to the new
civil code of that State, the latter privilege may sometimes,
perhaps, be obtained by the slave. But the master
must first be convicted of cruelty — a task so formidable
that it can hardly be ranked among possibilities;
and secondly it is optional with the judge, whether or
not, to make the decree in favor of the slave.”

If a slave should not obtain a decree in his favor what
has he to expect from a master exasperated against him,
for making the attempt?

At Athens, so deservedly admired for the mildness of
her slave laws, the door of freedom was opened widely.
The abused slaves might fly to the Temple of Theseus,
whence no one had a right to take them, except for the
purpose of publicly investigating their wrongs. If their
complaints were well founded, they were either enfranchised,
or delivered to more merciful hands.

In the Roman Empire, from the time of Adrian and
the Antonines, slaves were protected by the laws, and
undue severity being proved, they received freedom or a
different master.

By the Code Noir of the French islands, a slave cruelly 5(3)r 53
treated is forfeited to the crown; and the court, which
judges the offence, has power to confer freedom on the
sufferer. In the Spanish and Portuguese colonies, a
slave on complaint of ill-usage obtains public protection;
he may be manumitted, or change his master.

Prop. 9. — Slave unprotected in his domestic relations.

In proof of this it is only necessary to repeat that the
slave and his wife, and his daughters, are considered as
the property of their owners, and compelled to yield implicit
obedience — that he is allowed to give no evidence
— that he must not resist any white man, under any circumstances,
which do not interfere with his master’s interest
— and finally, that public opinion ridicules the
slave’s claim to any exclusive right in his own wife and
children.

In Athens, the female slave could demand protection
from the magistrates; and if her complaints of insulting
treatment were well founded, she could be sold to another
master, who, in his turn, forfeited his claim by improper
conduct.

Prop. 10. — The laws obstruct emancipation.

In nearly all slave-holding States, a slave emancipated
by his master’s will, may be seized and sold to satisfy any
debt. In Louisiana, fraud of creditors is by law considered
as proved, if it can be made to appear that the master,
at the moment of executing the deed of enfranchisement,
had not sufficient property to pay all his debts; and if
after payment of debts, there be not personal estate
enough to satisfy the widow’s claim to one third, his
slaves, though declared to be free by his last will, are
nevertheless liable to be sold for the widow’s portion. —
In South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi,
a valid emancipation can only be gained by authority of
the Legislature, expressly granted. A slave owner cannot
manumit his slaves without the formal consent of the
Legislature. “In Georgia, any attempt to free a slave in
any other manner than the prescribed form, is punished
by a fine of two hundred dollars for each offence; and
the slave or slaves are still, to all intents and purposes, in
a state of slavery.” A new act was passed in that State
in 18181818, by which any person, who endeavors to enfranchise5* 5(3)v 54
a slave by will, testament, contract, or stipulation,
or who contrives indirectly to confer freedom by allowing
his slaves to enjoy the profit of their labor and skill,
incurs a penalty not exceeding one thousand dollars; and
the slaves who have been the object of such benevolence,
are ordered to be seized and sold at public outcry.

In North Carolina, “no slave is allowed to be set free,
except for meritorious services, to be adjudged of and
allowed by the county court, and license first had and
obtained thereupon;” and any slave manumitted contrary
to this regulation may be seized, put in jail, and sold
to the highest bidder. In Mississippi, all the above
obstacles to emancipation are combined in one act.

In Kentucky, Missouri, Virginia, and Maryland, greater
facillities are afforded to emancipation. An instrument
in writing, signed by two witnesses, or acknowledged by
the owner of the slave in open court, is sufficient; the
court reserving the power to demand security for the
maintenance of aged or infirm slaves. By the Virginia
laws, an emancipated negro, more than twentyone years
old, is liable to be again reduced to slavery, if he remain
in the State more than twelve months after his manumission.

In Louisiana, a slave cannot be emancipated, unless
he is thirty years old and has behaved well at least four
years preceding his freedom; except a slave who has
saved the life of his master, his master’s wife, or one of
his children. It is necessary to make known to the
judge the intention of conferring freedom, who may authorize
it, after it has been advertised at the door of the
court house forty days, without exciting any opposition.

Stephens in his history of West India slavery, supposes
that the colonial codes of England are the only ones
expressly framed to obstruct emancipation. He is mistaken;
— the American republics share that distinction
with their mother country. There are plenty of better
things in England to imitate.

According to the Mosaic law, a Hebrew could not
retain his brother, whom he might buy as a servant, more
than six years, against his consent, and in the seventh
year he went out free for nothing. If he came by himself, 5(4)r 55
he went out by himself; if he were married when
he came, his wife went with him. Exodus xxi., Deut.
xv. Jeremiah, xxxiv. Besides this, Hebrew slaves were,
without exception, restored to freedom by the Jubilee.—
“Ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty
throughout the land, and unto all the inhabitants thereof.”
Leviticus, xxv. 10.

At Athens, if the slave possessed property enough to
buy his freedom, the law compelled the master to grant
it, whenever the money was offered.

The severe laws of Rome discouraged manumission;
but it was a very common thing for slaves to pay for freedom
out of their peculium; and public opinion made it
dishonorable to retain them in bondage under such
circumstances. “According to Cicero, sober and industrious
slaves, who became such by captivity in war,
seldom remained in servitude above six years.”

“In Turkey, the right of redemption is expressly regulated
by the Koran. The master is commanded to give
to all his slaves, that behave themselves faithfully, a
writing, fixing beforehand the price at which they may
be redeemed; and which he is bound to accept, when
tendered by them, or on their behalf.”

“In Brazil, a slave who can pay the value of his servitude,
(the fair price of which may be settled by the
magistrate,) has a right to demand his freedom. And
the case frequently happens; for the slaves have one
day in the week, and in some places two days, exclusively
of Sundays and other festivals, which the industrious
employ in providing a fund for their redemption.”

“In the Spanish colonies, the law is still more liberal.
The civil magistrates are empowered to decide upon the
just price of a slave, and when the negro is able to offer
this sum, his master is compelled to grant his freedom.
He may even redeem himself progressively. For instance,
by paying a sixth part of his appreciation, he
may redeem for his own use one day in the week; by
employing this industriously, he will soon be enabled to
buy another day; by pursuing the same laudable course,
the remainder of his time may be redeemed with continually 5(4)v 56
accelerated progress, till he becomes entitled to
entire manumission.”

Prop. 11. — Operation of the laws interferes with religious
privileges.

No places of public worship are prepared for the
negro; and churches are so scarce in the slave holding
States, compared with the number of white inhabitants,
that it is not to be supposed great numbers of them follow
their masters to such places; and if they did, what
could their rude, and merely sensual minds comprehend
of a discourse addressed to educated men? In
Georgia, there is a law which fobids any congregation
or company of negroes to assemble themselves contrary
to the act regulating patrols. Every justice of the
peace may go in person, or send a constable, to disperse
any assembly or meeting of slaves, which may disturb
the peace, endanger the safety, &c., and every slave
taken at such meetings may, by order of the justice,
without trial, receive on the bare back twentyfive stripes
with whip, switch, or cowskin. In South Carolina, an
act forbids the police officers to break into any place of
religious meeting before nine o’clock, provided a majority
of the assembly are white persons; but if the quorum
of white people should happen to be wanting, every slave
would be liable to twentyfive lashes of the cowskin.

These, and various similar regulations, are obviously
made to prevent insurrections; but it is plain that they
must materially interfere with the slave’s opportunities
for religious instruction. The fact is, there are inconveniences
attending a general diffusion of Christianity in
a slave holding State — light must follow its path, and
that light would reveal the surrounding darkness, —
slaves might begin to think whether slavery could be
reconciled with religious precepts, — and then the system
is quite too republican — it teaches that all men are
children of the same Heavenly Father, who careth alike
for all.

The West India planters boldly and openly declared,
that slavery and Christianity could not exist together; in
their minds the immediate inference was, that Chris
tianity must be put down; and very consistently they 5(5)r 57
began to fine and imprison Methodist missionaries, burn
chapels,Open note a17-rota The slaves of any one owner may meet together for religious
purposes, if authorized by their master, and private chaplains may
be hired to preach to them. The domestic slaves, who are entirely
employed in the family, no doubt fare much better in this respect,
than the plantation slaves; but this, and all other negro privileges,
depend entirely upon the slave’s luck in the character of his master. &c.

In Rome, the introduction of “Christianity abolished
slavery; the idea of exclusive property in our fellow men
was too obviously at variance with its holy precepts; and
its professors, in the sincerity of their hearts, made a
formal surrender of such claims. In various ancient instruments
of emancipation, the masters begin by declaring,
that, ‘for the love of God and Jesus Christ, for the
easing of their consciences, and the safety of their souls,’
they set their bondmen free.”

“It is remarkable that the ancient inhabitants of
Great Britain used to sell their countrymen, and even
their own children, to the Irish. The port of Bristol,
afterwards so famous for the African slave trade, was
then equally distinguished as a market for the same commodity,
though of a different color. But when Ireland,
in the year 11721172, was afflicted with public calamities, the
clergy and people of that generous nation began to reproach
themselves with the unchristian practice of holding
their fellow men in slavery. Their English bondmen
though fully paid for, were, by an unanimous resolution of
the Armagh Assembly, set at liberty. Their repentance
dictated present restitution to the injured. More than
six hundred years afterward, when Mr Wilberforce made
his first motion for the abolition of the slave trade, he
was supported by every Irish member of the House of
Commons.” May God bless thee, warm hearted, generous
old Ireland!

In the English and Dutch colonies, baptism was generally
supposed to confer freedom on the slave; and for
this reason, masters were reluctant to have them baptised.
They got over this difficulty, however, and
married self-interest to conscience, by making a law that
“no slave should become free by being a Christian.” 5(5)v 58
This is a striking proof how closely Christianity and
liberty are associated together.

A French planter of St Domingo, in a book which he
published concerning that colony, admits that it is desirable
to have negroes know enough of religion to make
them friends to humanity, and grateful to their Creator;
but he considers it very wrong to load their weak minds
with a belief in supernatural dogmas, such as a belief
in a future state. He says, “such knowledge is apt
to render them intractable, averse to labor, and induces
them to commit suicide on themselves and their children,
of which the colony, the state, and commerce have
equal need.”

Our slave holders, in general, seem desirous to have
the slave just religious enough to know that insurrections
and murder are contrary to the maxims of Christianity;
but it is very difficult to have them learn just
so much as this, without learning more. In Georgia,
I have been told, that a very general prejudice prevails
against white missionaries. To avoid this danger,
old domestic slaves, who are better informed than
the plantation slaves, are employed to hear sermons
and repeat them to their brethren; and their repetitions
are said to be strange samples of pulpit eloquence. One
of these old negroes, as the story goes, told his hearers
that the Bible said slaves ought to get their freedom;
and if they could not do it in any other way, they must
murder their masters. The slaves had never been allowed
to learn to read, and of course they could not dispute
that such a doctrine was actually in the Scriptures.
Thus do unjust and absurd laws “return to plague the
inventor.”

Prop. 12. — Whole power of the laws exerted to keep
negroes in ignorance.

South Carolina made the first law upon this subject.
While yet a province, she laid a penalty of one hundred
pounds upon any person who taught a slave to write, or
allowed him to be taught to write.Open note a18-rota Yet it has been said that these laws are entirely owing to the
rash efforts of the abolitionists. In Virginia, any 5(6)r 59
school for teaching reading and writing, either to slaves,
or free people of color, is considered an unlawful assembly,
and may accordingly be dispersed, and punishment
administered upon each pupil not exceeding twenty lashes.

In South Carolina, the law is the same.

The city of Savannah, in Georgia, a few years ago,
passed an ordinance, by which “any person that teaches
a person of color, slave or free, to read or write, or
causes such persons to be so taught, is subjected to a
fine of thirty dollars for each offence; and every person
of color who shall teach reading or writing, is subject
to a fine of thirty dollars, or to be imprisoned ten days
and whipped thirtynine lashes.”

From these facts it is evident that legislative power
prevents a master from giving liberty and instruction to
his slave, even when such a course would be willingly
pursued by a benevolent individual. The laws allow
almost unlimited power to do mischief; but the power
to do good is effectually restrained.

Prop. 13. — There is a monstrous inequality of law
and right.

In a civilized country, one would expect that if any
disproportion existed in the laws, it would be in favor of
the ignorant and defenceless; but the reverse is lamentably
the case here. Obedience to the laws is the price
freemen pay for the protection of the laws; — but the
same legislatures which absolutely sanction the negro’s
wrongs, and, to say the least, make very inadequate provisions
for his safety, claim the right to punish him with
inordinate severity.

“In Kentucky, white men are condemned to death for
four crimes only; slaves meet a similar punishment for
eleven crimes. In South Carolina, white persons suffer
death for twentyseven crimes; slaves incur a similar fate
for thirtysix crimes. In Georgia, whites are punished
capitally for three crimes only; slaves for at least nine.”

Stroud says there are seventyone crimes in the slave
States, for which negroes are punished with death, and
for each and every one of these crimes the white man
suffers nothing worse than imprisonment in the penitentiary.

5(6)v 60

“Trial by jury is utterly denied to the slave, even in
criminal accusations which may affect his life, in South
Carolina, Virginia, and Louisiana, instead of a jury, is
substituted a tribunal composed of two justices of the
peace and from three to five ‘free’-holders, (i. e. slave-
holders.) In Virginia it is composed of five justices merely.
What chance has an ignorant slave before a tribunal
chosen by his accuser, suddenly convoked, and consisting
of but five persons?”

If a slave is found out of the limits of the town in
which he lives, or beyond the plantation on which he is
usually employed, without a written permission from his
master, or the company of some white person, any body
may inflict twenty lashes upon him; and if the slave
resist such punishment, he may be lawfully killed.

If a slave visit another plantation without leave in
writing from his master, the owner of the plantation may
give him ten lashes.

More than seven slaves walking or standing together
in the road, without a white man, may receive twenty
lashes each from any person.

Any slave, or Indian, who takes away, or lets loose a
boat, from any place where it is fastened, receives thirtynine
lashes for the first offence; and, according to some
laws, one ear is cut off for the second offence.

For carrying gun, powder, shot, a club, or any weapon
whatsoever, offensive or defensive, thirtynine lashes by
order of a justice; and in some States, twenty lashes
from the nearest constable, without a conviction by the
justice.

For selling any article, without a specific ticket from
his master, ten lashes by the captain of the patrollers,Open note a19-rota The patrols are very generally low and dissipated characters,
and the cruelties which negroes suffer from them, while in a state
of intoxication, are sometimes shocking. The law endows these
men with very great power. or
thirtynine by order of a magistrate. The same punishment
for being at any assembly deemed “unlawful”.

For travelling by himself from his master’s land to any
other place, unless by the most accustomed road, forty
lashes; the same for travelling in the night without a 6(1)r 61
pass; the same for being found in another negro’s kitchen,
or quarters; and every negro found in company with
such vagrant, receives twenty lashes.

For hunting with dogs, even in the woods of his master,
thirty lashes.

For running away and lurking in swamps, a negro
may be lawfully killed by any person. If a slave happen
to die of “moderate” correction, it is likewise justifiable
homicide.

For endeavoring to entice another slave to run away,
if provisions are prepared, the slave is punished with
death; and any negro aiding or abbetting suffers death.

Thirtynine stripes for harboring a runaway slave one
hour.

For disobeying orders, imprisonment, as long as the
master chooses.

For riding on horseback, without written permission,
or for keeping a dog, twentyfive lashes.

For rambling, riding, or going abroad in the night, or
riding horses in the day without leave, a slave may be
whipped, cropped, or branded on the cheek with the letter
R, or otherwise punished, not extending to life, or so as to
unfit him for labor.

For beating the Patuxent river, to catch fish, ten lashes;
for placing a seine across Transquakin, and Chickwiccimo
creeks, thirtynine lashes by order of a justice.

For advising the murder of a person, one hundred
lashes may be given.

A runaway slave may be put into jail, and the jailer
must forthwith send a letter by mail, to the man whom
the negro says is his owner. If an answer does not arrive
at the proper time, the jailer must inflict twentyfive
lashes, well laid on, and interrogate anew. If the slave’s
second statement be not corroborated by the letter from
the owner, twentyfive lashes are again administered. —
The act very coolly concludes thus: “and so on, for the
space of six months, it shall be the duty of the jailer to
interrogate and whip as aforesaid.”

The letter may miscarry — the owner may reside at a
great distance from the Post-Office, and thus long delays
may occur — the ignorant slave may not know his master’s6 6(1)v 62
christian name — the jailer may not spell it aright;
but no matter — “it is the jailer’s duty to interrogate
and whip, as aforesaid.”

The last authorized edition of the laws of Maryland,
comprises the following: “If any slave be convicted of
any petit treason, or murder, or wilully burning of
dwelling houses, it may be lawful for the justices to give
judgment against such slave to have the right hand cut
off, to be hanged in the usual manner, the head severed
from the body, the body divided into four quarters, and
the head and quarters set up in the most public places of
the county,” &c.

The laws of Tennessee and Missouri are comparatively
mild; yet in Missouri it is death to prepare or administer
medicine without the master’s consent, unless it can
be proved that there was no evil intention. The law in
Virginia is similar; it requires proof that there was no
evil intention, and that the medicine produced no bad
consequences.

To estimate fully the cruel injustice of these laws, it
must be remembered that the poor slave is without religious
instruction, unable to read, too ignorant to comprehend
legislation, and holding so little communication
with any person better informed than himself, that the
chance is, he does not even know the existence of half the
laws by which he suffers. This is worthy of Nero, who
caused his edicts to be placed so high that they could
not be read, and then beheaded his subjects for disobeying
them.

Prop. 14. — The laws operate oppressively on free colored
people.

Free people of color, like the slaves, are excluded by
law from all means of obtaining the common elements of
education.

The free colored man may at any time be taken up on
suspicion, and be condemned and imprisoned as a runaway
slave, unless he can prove the contrary; and be it
remembered, none but white evidence, or written documents,
avail him. The common law supposes a man to
be innocent, until he is proved guilty; but slave law
turns this upside down. Every colored man is presumed 6(2)r 63
to be a slave, till it can be proved otherwise; this rule
prevails in all the slave States, except North Carolina,
where it is confined to negroes. Stephens supposes this
harsh doctrine to be peculiar to the British Colonial
Code; but in this he is again mistaken — the American
republics share the honor with England.

A law passed in 1822-12December, 1822, in South Carolina,
provides that any free colored persons coming into port
on board of any vessel shall be seized and imprisoned
during the stay of the vessel; and when she is ready to
depart, the captain shall take such free negroes and pay
the expenses of their arrest and imprisonment; and in
case of refusing so to do, he shall be indicted and fined
not less than one thousand dollars, and imprisoned not
less than two months; and such free negroes shall be
sold for slaves. The Circuit Court of the United States,
adjudged the law unconstitutional and void. Yet nearly
two years after this decision, four colored English seamen
were taken out of the brig Marmion. England
made a formal complaint to our Government. Mr Wirt
the Attorney General gave the opinion that the law was
unconstitutional. This, as well as the above mentioned
decision, excited strong indignation in South Carolina.
Notwithstanding the decision, the law still remains in
force, and other States have followed the example of
South Carolina, though with a more cautious observance
of appearances.

In South Carolina, if any free negro harbor, conceal,
or entertain, any runaway slave, or a slave charged with
any criminal matter, he forfeits ten pounds for the first
day, and twenty shillings for every succeeding day. In
case of inability to pay, the free negro is sold at auction,
and if any overplus remain, after the fines and attendant
expenses are paid, it is put into the hands of the public
treasurer.

The free negro may entertain a slave without knowing
that he has done anything wrong; but his declaration
to that effect is of no avail. Where every effort is made
to prevent colored people from obtaining any money, they
are of course unable to pay the penalties imposed.

If any omission is made in the forms of emancipation 6(2)v 64
established by law, any person whatsoever may seize the
negro so manumitted, and appropriate him to their own
use.

If a free colored person remain in Virginia twelve
months after his manumission, he can be sold by the
overseers of the poor for the benefit of the literary fund!

In Georgia, a free colored man, except a regular articled
seaman, is fined one hundred dollars for coming
into the State; and if he cannot pay it, may be sold at
public outcry. This act has been changed to one of increased
severity. A free colored person cannot be a
witness against a white man. They may therefore be
robbed, assaulted, kidnapped and carried off with impunity;
and even the legislatures of the old slave States
adopt it as a maxim that it is very desirable to get rid of
them. It is of no avail to declare themselves free; the
law presumes them to be slaves, unless they can prove to
the contrary. In many instances written documents of
freedom have been wrested from free colored people and
destroyed by kidnappers. A lucrative internal slave
trade furnishes constant temptation to the commission of
such crimes; and the new States of Alabama, Mississippi,
Missouri, and the territories of Arkansas, and the Floridas,
are not likely to be glutted for years to come.

In Philadelphia, though remote from a slave market,
it has been ascertained that more than thirty free persons
of color, were stolen and carried off within two
years. Stroud says: “Five of these have been restored
to their friends, by the interposition of humane gentlemen,
though not without great expense and difficulty.
The others are still in bondage; and if rescued at all, it
must be by sending white witnesses a journey of more
than a thousand miles.”

I know the names of four colored citizens of Massachusetts,
who went to Georgia on board a vessel, were
seized under the laws of that State, and sold as slaves.
They have sent the most earnest exhortations to their
families and friends to do something for their relief;
but the attendant expenses require more money than
the friends of negroes are apt to have, and the poor fellows
as yet remain unassisted.

6(3)r 65

A New York paper, 1829-11November, 1829, contains the
following caution:

“Beware of kidnappers! — It is well understood that
there is at present in this city, a gang of kidnappers, busily
engaged in their vocation of stealing colored children
for the Southern market! It is believed that three
or four have been stolen within as many days. A little
negro boy came to this city from the country three or
four days ago. Some strange white persons were very
friendly to him, and yesterday morning he was mightily
pleased that they had given him some new clothes. And
the persons pretending thus to befriend him, entirely secured
his confidence. This day he cannot be found. —
Nor can he be traced since seen with one of his new
friends yesterday. There are suspicions of a foul nature,
connected with some who serve the police in subordinate
capacities. It is hinted that there may be
those in some authority, not altogether ignorant of these
diabolical practices. Let the public be on their guard!
It is still fresh in the memories of all, that a cargo, or
rather drove, of negroes was made up from this city and
Philadelphia, about the time that the emancipation of
all the negroes in this State took place under our present
constitution, and were taken through Virginia, the Carolinas,
and Tennessee, and disposed of in the state of
Mississippi. Some of those who were taken from Philadelphia
were persons of intelligence, and after they had
been driven through the country in chains, and disposed
of by sale on the Mississippi, wrote back to their friends,
and were rescued from bondage. The persons who
were guilty of this abominable transaction are known,
and now reside in North Carolina; they may, very probbably,
be engaged in similar enterprises at the present
time — at least there is reason to believe that the system
of kidnapping free persons of color from the Northern
cities has been carried on more extensively than the
public are generally aware of.”

This, and other evils of the system, admit of no radical
cure but the utter extinction of slavery. To enact
laws prohibiting the slave traffic, and at the same time 6* 6(3)v 66
tempt avarice by the allurements of an insatiable market,
is irreconcilable and absurd.

To my great surprise, I find that the free States of
Ohio and Indiana disgrace themselves by admitting the
same maxim of law, which prevents any black or mulatto
from being witness against a white man!

It is naturally supposed that free negroes will sympathize
with their enslaves brethren, and that, notwithstanding
all exertions to the contrary, they will become
a little more intelligent; this excites a peculiar jealousy
and hatred in the white population, of which it is impossible
to enumerate all the hardships. Even in the
laws, slaves are always mentioned before free people of
color; so desirous are they to degrade the latter class
below the level of the former. To complete the wrong,
this unhappy class are despised in consequence of the
very evils we ourselves have induced — for as slavery
inevitably makes its victims servile and vicious, and as
none but negroes are allowed to be slaves, we, from our
very childhood, associate everything that is degraded
with the mere color; though in fact the object of our
contempt may be both exemplary and intelligent. In
this way the Africans are doubly the victims of our injustice;
and thus does prejudice “make the meat it
feeds on.”

I have repeatedly said that our slave laws are continually
increasing in severity: as a proof of this I will
give a brief view of some of the most striking, which
have been passed since Stroud published his compendium
of slave laws, in 18271827. In the first class are contained
those enactments directly oppressive to people of color;
in the second are those which injure them indirectly, by
the penalties or disabilities imposed upon the whites,
who instruct, assist, or employ them, or endeavor, in any
way, to influence public opinion in their favor.

Class First. — The Legislature of Virginia passed a
law in 18311831, by which any free colored person who undertakes
to preach, or conduct any religious meeting, by
day or night, may be whipped not exceeding thirtynine
lashes, at the discretion of any justice of the peace;
and anybody may apprehend any such free colored person 6(4)r 67
without a warrant. The same penalty, adjudged
and executed in the same way, falls upon any slave, or
free colored person, who attends such preaching; and
any slave who listens to any white preacher, in the night
time, receives the same punishment. The same law prevails
in Georgia, and Mississippi. A master may permit
a slave to preach on his plantation, to none but his slaves.

There is a naiveté in the following preamble to a law
passed by North Carolina, in 18311831, which would be
amusing, if the subject were not too serious for mirth:
“Whereas teaching slaves to read and write has a tendency
to excite dissatisfaction in their minds, and to produce
insurrection and rebellion,” therefore it is enacted
that teaching a slave to read or write, or giving or selling
to a slave any book, or pamplet, shall be punished
with thirtynine lashes, if the offender be a free black, or
with imprisonment at the discretion of the court; if a
slave, the “offence” is punishable with thirtynine lashes, on
his or her bare back, on conviction before a justice of
the peace.

In Georgia, any slave, or free person of color, is for a
similar offence, fined or whipped, or fined and whipped
at the discretion of the court.

In Louisiana, twelve months’ imprisonment is the penalty
for teaching a slave to read or write.

For publishing, or circulating, in the state of North
Carolina, any pamphlet or paper having an evident tendency
to excite slaves, or free persons of color, to insurrection
or resistance, imprisonment not less than one
year, and standing in the pillory, and whipping, at the
discretion of the court for the first offence; and death
for the second. The same offence punished with death
in Georgia, without any reservation. In Mississippi, the
same as in Georgia. In Louisiana, the same offence
punished either with imprisonment for life, or death, at
the discretion of the court. In Virginia, the first offence
of this sort is punished with thirtynine lashes, the second
with death.

With regard to publications having a “tendency” to promote
discontent among slaves, their masters are so very
jealous, that it would be difficult to find any book, that 6(4)v 68
would not come under their condemnation. The Bible,
and the Declaration of Independence are certainly unsafe.
The preamble to the North Carolina law declares,
that the Alphabet has a tendency to excite dissatisfaction;
I suppose it is because “freedom” may be spelt out
of it. A store keeper in South Carolina was nearly
ruined by having unconsciously imported certain printed
handkerchiefs, which his neighbors deemed seditious. A
friend of mine asked, “Did the handkerchiefs contain
texts from scripture? or quotations from the Constitution
of the United States?”

Emancipated slaves must quit North Carolina in ninety
days after their enfranchisement, on pain of being sold
for life. Free persons of color who shall migrate into
that State, may be seized and sold as runaway slaves;
and if they migrate out of the State for more than ninety
days, they can never return under the same penalty.

This extraordinary use of the word “migrate” furnishes
a new battering ram against the free colored class, which
is everywhere so odious to slave owners. A visit to relations
in another State may be called “migrating”; being
taken up and detained by kidnappers, over ninety days,
may be called “migrating”; — for where neither the evidence
of the sufferer nor any of his own color is allowed,
it will evidently amount to this.

In South Carolina, if a free negro cross the line of the
State, he can never return.

In 18311831, Mississippi passed a law to expel all colored
persons under sixty and over sixteen years of age from
the State, within ninety days, unless they could prove
good characters, and obtain from the court a certificate
of the same, for which they paid three dollars; these
certificates might be revoked at the discretion of the
county courts. If such persons do not quit the State
within the time specified, or if they return to it, they may
be sold for a term not exceeding five years.

In Tennessee, slaves are not allowed to be emancipated
unless they leave the State forthwith. Any free
colored persons emigrating into this State, is fined from
ten to fifty dollars, and hard labor in the penitentiary
from one to two years.

North Carolina has made a law subjecting any vessel 6(5)r 69
with free colored persons on board to thirty days quarantine;
as if freedom were as bad as the cholera! Any person
of color coming on shore from such vessels is seized and
imprisoned, till the vessel departs; and the captain is fined
five hundred dollars; and if he refuse to take the colored
seaman away, and pay all the expenses of his imprisonment,
he is fined five hundred more. If the sailor do
not depart within ten days after his captain’s refusal, he
must be whipped thirtynine lashes; and all colored persons,
bond or free, who communicate with him, receive
the same.

In Georgia, there is a similar enactment. The prohibition
is, in both States, confined to merchant vessels,
(it would be imprudent to meddle with vessels of war;)
and any colored person communicating with such seamen
is whipped not exceeding thirty lashes. If the captain
refuse to carry away seamen thus detained, and
pay the expenses of their imprisonment, he shall be fined
five hundred dollars, and also imprisoned, not exceeding
three months.

These State laws are a direct violation of the Laws of
Nations, and our treaties; and may involve the United
States in a foreign war.

Colored seamen are often employed in Spanish, Portuguese,
French, and English vessels. These nations are
bound to know the United States Laws; but can they
be expected to know the enactments of particular States
and cities? and if they know them, are they bound to
observe them, if they interfere with the established rules
of nations? When Mr Wirt pronounced these laws unconstitutional,
great excitement was produced in South
Carolina. The Governor of that State in his Message to
the Legislature implied that separation from the Union
was the only remedy, if the laws of the Southern States
could not be enforced. They seem to require unconditional
submission abroad as well as at home.

The endeavor to prevent insurrections in this way, is
as wise as to attempt to extinguish fire with spirits of
wine. The short-sighted policy defeats itself. A free
colored sailor was lately imprisoned with seven slaves:
Here was a fine opportunity to sow the seeds of sedition
in their minds!

6(5)v 70

The upholders of slavery will in vain contend with the
liberal spirit of the age; it is too strong for them. —
They may as well try to bottle up the sunshine for their
own exclusive use, as to attempt to keep knowledge
and freedom to themselves. We all know that such an
experiment would result in bottling up darkness for themselves,
while exactly the same amount of sunshine remained
abroad for the use of their neighbors.

In North Carolina, free negroes are whipped, fined,
and imprisoned at the discretion of the court, for intermarrying
with slaves.

In Georgia, free colored persons when unable to pay
any fine, may be sold for a space of time not exceeding
five years. This limitation does not probably avail
much; if sold to another master before the five years
expired, they would never be likely to be free again.

Several other laws have been passed in Georgia, prohibiting
slaves from living apart from their master, either
to labor for other persons, or to sell refreshments, or to
carry on any trade or business although with their master’s
consent. Any person of color, bond or free, is
forbidden to occupy any tenement except a kitchen or
an outhouse, under penalty of from twenty to fifty lashes.
Some of these laws are applicable only to particular
cities, towns, or counties; others to several counties.

Sundry general laws of a penal nature have been made
more penal; and the number of offences, for which a
colored person may suffer death, is increased.

A law passed in Tennessee, in 18311831, provides that negroes
for conspiracy to rebel, shall be punished with
whipping, imprisonment and pillory, at the discretion of
the court; it has this curious proviso — “Householders
may serve as jurors, if slave-holders cannot be had!”Open note a20-rota The Common Law assigns for the trial of a foreigner, six jurors
of his own nation, and six native Englishmen.
The Southern courts need to have a great deal of discretion,
since so much is trusted to it.

Class Second. — In Virginia, white persons who teach
any colored person to read or write, are fined not exceeding
fifty dollars; for teaching slaves for pay, from ten to
twenty dollars for each offence.

6(6)r 71

In Georgia, a similar offence is fined not exceeding
five hundred dollars, and imprisoned at the discretion of
the court. Knowledge seems to be peculiarly pokerish
in Georgia.

In North Carolina, if a white person teach a slave to
read or write, or give or sell him any book, &c., he is
fined from one to two hundred dollars.

In Louisiana, any white person, who teaches a slave to
read or write, is imprisoned one year. And if any person
shall use any language from the bar, bench, stage,
pulpit, or any other place, — or hold any conversation
having a tendency to promote discontent among free colored
people, or insubordination among slaves, he may
be imprisoned at hard labor, not less than three, nor
more than twentyone years; or he may suffer death — at
the discretion of the court.

In Mississippi, a white man, who prints or circulates
doctrines, sentiments, advice, or innuendoes, likely to produce
discontent among the colored class, is fined from
one hundred to a thousand dollars, and imprisoned from
three to twelve months.

All the States which have pronounced an anathema
against books and alphabets, have likewise forbidden
that any colored man shall be employed in a printing
office, under the penalty of ten dollars for every offence.

In Mississippi, any white who employs, or receives a
free colored person, without a certificate of freedom,
written on parchment, forfeits one thousand dollars.

If any master, in that State, allows his slaves to sell
any wares or merchandiese out of the incorporated towns,
he is liable to a fine of from fifty to five hundred dollars.

In Virginia, any person who buys of a slave any article
belonging to his master, forfeits from ten to fifty dollars;
if the purchase be made on Sunday, ten dollars
more are added to the fine for each article.

This enactment is evidently made to prevent a slave
from obtaining any money, or holding communication
with freemen; a particular proviso is made against Sunday,
because the slave has usually more leisure on that
day. It is to be remembered that all a slave has belongs
to his master.

6(6)v 72

To carry a slave out of North Carolina, or conceal
him with intent to carry him out, is punished with
death.

If a runaway slave die in prison, before he or she can
be sold, the county pays the sheriff and jailer; formerly
these officers depended on the life and marketableness
of their prisoners for security; but even this poor motive
for kindness is now taken away. If ninetynine out of a
hundred die in prison, they will be heard of only in the
jailer’s bill. I never heard or read of an inquest upon
the body of a slave found dead. Under the term “runaway
slaves” are included many free colored persons
taken up unjustly.

Well might Jefferson say, “I tremble for my country,
when I reflect that God is just!”

In travelling over this dreary desert, it is pleasant to
arrive at one little oasis: Louisiana has enacted that
slaves brought into that State for sale, shall forthwith be
set free; but they must be sent out of the State.

It is worthy of remark that England pursues a totally
different course with regard to allowing slaves to communicate
with free people. Their recent laws are all
calculated to make it easy for the slave to obtain a fair
hearing from people who have no interest to suppress his
complaints. He may go upon any plantation, and communicate
with any person; and whoever tries to prevent
his going to a magistrate is guilty of a misdemeanor.

They have abolished all distinction between white and
colored witnesses.

The law expressly stipulates the quality and quantity
of provisions.

Inquest is held upon the bodies of slaves dying suddenly,
or from any suspected violence.

Use of the cart whip prohibited; and no female to be
punished except by order of the court.

Only fifteen lashes allowed as a punishment to men
for one offence, and in one day; two kinds of punishment
never allowed for one offence.

When a slave is punished, two competent witnesses
must be present.

The owner is obliged to keep a record of domestic
punishments and the causes.

7(1)r 73

Marriages among slaves are encouraged, and husband
and wife are not allowed to be sold separately. Children
under sixteen years old cannot be separated from their
parents.

Masters illegally punishing their slaves, are subject to
fine, imprisonment, and loss of the slave, for the first
offence; for the second offence, sequestration of all their
slaves.

Free colored representatives are allowed to take their
seat in the legislature, and share all the other privileges of
British subjects.

Yet these humane laws, so carefully framed in favor of
the defenceless, have been found insufficient to protect
the slave. Experience proves, what reason clearly points
out, that the force of good laws must be weakened by the
very nature of this unholy relation. Where there is
knowledge and freedom on one side, and ignorance and
servitude on the other, evasions and subterfuges will of
course be frequent. Hence English philanthropists have
universally come to the conclusion that nothing effectual
can be done, unless slavery itself be destroyed.

The limits of this work compel me to pass by many
enactments in our slave-holding States, which would
throw still more light on this dark subject.

I have laid open some of the laws which do actually
exist, and are constantly enforced in this free country;
and knowing all this, and still more, to be true, I blush
and hang my head, whenever I hear any one boast of our
“glorious institutions.”

The slave-holders insist that their “humanity” is so
great, as to render all their ferocious laws perfectly
harmless. Are the laws then made on purpose to urge
tender-hearted masters to be so much worse than they
really desire to be? The democrats of the South appear
to be less scrupulous about the liberties of others, than
the Autocrat of the Russias; — for, when Madame de
Staël told the Emperor Alexander that his character
answered instead of a constitution for his country, he
replied, “Then, madam, I am but a lucky accident.”
How much more emphatically may it be said that the
slave’s destiny is a matter of chance! Reader, would 7 7(1)v 74
you trust the very best man you know, with your time,
your interests, your family, and your life, unless the contract
were guarded on every side by the strong arm of
the law? If a money-loving neighbor could force you to
toil, and could gain a certain number of dollars for every
hour of your labor, how much rest should you expect to
have?

It is utter nonsense to say that generosity of disposition
is a protection against tyranny, where all the power
is on one side. It may be, and it no doubt is so, in
particular instances; but they must be exceptions to the
general rule.

We all know that the Southerners have a high sense of
what the world calls honor, and that they are brave, hospitable,
and generous to people of their own color; but
the more we respect their virtues, the more cause is
there to lament the demoralizing system, which produces
such unhappy effects on all who come within its baneful
influence. Most of them may be as kind as can be expected
of human nature, endowed with almost unlimited
power to do wrong; and some of them may be even
more benevolent than the warmest friend of the negro
would dare to hope; but while we admit all this, we
must not forget that there is in every community a class
of men, who will not be any better than the laws compel
them to be.

Captain Riley, in his Narrative, says: “Strange as it
may seem to the philanthropist, my free and proud spirited
country men still hold a million and a halfOpen note a21-rota There are now over two millions. of human
beings in the most cruel bonds of slavery; who are kept
at hard labor, and smarting under the lash of inhuman,
mercenary drivers; in many instances enduring the miseries
of hunger, thirst, imprisonment, cold, nakedness,
and even tortures. This is no picture of the imagination.
For the honor of human nature, I wish likenesses
were nowhere to be found! I myself have witnessed such
scenes in different parts of my own country; and the
bare recollection of them now chills my blood with horror.”

7(2)r 75

When the slave owners talk of their gentleness and
compassion, they are witnesses in their own favor, and
have strong motives for showing the fairest side. But
what do the laws themselves imply? Are enactments
ever made against exigencies which do not exist? If
negroes have never been scalded, burned, mutilated, &c.
why are such crimes forbidden by an express law, with
the marvellous proviso, except said slave die of “‘moderate’
punishment”? If a law sanctioning whipping to any
extent, incarceration at the discretion of the master, and
the body loaded with irons, is called a “restraining” law,
let me ask what crimes must have been committed, to
require prohibition, where so much is allowed? The
law, which declares that slaves shall be compelled to
labor only fourteen or fifteen hours a day, has the following
preamble: “Whereas many owners of slaves, managers,
&c. do confine them so closely to hard labor that
they have not sufficient time for natural rest,” &c. Mr
Pinckney, in a public argument, speaking of slaves murdered
by severe treatment, says: “The frequency of the
crime is no doubt owing to the nature of the punishment.”
The reader will observe that I carefully refrain from
quoting the representations of party spirit, and refer to
facts only for evidence.

Where the laws are made by the people, a majority of
course approve them; else they would soon be changed.
It must therefore in candor be admitted, that the laws
of a State speak the prevailing sentiments of the inhabitants.

Judging by this rule, what inference must be drawn
from the facts stated above? “At Sparta, the freeman
is the freest of all men, and the slave is the greatest of
slaves.”

Our republic is a perfect Pandora’s box to the negro,
only there is no hope at the bottom. The wretchedness
of his fate is not a little increased by being a constant
witness of the unbounded freedom enjoyed by others:
the slave’s labor must necessarily be like the labor of
Sisiphus; and here the torments of Tantalus are added.

Slavery is so inconsistent with free institutions, and
the spirit of liberty is so contagious under such institutions, 7(2)v 76
that the system must either be given up, or sustained
by laws outrageously severe; hence we find that
our slave laws have each year been growing more harsh
than those of any other nation.

Shall I be told that all these regulations are necessary
for the white man’s safety? What then, let me indignantly
ask, what must the system be that requires to be
supported by such unnatural, such tyrannical means! The
very apology pronounces the condemnation of slavery —
for it proves that it cannot exist without producing
boundless misery to the oppressed, and perpetual terror
to the oppressor.

In our --07-04fourth of July orations, we are much in the
habit of talking about the tyranny of England! and there
is no doubt that broad and deep stains do rest upon her
history. But there is a vulgar proverb that “those who
live in glass houses should not throw stones.” In judging
of national, as well as individual wrong, it is fair to
consider the amount of temptation. England has had
power, more extensive and permanent than any nation
since the decline of Rome: the negroes and the Indians
are the only people who have been dependent on our justice
and generosity — and how have we treated them?

It is a favorite argument that we are not to blame for
slavery, because the British engrafted it upon us, while
we were colonies. But did we not take the liberty to
change English laws and customs, when they did not
suit us? Why not put away this, as well as other evils of
much less consequence? It could have been done easily,
at the time of our confederation; it can be done now. —
Have not other nations been making alterations for the
better, on this very subject, since we became independent?
Is not England trying with all her might to atone
for the wrong she has done? Does not the constitution of
the United States, and the constitution of each individual
State, make provision for such changes as shall tend to
the public good?

The plain truth is, the continuation of this system is a
sin; and the sin rests upon us: It has been eloquently
said that “by this excuse, we try to throw the blame upon
our ancestors, and leave repentance to posterity.”

Chapter III.

Free Labor and Slave Labor. — Possibility of Safe
Emancipation.

Political economists found their systems on those
broad and general principles, the application of which
has been proved by reason and experience to produce
the greatest possible happiness to the greatest number of
people. All writers of this class, I believe without exception,
prefer free labor to slave labor.

Indeed a very brief glance will show that slavery is inconsistent
with economy, whether domestic, or political.

The slave is bought, sometimes at a very high price;
in free labor there is no such investment of capital. —
When the slave is ill, a physician must be paid by the
owner; the free laborer defrays his own expenses. The
children of the slave must be supported by his master;
the free man maintains his own. The slave is to be
taken care of in his old age, which his previous habits
render peculiarly helpless; the free laborer is hired
when he is wanted, and then returns to his home. The
slave does not care how slowly or carelessly he works;
it is the free man’s interest to do his business well and
quickly. The slave is indifferent how many tools he
spoils; the free man has a motive to be careful. The
slave’s clothing is indeed very cheap, but it is of no consequence7* 7(3)v 78
to him how fast it is destroyed — his master
must keep him covered, and that is all he is likely to do;
the hired laborer pays more for his garments, but makes
them last three times as long. The free man will be
honest for reputation’s sake; but reputation will make
the slave none the richer, nor invest him with any of the
privileges of a human being — while his poverty and
sense of wrong both urge him to steal from his master.
A salary must be paid to an overseer to compel the slave
to work; the free man is impelled by the desire of increasing
the comforts of himself and family. Two hired
laborers will perform as much work as three slaves; by
some it is supposed to be a more correct estimate that
slaves perform only half as much labor as the same number
of free laborers. Finally, where slaves are employed,
manual industry is a degradation to white people, and
indolence becomes the prevailing characteristic.

Slave owners have indeed frequently shown great
adroitness in defending this bad system; but, with few
exceptions, they base their arguments upon the necessity
of continuing slavery because it is already begun. Many
of them have openly acknowledged that it was highly
injurious to the prosperity of the State.

The Hon. Henry Clay, in his address before the Colonization
Society of Kentucky, has given a view of the causes
affecting, and likely to affect, slavery in this country,
which is very remarkable for its completeness, its distinctness,
and its brevity. The following sentences are
quoted from this address: “As a mere laborer, the slave
feels that he toils for his master, and not for himself;
that the laws do not recognize his capacity to acquire
and hold property, which depends altogether upon the
pleasure of his proprietor, and that all the fruits of his exertions
are reaped by others. He knows that, whether
sick or well, in times of scarcity or abundance, his master
is bound to provide for him by the all powerful influence
of self-interest. He is generally, therefore, indifferent to
the adverse or prosperous fortunes of his master, being
contented if he can escape his displeasure or chastisement,
by a careless and slovenly performance of his duties.

This is the state of the relation between master and 7(4)r 79
slave, prescribed by the law of its nature, and founded
in the reason of things. There are undoubtedly many
exceptions, in which the slave dedicates himself to his
master with a zealous and generous devotion, and the
master to the slave with a parental and affectionate attachment.
But it is my purpose to speak of the general
state of this unfortunate relation.

That labor is best, in which the laborer knows that
he will derive the profits of his industry, that his employment
depends upon his diligence, and his reward upon
this assiduity. He then has every motive to excite him
to exertion, and to animate him in perseverance. He
knows that if he is treated badly he can exchange his
employer, for one who will better estimate his service; and
that whatever he earns is his, to be distributed by himself
as he pleases, among his wife, and children, and
friends, or enjoyed by himself. In a word, he feels that
he is a free agent, with rights, and privileges, and sensibilities.

Wherever the option exists to employ, at an equal
hire, free or slave labor, the former will be decidedly preferred,
for the reasons already assigned. It is more
capable, more diligent, more faithful, and in every respect
more worthy of confidence.

It is believed that nowhere in the farming portion of
the United States would slave labor be generally employed,
if the proprietor were not tempted to raise slaves by
the high price of the Southern market, which keeps it
up in his own.”

Speaking of an attempt more than thirtyfive years ago,
to adopt gradual emancipation in Kentucky, Mr Clay
says: “We were overpowered by numbers, and submitted
to the decision of the majority, with the grace
which the minority, in a republic, should ever yield to
such a decision. I have nevertheless never ceased, and
never shall cease, to regret a decision, the effects of
which have been to place us in the rear of our neighbors,
who are exempt from slavery, in the state of agriculture,
the progress of manufactures, the advance of improvement,
and the general prosperity of society.”

Mr Appleton, in his reply to Mr McDuffie in the winter 7(4)v 80
of 18321832, — a speech distinguished for its good temper
and sound practical sense, — says: “I do not think
the gentleman from South Carolina has overrated the
money price of New England labor at fifty cents; but
most of the labor is performed by the owners of the soil.
It is great industry alone, which makes New England
prosperous. The circumstance that with this cheap
slave labor, the South is complaining of suffering, while
the North is content and prosperous with dear free labor,
is a striking fact and deserves a careful and thorough
examination. The experience of all ages and nations
proves that high wages are the most powerful stimulus
to exertion, and the best means of attaching the people
to the institutions under which they live. It is apparent
that the political effect upon the character of society
cannot have any action upon slaves. Having no choice
or volition, there is nothing for stimulus to act upon;
they are in fact no part of society. So that, in the language
of political economy, they are, like machinery,
merely capital; and the productions of their labor consist
wholly of profits of capital. But it is not perceived how
the tariff can lessen the value of the productions of their
labor, in comparison with that of the other States. New
York and Virginia both produce wheat; New York with
dear labor is content, and Virginia with cheap labor is
dissatisfied.

What is the occupation of the white population of the
planting States? I am at a loss to know how this population
is employed. We hear of no products of these
States, but those produced by slave labor. It is clear the
white population cannot be employed in raising cotton or
tobacco, because in doing so they can earn but twelve and
a half cents per day, since the same quantity of labor performed
by a slave is worth no more. I am told also that the
wages of overseers, mechanics, &c. are higher than the
white labor of the North; and it is well known that
many mechanics go from the North to the South, to get
employment during the winter. These facts suggest the
inquiry whether this cheap slave labor does not paralyze
the industry of the whites? Whether idleness is not the
greatest of their evils?”

7(5)r 81

During the famous debate in the Virginia Legislature,
in the winter of 18321832, Mr Brodnax made the following
remark: “That slavery in Virginia is an evil, and a
transcendent evil, it would be more than idle for any
human being to doubt or deny. It is a mildew which
has blighted every region it has touched, from the creation
of the world. Illustrations from the history of other
countries and other times might be instructive and profitable,
had we the time to review them; but we have
evidence tending to the same conviction nearer at hand
and accessible to daily observation, in the short histories
of the different States of this great confederacy, which
are impressive in their admonitions and conclusive in
their character.”

During the same session, Mr Faulkner of Virginia,
said: “Sir, I am gratified to perceive that no gentleman
has yet risen in this Hall, the avowed advocate of slavery.
The day has gone by, when such a voice could be listened
to with patience, or even forbearance. I even regret,
sir, that we should find one amongst us, who enters the
lists as its apologist, except on the ground of uncontrolable
necessity. If there be one, who concurs with the
gentleman from Brunswick (Mr Gholson) in the harmless
character of this institution, let me request him to
compare the condition of the slave holding portion of
this Commonwealth — barren, desolate, and seared as it
were by the avenging hand of Heaven, with the descriptions
which we have of this same country from those who
first broke its virgin soil. To what is this change ascribable?
Alone to the withering and blasting effects of
slavery. If this does not satisfy him, let me request him
to extend his travels to the Northern States of this Union,
— and beg him to contrast the happiness and contentment
which prevails throughout the country — the busy
and cheerful sound of industry — the rapid and swelling
growth of their population — their means and institutions
of education — their skill and proficiency in the useful
arts — their enterprise, and public spirit — the monuments
of their commercial and manufacturing industry;
and, above all, their devoted attachment to the government
from which they derive their protection, with the 7(5)v 82
division, discontent, indolence, and poverty of the Southern
country. To what, sir, is all this ascribable? To
that vice in the organization of society, by which one half
of its inhabitants are arrayed in interest and feeling
against the other half — to that unfortunate state of society
in which freemen regard labor as disgraceful — and
slaves shrink from it as a burden tyrannically imposed
upon them — to that condition of things, in which half a
million of your population can feel no sympathy with the
society in the prosperity of which they are forbidden to
participate, and no attachment to a government at whose
hands they receive nothing but injustice.

If this should not be sufficient, and the curious and
incredulous inquirer should suggest that the contrast
which has been adverted to, and is so manifest, might be
traced to a difference of climate, or other causes distinct
from slavery itself, permit me to refer him to the two
states of Kentucky and Ohio — no difference of soil —
no diversity of climate — no diversity in the original
settlement of those two States, can account for the remarkable
disproportion in their national advancement. —
Separated by a river alone, they seem to have been purposely
and providentially designed to exhibit in their
future histories the difference, which necessarily results
from a country free from, and a country afflicted with,
the curse of slavery. The same may be said of the two
states of Missouri and Illinois.

Slavery, it is admitted, is an evil — it is an institution
which presses heavily against the best interests of the
State. It banishes free white labor — it exterminates
the mechanic — the artisan — the manufacturer. It deprives
them of occupation. It deprives them of bread. It
converts the energy of a community into indolence — its
power into imbecility — its efficiency into weakness. Sir,
being thus injurious, have we not a right to demand its
extermination! Shall society suffer, that the slave holder
may continue to gather his virgintial crop of human
flesh? What is his mere pecuniary claim, compared
with the great interests of the common weal? Must the
country languish and die, that the slave holder may flourish?
Shall all interests be subservient to one? — all 7(6)r 83
rights subordinate to those of the slave holder? Has not
the mechanic — have not the middle classes their rights?
— rights imcompatible with the existence of slavery?”

Sutcliff in his Travels in North America, says: “A
person not conversant with these things would naturally
think that where families employ a number of slaves,
everything about their houses, gardens, and plantations,
would be kept in the best order. But the reverse of this
is generally the case. I was sometimes tempted to think
that the more slaves there were employed, the more disorder
appeared. I am persuaded that one or two hired
servants, in a well regulated family, would preserve more
neatness, order, and comfort, than treble the number of
slaves.

There is a very striking contrast between the appearance
of the horses or teams in Pennsylvania, and those
in the Southern States, where slaves are kept. In Pennsylvania
we met with great numbers of wagons, drawn
by four or more fine fat horses, the carriages firm and
well made, and covered with stout good linen, bleached
almost white: and it is not uncommon to see ten or fifteen
together, travelling cheerfully along the road, the
driver riding on one of his horses. Many of these come
more than three hundred miles to Philadelphia, from the
Ohio, Pittsburg, and other places; and I have been told
by a respectable friend, a native of Philadelphia, that
more than one thousand covered carriages frequently
come to Philadelphia market.”

“The appearance of things in the slave States is quite
the reverse of this. We sometimes meet a ragged black
boy or girl driving a team, consisting of a lean cow or a
mule, sometimes a lean bull, or an ox and a mule; and
I have seen a mule, a bull, and a cow, each miserable in
its appearance, composing one team, with a half naked
black slave or two, riding or driving, as occasion suited.
The carriage or wagon, if it may be called such, appeared
in as wretched a condition as the team and its driver.
Sometimes a couple of horses, mules, or cows, &c. would
be dragging a hogshead of tobacco, with a pivot, or axle,
driven into each end of the hogshead, and something like
a shaft attached, by which it was drawn, or rolled along 7(6)v 84
the road. I have seen two oxen and two slaves pretty
fully employed in getting along a single hogshead; and
some of these come from a great distance inland.”

The inhabitants of free States are often told that they
cannot argue fairly upon the subject of slavery because
they know nothing about its actual operation; and any
expression of their opinions and feelings with regard to
the system, is attributed to ignorant enthusiasm, fanatical
benevolence, or a wicked intention to do mischief.

But Mr Clay, Mr Brodnax, and Mr Faulkner, belong
to slave holding States; and the two former, if I mistake
not, are slave owners. They surely are qualified to
judge of the system; and I might fill ten pages with
other quotations from Southern writers and speakers,
who acknowledge that slavery is a great evil. There
are zealous partisans indeed, who defend the system
strenuously, and some of them very eloquently. Thus,
Mr Hayne, in his reply to Mr Webster, denied that the
South suffered in consequence of slavery; he maintained
that the slave holding States were prosperous, and the
principal cause of all the prosperity in the Union. He
laughed at the idea of any danger, however distant, from
an overgrown slave population, and supported the position
by the fact that slaves had always been kept in
entire subjection in the British West Indies, where the
white population is less than ten per cent of the whole.
But the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina did
not mention that the peace establishment of the British
West Indies costs England two million pounds annually!
Yet such is the fact. This system is so closely entwined
with the apparent interests and convenience of individuals,
that it will never want for able defenders, so long as
it exists. But I believe I do not misrepresent the truth,
when I say the prevailing opinions at the South is, that it
would have been much better for those States, and for
the country in general, if slavery had never been introduced.

Miss Martineau, in her most admirable little book on
Demerara, says: “Labor is the product of mind as
much as of body; and to secure that product, we must
sway the mind by the natural means — by motives. Laboring 8(1)r 85
against self-interest is what nobody ought to expect
of white men — much less of slaves. Of course
every man, woman and child, would rather play for
nothing than work for nothing.

It is the mind, which gives sight to the eye, and
hearing to the ear, and strength to the limbs; and the
mind cannot be purchased. Where a man is allowed
the possession of himself, the purchaser of his labor is
benefited by the vigor of his mind through the service of
his limbs: where man is made the possession of another,
the possessor loses at once and forever all that is most
valuable in that for which he has paid the price of crime.
He becomes the owner of that which only differs from
an idiot in being less easily drilled into habits, and
more capable of effectual revenge.

Cattle are fixed capital, and so are slaves: But
slaves differ from cattle on the one hand, in yielding
(from internal opposition) a less return for their maintenace;
and from free laborers on the other hand, in not
being acted upon by the inducements which stimulate
production as an effort of mind as well as body. In all
three cases the labor is purchased. In free laborers and
cattle, all the faculties work together, and to advantage;
in the slave they are opposed; and therefore he is, so far
as the amount of labor is concerned, the least valuable of
the three. The negroes can invent and improve — witness
their ingenuity in their dwellings, and their skill in
certain of their sports; but their masters will never possess
their faculties, though they have purchased their
limbs. Our true policy would be to divide the work of
the slave between the ox and the hired laborer; we
should get more out of the sinews of the one and the soul
of the other, than the produce of double the number of
slaves.”

As a matter of humanity, let it be remembered that men
having more reason than brutes, must be treated with
much greater severity, in order to keep them in a state
of abject submission.

It seems unnecessary to say that what is unjust and
unmerciful, can never be expedient; yet men often write,
talk, and act, as if they either forgot this truth, or doubted8 8(1)v 86
it. There is genuine wisdom in the following remark,
extracted from the petition of Cambridge University to
the Parliament of England, on the subject of slavery: “A
firm belief in the Providence of a benevolent Creator assures
us that no system, founded on the oppression of
one part of mankind, can be beneficial to another.”

But the tolerator of slavery will say, “No doubt the
system is evil; but we are not to blame for it; we received
it from our English ancestors. It is a lamentable
necessity; we cannot do it away if we would; — insurrections
would be the inevitable result of any attempt to
remove it” — and having quieted their consciences by
the use of the word “lamentable”, they think no more upon
the subject

These assertions have been so often, and so dogmatically
repeated, that many truly kind-hearted people have
believed there was some truth in them. I myself, (may
God forgive me for it!) have often, in thoughtless ignorance,
made the same remarks.

An impartial and careful examination has led me to
the conviction that slavery causes insurrections, while
emancipation prevents them.

The grand argument of the slave holder is that sudden
freedom occasioned the horible massacres of St Domingo.
— If a word is said in favor of abolition, he shakes
his head, and points a warning finger to St Domingo!
But it is a remarkable fact that this same vilified island
furnishes a strong argument against the lamentable necessity
of slavery. In the first place, there was a bloody
civil war there before the act of emancipation was passed;
in the second place enfranchisement produced the most
blessed effects; in the third place, no difficulties whatever
arose, until Bonaparte made his atrocious attempt to
restore slavery in the island.

Colonel Malenfant, a slave proprietor, resident in St
Domingo at the time, thus describes the effect of sudden
enfranchisement, in his Historical and Political Memoir
of the Colonies:

“After this public act of emancipation, the negroes remained
quiet both in the south and in the west, and they
continued to work upon all the plantqations. There were 8(2)r 87
estates which had neither owners nor managers resident
upon them, yet upon these estates, though abandoned,
the negroes continued their labors where there were any,
even inferior agents, to guide them; and on those estates
where no white men where left to direct them, they betook
themselves to the planting of provisions; but upon
all the plantations where the whites resided, the blacks
continued to labor as quietly as before.” Colonel Malenfant
says, that when many of his neighbors, proprietors
or managers, were in prison, the negroes of their
plantations came to him to beg him to direct them in
their work.

He adds, “If you will take care not to talk to them
of the restoration of slavery, but to talk to them of freedom,
you may with this word chain them down to their
labor. How did Toussaint succeed? — How did I succeed
before his time in the plain of the Culde-Sae on the
plantation Gouraud, during more than eight months after
liberty had been granted to the slaves? Let those who
knew me at that time, let the blacks themselves, be asked:
they will all reply that not a single negro upon that plantation,
consisting of more than four hundred and fifty
laborers, refused to work: and yet this plantation was
thought to be under the worst discipline and the slaves
the most idle of any in the plain. I inspired the same
activity into three other plantations of which I had the
management. If all the negroes had come from Africa
within six months, if they had the love of independence
that the Indians have, I should own that force must be
employed; but ninetynine out of a hundred of the blacks
are aware that without labor they cannot procure the
things that are necessary for them; that there is no other
method of satisfying their wants and their tastes. They
know that they must work, they wish to do so, and they
will do so.”

Such was the conduct of the negroes for the first nine
months after their liberation, or up the middle of 17941794.
In the latter part of 17961796, Malenfant says, “the colony
was flourishing under Toussaint, the whites lived happily
and in peace upon their estates, and the negroes continued 8(2)v 88
to work for them.” General Lecroix who published
his Memoirs for a History of St Domingo in
18191819, says, that in 17971797 the most wonderful progress had
been made in agriculture. “The Colony,” says he,
“marched as by enchantment towards its ancient splendor:
cultivation prospered; every day produced perceptible
proof of its progress.” General Vincent,Open note a22-rota Clarkson’s Thoughts, p. 2. who was
a general of brigade of artillery in St Domingo and a
proprietor of estates in the island, was sent by Toussaint
to Paris in 18011801 to lay before the Directory the new constitution
which had been agreed upon in St Domingo.
He arrived in France just at the moment of the peace of
Amiens, and found that Bonaparte was preparing an armament
for the purpose of restoring slavery in St Domingo.
He remonstrated against the expedition; he
stated that it was totally unnecessary and therefore
criminal, for everything was going on well in St Domingo.
The proprietors were in peaceable possession
of their estates; cultivation was making rapid progress;
the blacks were industrious and beyond example happy.
He conjured him, therefore, not to reverse this beautiful
state of things; but his efforts were ineffectual, and the
expedition arrived upon the shores of St Domingo. At
length, however the French were driven from the island.
Till that time the planters had retained their property,
and then it was, and not till then, that they lost their all.
In 18041804, Dessalinea was proclaimed Emperor; in process
of time a great part of the black troops were disbanded,
and returned to cultivation again. From that time to
this, there has been no want of subordination or industry
among them.”

The following account of Hayti at a later period is
quoted from Mr Harvey’s sketches of that island, during
the latter part of the reign of Christophé:

“Those who by their exertions and economy were
enabled to procure small spots of land of their own or to
hold the smaller plantations at an annual rent, were diligently
engaged in cultivating coffee, sugar, and other
articles, which they disposed of to the inhabitants of the 8(3)r 89
adjacent towns and villages. It was an interesting sight
to behold this class of the Haytians, now in possession of
their freedom, coming in groups to the market nearest
which they resided, bringing the produce of their industry
for sale; and afterwards returning, carrying back the
necessary articles of living which the disposal of their
commodities had enabled them to purchase; all evidently
cheerful and happy. Nor could it fail to occur to the
mind that their present condition furnished the most
satisfactory answer to that objection to the general emancipation
of slaves, founded on their alleged unfitness to
value and improve the benefits of liberty. Though of the same race and possessing the same
general traits of character as the negroes of the other
West India islands, they are already distinguished from
them by habits of industry and activity, such as slaves
are seldom known to exhibit. As they would not suffer,
so they do not require, the attendance of one acting in
the capacity of a driver with the instrument of punishment
in his hand. In Guadaloupe, the conduct of the freed negroes was
equally satisfactory. The perfect subordination which
was established and the industry which prevailed there,
are proved by the official Reports of the Governor of
Guadaloupe, to the French government. In 17931793 liberty
was proclaimed universally to the slaves in that island,
and during their ten years of freedom, their governors
bore testimony to their regular industry and uninterrupted
submission to the laws. During the first American war, a number of slaves
ran away from their North American masters and joined
the British army. When peace came, it was determined
to give them their liberty, and to settle them in Nova
Scotia, upon grants of land, as British subjects and as
free men. Their number, comprehending men, women
and children, was two thousand and upwards. Some
of them worked upon little portions of land as their
own; others worked as carpenters; others became fishermen;
and others worked for hire in various ways. In
time, having embraced Christianity, they raised places
of worship of their own, and had ministers of their own 8* 8(3)v 90
from their own body. They led a harmless life, and
gained the character of an industrious and honest people
from their white neighbors. A few years afterwards,
the land in Nova Scotia being found too poor to answer,
and the climate too cold for their constitutions, a number
of them, to the amount of between thirteen and fourteen
hundred, volunteered to form a new colony which
was then first thought of at Sierra Leone, to which place
they were accordingly conveyed. Many hundreds of the
negroes who had formed the West Indian black regiments
were removed in 18191819 to Sierra Leone, where
they were set at liberty at once, and founded the villiages
of Waterloo, Hastings and others. Several hundred maroons
(runaway slaves and their descendants,) being
exiled from Jamaica, were removed in 18011801 to Sierra
Leone, where they were landed with no other property
than the clothes which they wore and the muskets which
they carried in their hands. A body of revolted slaves
were banished from Barbadoes in 18161816, and sent also to
Sierra Leone. The rest of the population of this colony
consists almost entirely of negroes who have been recaptured
from slave ships, and brought to Sierra Leone in
the lowest state of misery, debility and degradation:
naked, diseased, destitute, wholly ignorant of the English
language, in this wretched, helpless condition they have
been suddenly made free, and put into possession at once
of the rights and privileges of British subjects. All these
instances of sudden emancipation have taken place in a
colony where the disproportion between black and white
is more than a hundred to one. Yet this mixed population
of suddenly emancipated slaves — runaway slaves —
criminal slaves — and degraded recaptured negroes, are
in their free condition living in order, tranquility and
comfort, and many of them in affluence. During the last American war, 774 slaves escaped
from their masters, and were at the termination of the
war settled in Trinidad as free laborers, where they are
earning their own livelihood with industry and good conduct.
The following extract of a letter, received in
1820–1829182[Gap in transcription—one numeralflawed-reproduction] from Trinidad by Mr Pownall, will show the usefulness
and respectability of these liberated negroes. ‘A 8(4)r 91
field negro brings four hundred dollars, but most of the
work is done by free blacks and people from the main at
a much cheaper rate; and as these are generally employed
by foreigners, this accounts for their succeeding
better than our own countrymen, who are principally
from the old islands, and are unaccustomed to any other
management than that of slaves; however, they are
coming into it fast. In Trinidad, there are upwards of
fifteen thousand free people of color; there is not a single
pauper amongst them; they live independently and comfortably,
and nearly half of the property of the island is
said to be in their hands. It is admitted that they are
highly respectable in character, and are rapidly advancing
in knowledge and refinement.’ Mr Mitchell, a sugar
planter who had resided twentyseven years in Trinidad,
and who is the superintendent of the liberated negroes
there, says he knows of no instance of a manumitted
slave not maintaining himself. In a paper printed by
the House of Commons in 18271827, ( No. 479,) he says of
the liberated blacks under his superintendence, that each
of them possessed an allotment of land which he cultivated,
and on which he raised provisions and other articles
for himself and his family; his wife and children aiding
him in the work. A great part, however, of the time of
the men (the women attending to the domestic menage)
was freely given to laboring on the neighboring plantations,
on which they worked not in general by the day,
but by the piece. Mr Mitchell says that their work is
well executed, and that they can earn as much as four
shillings a day. If, then, these men who have land on
which they can support themselves are yet willing to work
for hire, how is it possible to doubt that in case of general
emancipation, the freed negroes who would have no land
of their own would gladly work for wages? A few years ago, about 150 negro slaves, at different
times, succeeded in making their escape from Kentucky
into Canada. Captain Stuart, who lived in Upper Canada
from 18171817 to 18221822, was generally acquainted with
them, and employed several of them in various ways. —
He found them as good and as trustworthy laborers, in
every respect, as any emigrants from the islands, or from 8(4)v 92
the United States, or as the natives of the country. In
18281828, he again visited that country, and found that their
numbers had increased by new refugees to about three
hundred. They had purchased a tract of woodland, a
few miles from Amherstburgh, and were settled on it,
had formed a little village, had a minister of their own
number, color, and choice, a good old man of some talent,
with whom Captain Stuart was well acquainted, and
though poor, were living soberly, honestly and industriously,
and were peacefully and usefully getting their own
living. — In consequence of the Revolution in Colombia,
all the slaves who joined the Colombian armies, amounting
to a considerable number, were declared free. —
General Bolivar enfranchised his own slaves to the
amount of between seven and eight hundred, and many
proprietors followed his example. At that time Colombia
was overrun by hostile armies, and the masters were
often obliged to abandon their property. The black population
(including Indians) amounted to nine hundred
thousand persons. Of these, a large number was suddenly
emancipated, and what has been the effect? —
Where the opportunities of insurrection have been so
frequent, and so tempting, what has been the effect? M.
Ravenga declares that the effect has been a degree of
docility on the part of the blacks, and a degree of security
on the part of the whites, unknown in any preceding
period of the history of Colombia. Dr WalshOpen note a23-rota Walsh’s Notes on Brazil, vol ii. page 365. states that in Brazil there are six hundred
thousand enfranchised persons, either Africans or of
African descent, who were either slaves themselves or
are the descendants of slaves. He says they are, generally
speaking, ‘well conducted and industrious persons,
who compose indiscriminately different orders of the community.
There are among them merchants, farmers,
doctors, lawyers, priests and officers of different ranks.
Every considerable town in the interior has regiments
composed of them.’ The benefits arising from them, he
adds, have disposed the whites to think of making free
the whole negro population. 8(5)r 93 Mr Koster, an Englishman living in Brazil, confirms
Mr Walsh’s statement.Open note a24-rota Amelioration of Slavery, published in No. 16 of the Pamphleteer. ‘There are black regiments,’
he observes, ‘composed entirely and exclusively of black
creole soldiers, commanded by black creole officers from
the corporal to the colonel. I have seen the several
guard houses of the town occupied by these troops. Far
from any apprehension being entertained on this score, it
is well known that the quietude of this country, and the
feeling of safety which every one possesses, although surrounded
by slaves, proceed from the contentedness of the
free people.’ The actual condition of the hundred thousand emancipated
blacks and persons of color in the British West
India Colonies, certainly gives no reason to apprehend
that if a general emancipation should take place, the
newly freed slaves would not be able and willing to
support themselves. On this point the Returns from
fourteen of the Slave Colonies, laid before the House of
Commons, in 18261826, give satisfactory information: they
include a period of five years from 1821-01-01January 1, 1821, to
1825-12-31December 31, 1825, and give the following account of
the state of pauperism in each of these colonies. Bahamas. — The only establishment in the colony
for the relief of the poor, appears to be a hospital or poor
house. The number passing through the hospital annually
was, on the average, fifteen free black and colored
persons and thirteen whites. The number of free black
and colored persons is about double that of the whites;
so that the proportion of white to that of colored paupers
in the Bahamas, is nearly two to one. Barbadoes. — The average annual number of persons
supported in the nine parishes, from which returns have
been sent, is nine hundred and ninetyeight, all of whom,
with a single exception, are white. The probable
amount of white persons in the island is fourteen thousand
five hundred—of free black and colored persons,
four thousand five hundred. Berbice. — The white population appears to amount 8(5)v 94
to about six hundred, the free black and colored to nine
hundred. In 18221822, it appears that there were seventeen
white and two colored paupers. Demerara. — The free black and colored population,
it is supposed, are twice the number of the whites. The
average number of white pensioners on the poor fund
appears to be fiftyone, that of colored pensioners twentysix.
In occasional relief, the white paupers receive
about three times as much as the colored. Dominica. — The white population is estimated at
about nine hundred; the free black and colored population
was ascertained, in 18251825, to amount to three thousand
one hundred and twentytwo. During the five
years ending in 1825-11November, 1825, thirty of the former
class had received relief from the poor fund, and only
ten of the latter, making the proportion of more than
nine white paupers to one colored one in the same number
of persons. Jamaica is supposed to contain twenty thousand
whites, and double that number of free black and colored
persons. The returns of paupers from the parishes
which have sent returns, exhibits the average number of
white paupers to be two hundred and ninetyfive, of black
and colored paupers, one hundred and fortyeight; the
proportion of white paupers to those of the other class,
according to the whole population, being as four to one. Nevis. — The white population is estimated at about
eight hundred, the free black and colored at about
eighteen hundred. The number of white paupers receiving
relief is stated to be twentyfive; that of the
other class, two; being in the proportion of twentyeight
to one. St Christophers. — The average number of white
paupers appears to be one hundred and fifteen; that of
the other class, fourteen; although there is no doubt that
the population of the latter class greatly outnumbers
that of the former. Tortola. — In 18251825 the free black and colored population
[Gap in transcription—three to five charactersflawed-reproduction]nted to six hundred and seven. The whites
are estimated at about three hundred. The number of 8(6)r 95
white paupers relieved appears to be twentynine: of the
other class, four: being in proportion of fourteen to one. In short, in a population of free black and colored
persons amounting to from eighty thousand to ninety
thousand, only two hundred and twentynine persons
have received any relief whatever as paupers during the
years 18211821 to 18251825; and these chiefly the concubines
and children of destitute whites; while of about sixtyfive
thousand whites, in the same time, sixteen hundred
and seventyfive received relief. The proportion, therefore,
of enfranchised persons receiving any kind of aid
as paupers in the West Indies, is about one in three
hundred and seventy: whereas the proportion among the
whites of the West Indies is about one in forty; and in
England, generally one in twelve or thirteen — in some
counties, one in eight or nine. Can any one read these statements, made by the
colonists themselves, and still think it necessary to keep
the negroes in slavery, lest they should be unable to
maintain themselves if free? In 18231823, the Assembly of Grenada passed a resolution,
declaring that the free colored inhabitants of these
colonies, were a respectable, well behaved class of the
community, were possessed of considerable property, and
were entitled to have their claims viewed with favor. In 18241824, when Jamaica had been disturbed for
months by unfounded alarms relating to the slaves, a
committee of the legislative assembly declared that ‘the
conduct of the freed people evinced not only zeal and
alacrity, but a warm interest in the welfare of the colony,
and every way identified them with those who are
the most zealous promoters of its internal security.’ The
assembly confirmed this favorable report a few months
ago, by passing a bill conferring on all free black and
colored persons the same privileges, civil and political,
with the white inhabitants. In the orders issued in 18291829, by the British Government,
in St Lucia, placing all freemen of African descent
upon the footing of equal rights with their white
neighbors, the loyalty and good conduct of that class are
distinctly acknowledged, and they are declared ‘to have 8(6)v 96
shown, hitherto, readiness and zeal in coming forward
for the maintenance of order.’ As similar orders have
been issued for Trinidad, Berbice, and the Cape of Good
Hope, it may be presumed that the conduct of the free
blacks and colored persons in those colonies has likewise
given satisfaction to Government. In the South African Commercial Advertiser of 1831-02-099th
of February, 1831, we are happy to find recorded one
more of the numerous proofs which experience affords
of the safety and expediency of immediate abolition. Three thousand prize negroes have received their
freedom; four hundred in one day; but not the least
difficulty or disorder occurred; — servants found masters
— masters hired servants; all gained homes, and at
night scarcely an idler was to be seen. In the last
month, one hundred and fifty were liberated under precisely
similar circumstances, and with the same result.
These facts are within our own observation; and to state
that sudden and abrupt emancipation would create disorder
and distress to those you mean to serve, is not reason;
but the pleas of all men who are adverse to emancipation.
As far as it can be ascertained from the various
documents which have been cited, and from others,
which, from the fear of making this account too long,
are not particularly referred to, it appears that in every
place and time in which emancipation has been tried,
not one drop of white blood has been shed, or even endangered
by it; that it has everywhere greatly improved
the condition of the blacks, and in most places
has removed them from a state of degradation and
suffering to one of the respectability and happiness. Can
it, then, be justifiable, on account of any vague fears
of we know not what evils, to reject this just, salutary
and hitherto uninjurious measure; and to cling to a
system which we know, by certain experience, is producing
crime, misery and death, during every day of
its existence!”

In Mexico, 1829-09-15September 15, 1829, the following decree
was issued; “Slavery is forever abolished in the republic;
and consequently all those individuals, who, until 9(1)r 97
this day, looked upon themselves as slaves, are free.”
The prices of slaves were settled by the magistrates,
and they were required to work with their master, for
stipulated wages, until the debt was paid. If the slave
wished to change masters he could do so, if another person
would take upon himself the liability of payment, in
exhange for his labor; and provided the master was secured
against loss, he was obliged to consent to the transaction.
Similar transfers might take place to accommodate
the master, but never without the consent of the
servant. The law regulated the allowance of provisions,
clothing, &c., and if the negro wished for more,
he might have it charged, and deducted from his wages;
but lest masters should take advantage of the improvidence
of their servants, it was enacted, that all charges
exceeding half the earnings of any slave, or family of
slaves, should be void in law. The duties of servants
were defined as clearly as possible by the laws, and
magistrates appointed to enforce them; but the master
was entrusted with no power to punish, in any manner
whatever. It was expressly required that the masters
should furnish every servant with suitable means of religious
and intellectual instruction.

A Vermont gentleman, who had been a slave holder
in Mississippi, and afterward resident at Metamoras, in
Mexico, speaks with enthusiasm of the beneficial effects
of these regulations, and thinks the example highly important
to the United States. He declares that the
value of the plantations was soon increased by the introduction
of free labor. “No one was made poor by it.
It gave property to the servant, and increased the riches
of the master.”

The republics of Buenos Ayres, Chili, Bolivia, Peru, Colombia,
Guatimala and Monte Video, likewise took steps
for the abolition of slavery, soon after they themselves
came into possession of freedom. In some of these states,
means were taken for the instruction of young slaves,
who were all enfranchised by law, on arriving at a certain
age; in others, universal emancipation is to take
place after a certain date, fixed by the laws. The empire
of Brazil, and the United States are the only 9 9(1)v 98
American nations, that have taken no measures to
destroy this most pestilent system; and I have recently
been assured by intelligent Brazilians, that public opinion
in that country is now so strongly opposed to slavery,
that something effectual will be done toward abolition, at
the very next meeting of the Cortes. If this should take
place, the United States will stand alone in most hideous
preëinence.

When Necker wrote his famous book on French
finances, he suggested a universal compact of nations to
suppress the slave trade. The exertions of England
alone have since nearly realized his generous plan,
though avarice and cunning do still manage to elude her
vigilance and power. She had obtained from Spain,
Portugal, France, Holland, and Denmark, a mutual
right to search all vessels suspected of being engaged
in this wicked traffic.Open note a25-rota The British government actually paid Spain 400,000 pounds as
an indemnity to those engaged in the slave trade, on condition that
the traffic should be abolished by law throughout her dominions. I believe I am correct in
saying that ours is now the only flag, which can protext
this iniquity from the just indignation of England.
When a mutual right of search was proposed to us, a
strong effort was made to blind the people with their own
prejudices, by urging the old complaint of the impressment
of seamen; and alas, when has an unsuccessful
appeal been made to passion and prejudice? It is evident
that nothing on earth ought to prevent coöoperation
in a cause like this. Besides, “It is useless for us to
attempt to linger on the skirts of the age that is departing.
The action of existing causes and principles is
steady and progressive. It cannot be retarded, unless
we would ‘blow out all the moral lights around us;’ and
if we refuse to keep up with it, we shall be towed in the
wake, whether we are willing or not.”Open note q161-rota Speech of Mr Broda[Gap in transcription—one characterflawed-reproduction]x of Virginia.

When I think of the colonies established along the
coast of Africa — of Algiers, conquered and civilized —
of the increasing wealth and intelligence of Hayti — of
the powerful efforts now being made all over the world
to sway public opinion in favor of universal freedom — of
the certain emancipation of slaves in all British Colonies 9(2)r 99
— and above all, the evident union of purpose existing
between the French and English cabinets, — I can most
plainly see the hand of God working for the deliverance
of the negroes. We may resist the blessed influence, if
we will; but we cannot conquer. Every year the plot
is thickening around us, and the nations of the earth,
either consciously or unconsciously, are hastening the
crisis. The defenders of the slave system are situated
like the man in the Iron Shroud, the walls of whose
prison daily moved nearer and nearer, by means of powwerful
machinery, until they crushed all that remained
within them.

But to return to the subject of emancipation. Nearly
every one of the States north of Mason and Dixon’s line
once held slaves. These slaves were manumitted without
bloodshed, and there was no trouble in making free
colored laborers obey the laws.

I am aware that this desirable change must be attended
with much more difficulty in the Southern States,
simply because the evil has been suffered until it is
fearfully overgrown; but it must not be forgotten that
while they are using their ingenuity and strength to sustain
it for the present, the mischief is increasing more
and more rapidly. If this be not a good time to apply
a remedy, when will be a better? They must annihilate
slavery, or slavery will annihilate them.

It seems to be forgotten that emancipation from
tyranny is not an emancipation from law; the negro,
after he is made free, is restrained from the commission
of crimes by the same laws which restrain other citizens:
if he steals, he will be imprisoned: if he commits
murder, he will be hung.

It will, perhaps, be said that the free people of color in
the slave portions of this country are peculiarly ignorant,
idle, and vicious? It may be so; for our laws and our
influence are peculiarly calculated to make them bad
members of society. But we trust the civil power to
keep in order the great mass of ignorant and vicious foreigners
continually pouring into the country; and if the
laws are strong enough for this, may they not be trusted
to restrain the free blacks?

9(2)v 100

In those countries where the slave codes are mild,
where emancipation is rendered easy, and inducements
are offered to industry, insurrections are not feared, and
free people of color form a valuable portion of the community.
If we persist in acting in opposition to the established
laws of nature and reason, how can we expect
favorable results? But it is pronounced “unsafe” to
change our policy. Every progressive improvement in
the world has been resisted by despotism, on the ground
that changes were dangerous. The Emperor of Austria
thinks there is need of keeping his subjects ignorant,
that good order may be preserved. But what he calls
good order, is sacrificing the happiness of many to the
advancement of a few; and no doubt knowledge is unfavorable
to the continuation of such a state of things.
It is precisely so with the slave holder; he insists that
the welfare of millions must be subordinate to his private
interest, or else all good order is destroyed.

It is much to be regretted that Washington enfranchised
his slaves in the manner he did; because their
poverty and indolence have furnished an ever ready argument
for those who are opposed to emancipation.Open note a27-rota With all my unbounded reverence for Washington, I have, I
confess, sometimes found it hard to forgive him for not manumitting
his slaves long before his death. A fact which has lately come
to my knowledge, gave me great joy; for it furnishes a reason
for what had appeared to me unpardonable. It appears that
Washington possessed a gang of negroes in right of his wife, with
which his own negroes had intermarried. By the marriage settlement,
the former were limited, in default of issue of the marriage,
to the representatives of Mrs Washington at her death; so that
her negroes could not be enfranchised. An unwillingness to separate
parents and children, husbands and wives, induced Washington
to postpone the manumission of his own slaves. This motive
is briefly, and as it were accidentally, referred to in his will.
To turn slaves adrift in their old age, unaccustomed to
take care of themselves, without employment, and in a
community where all the prejudices were strongly arrayed
against free negroes, was certainly an unhappy
experiment.

But if slaves were allowed to redeem themselves progressively,
by purchasing one day of the week after
another, as they can in the Spanish colonies, habits of 9(3)r 101
industry would be gradually formed, and enterprise
would be stimulated, by their successful efforts to acquire
a little property. And if they afterward worked better
as free laborers than they now do as slaves, it would
surely benefit their masters, as well as themselves.

That strong-hearted republican, La Fayette, when he
returned to France in 17851785, felt strongly urged by a
sense of duty, to effect the emancipation of slaves in the
Colony of Cayenne. As most of the property in the
colony belonged to the crown, he was enabled to prosecute
his plans with less difficulty than he could otherwise
have done. Thirty thousand dollars were expended
in the purchase of plantations and slaves, for the sole
purpose of proving by experiment the safety and good
policy of conferring freedom.Open note a28-rota It is now reported that the Hon. Mr Wirt has purchased a plantation
in Florida, with the same benevolent intent. Such a step is
worthy of that noble minded and distinguished man. Being afraid to trust the
agents generally employed in the colony, he engaged a
prudent and amiable man at Paris to undertake the business.
This gentleman, being fully instructed in La Fayette’s
plans and wishes, sailed for Cayenne. The first
thing he did when he arrived, was to collect all the cart-
whips, and other instruments of punishment, and have
them burnt amid a general assemblage of the slaves; he
then made known to them the laws and rules by which
the estates would be governed. The object of all the
regulations was to encourage industry by making it the
means of freedom. This new kind of stimulus had a
most favorable effect on the slaves, and gave promise of
complete success. But the judicious agent died in consequence
of the climate, and the French Revolution
threw everything into a state of convulsion at home and
abroad. The new republic of France bestowed unconditional
emancipation upon the slaves in her colonies;
and had she persevered in her promises with good faith
and discretion, the horrors of St Domingo might have
been spared. The emancipated negroes in Cayenne
came in a body to the agents, and declared that if the
plantations still belonged to General La Fayette they were
ready and willing to resume their labors for the benefit of 9* 9(3)v 102
one who had treated them like men, and cheered their
toil by making it a certain means of freedom.

I cannot forbear paying a tribute of respect to the
venerable Moses Brown, of Providence, Rhode Island,
now living in virtuous and vigorous old age. He was a
slave owner in early life, and, unless I have been misinformed,
a slave dealer, likewise. When his attention
became roused to religious subjects, these facts troubled
his conscience. He easily and promptly decided that a
Christian could not consistently keep slaves; but he did
not dare to trust his own nature to determine the best
manner of doing justice to those he had wronged. He
therefore appointed a committee, before whom he laid a
statement of the expenses he had incurred for the food
and clothing of his slaves, and the number of years,
during which he had had the exclusive benefit of their
labors. He conceived that he had no right to charge
them for their freedom, because God had given them an
unalienable right to that possession, from the very hour
of their birth; but he wished the committee to decide
what wages he ought to pay them for the work they had
done. He cordially accepted the decision of the committee,
paid the negroes their dues, and left them to
choose such employments as they thought best. Many
of the grateful slaves preferred to remain with him as
hired laborers. It is hardly necessary to add that Moses
Brown is a Quaker.

It is commonly urged against emancipation that white
men cannot possibly labor under the sultry climate of our
most southerly States. This is a good reason for not
sending the slaves out of the country, but it is no argument
against making them free. No doubt we do need
their labor; but we ought to pay for it. Why should
their presence be any more disagreeable as hired laborers,
than as slaves? In Boston, we continually meet
colored people in the streets, and employ them in various
ways, without being endangered, or even incommoded.
There is no moral impossibility in a perfectly
kind and just relation between the two races.

If white men think otherwise, let them remove from
climates which nature has made too hot for their constitutions. 9(4)r 103
Wealth or pleasure often induces men to
change their abode; and emigration for the sake of humanity
would be an agreeable novelty. Algernon Sidney,
said “When I cannot live in my own country, but
by such means as are worse than dying in it, I think
God shows me that I ought to keep myself out of it.”

But the slave holders try to stop all the efforts of benevolence,
by vociferous complaints about infringing
upon their “property”; and justice is so subordinate to self-
interest, that the unrighteous claim is silently allowed,
and even openly supported, by those who ought to blush
for themselves, as Christians, and as republicans. Let
men simplify their arguments — let them confine themselves
to one single question, “What right can a man
have to compel his neighbor to toil without reward, and
leave the same hopeless inheritance to his children, in
order that he may live in luxury and indolence?” Let
the doctrines of expediency return to the Father of Lies,
who invented them, and gave them power to turn every
way for evil. The Christian knows no appeal from the
decisions of God, plainly uttered in his conscience.

The laws of Venice allowed property in human beings;
and upon this ground Shylock demanded his
pound of flesh, cut nearest to the heart. Those who
advertise mothers to be sold separately from their children,
likewise claim a right to human flesh; and they
too cut it nearest to the heart.

The personal liberty of one man can never be the
property of another. All ideas of property are founded
upon the mutual agreement of the human race, and are
regulated by such laws as are deemed most conducive to
the general good. In slavery there is no mutual agreement;
for in that case it would not be slavery. The
negro has no voice in the matter — no alternative is presented
to him — no bargain is made. The beginning of
his bondage is the triumph of power over weakness; its
continuation is the tyranny of knowledge over ignorance.
One man may as well claim an exclusive right to
the air another man breathes, as to the possession of his
limbs and faculties. Personal freedom is the birthright
of every human being. God himself made it the first 9(4)v 104
great law of creation; and no human enactment can
render it null and void. “If,” says Price, “you have a
right to make another man a slave, he has a right to
make you a slave;” and Ramsay says, “If we have in
the beginning no right to sell a man, no person has a
right to buy him.”

Am I reminded that the laws acknowledge these
vested rights in human flesh? I answer, the laws themselves
were made by individuals, who wished to justify
this wrong and profit by it. We ought never to have
recognised a claim, which cannot exist according to the
laws of God; it is our duty to atone for the error; and
the sooner we make a beginning, the better will it be for
us all. Must our arguments be based upon justice
and mercy to the slave holders only? Have the negroes
the right to ask compensation for their years and years of
unrewarded toil? It is true that they have food and clothing,
of such kind, and in such quantities, as their masters
think proper. But it is evident that this is not the
worth of their labor; for the proprietors can give from
one hundred to five and six hundred dollars for a slave,
beside the expense of supporting those who are too old or
too young to labor. They could not afford to do this, if
the slave did not earn more than he receives in food and
clothing. If the laws allowed the slave to redeem himself
progressively, the owner would receive his money
back again; and the negro’s years of uncompensated
toil would be more than lawful interest.

The southerners are much in the habit of saying they
really wish for emancipation, if it could be effected in
safety; but I search in vain for any proof that these assertions
are sincere. (When I say this, I speak collectively;
there are, no doubt, individual exceptions.)

Instead of profiting by the experience of other nations,
the slave oweners, as a body, have resolutely shut their
eyes against the light, because they preferred darkness.
Every change in the laws has rivetted the chain closer
and closer upon their victims; every attempt to make the
voice of reason and benevolence heard has been overpowered
with threatening and abuse. A cautious vigilance
against improvement, a keen-eyed jealousy of all freedom 9(5)r 105
of opinion, has characterized their movements. There
can be no doubt that the majority wish to perpetuate
slavery. They support it with loud bravado, or insidious
sophistry, or pretended regret; but they never
abandon the point. Their great desire is to keep the
public mind turned in another direction. They are well
aware that the ugly edifice is built of rotten timbers, and
stands on slippery sands — if the loud voice of public
opinion could be made to reverberate through its dreary
chambers, the unsightly frame would fall, never to rise
again.

Since so many of their own citizens admit that the
policy of this system is unsound, and its effects injurious,
it is wonderful that they do not begin to destroy the
“costly iniquity” in good earnest. But long continued
habit is very powerful; and in the habit of slavery are
concentrated the strongest evils of human nature —
vanity, pride, love of power, licentiousness, and indolence.

There is a minority, particularly in Virginia and Kentucky,
who sincerely wish a change for the better; but
they are overpowered, and have not even ventured to
speak, except in the great Virginia debate of 18321832. In
the course of that debate the spirit of slavery showed itself
without disguise. The members talked of emancipation;
but with one or two exceptions, they merely wanted to
emancipate or rather to send away, the surplus population,
which they could neither keep nor sell, and which
might prove dangerous. They wished to get rid of the
consequences of the evil, but were determined to keep
the evil itself. Some members from Western Virginia,
who spoke in a better spirit, and founded their arguments
on the broad principles of justice, not on the mere
convenience of a certain class, were repelled with angry
excitement. The eastern districts threatened to separate
from the western, if the latter persisted in expressing
opinions opposed to the continuance of slavery.
From what I have uniformly heard of the comparative
prosperity of Eastern and Western Virginia, I should
think this was very much like the town’s poor threatening
to separate from the town.

The mere circumstance of daring to debate on the 9(5)v 106
subject was loudly reprimanded; and there was a good
deal of indignation expressed that “reckless editors, and
imprudent correspondents, had presumed so far as to allude
to it in the columns of a newspaper.” Discussion in
the Legislature was strongly deprecated until a plan had
been formed; yet they must have known that no plan
could be formed, in a republican government, without
previous discussion. The proposal contained within
itself that self-perpetuating power, for which the schemes
of slave oweners are so remarkable.

Mr Gholson sarcastically rebuked the restless spirit of
improvement, by saying “he really had been under the
impression that he owned his slaves. He had lately purchased
four women and ten children, in whom he
thought he had obtained a great bargain; for he supposed
they were his own property, as were his brood
mares.” To which Mr Roane replied, “I own a considerable
number of slaves, and am perfectly sure they
are mine; and I am sorry to add that I have occasionally,
though not often, been compelled to make them feel
the impression of that ownership. I would not touch a
hair on the head of the genteman’s slave, any sooner
than I would a hair in the mane of his horse.”

Mr R. likewise remarked, “I think slavery as much a
correlative of liberty as cold is of heat. History, experience,
observation and reason, have taught me that the
torch of liberty has ever burned brighter when surrounded
by the dark and filthy, yet nutritious atmosphere
of slavery! I do not believe in the fanfaronade that all
men are by nature equal. But these abstract speculations
have nothing to do with the question, which I am
willing to view as one of cold, sheer state policy, in
which the safety, prosperity, and happiness of the whites
alone are concerned.”

Would Mr Roane carry out his logic into all its details?
Would he cherish intemperance, that sobriety
might shine the brighter? Would he encourage theft,
in order to throw additional lustre upon honesty? Yet
there seems to be precisely the same relation between
these things that there is between slavery and freedom.
Such sentiments sound oddly enough in the mouth of a
republican of the nineteenth century!

9(6)r 107

When Mr Wirt, before the Supreme Federal Court,
said that slavery was contrary to the laws of nature and
of nations, and that the law of South Carolina concerning
seizing colored seamen, was unconstitutional, the
Governor directed several reproofs at him. In 18251825, Mr
King laid on the table of the United States Senate a resolution
to appropriate the proceeds of the public lands
to the emancipation of slaves, and the removal of free
negroes, provided the same could be done under and
agreeable to, the laws of the respective States. He said
he did not wish it to be debated, but considered at some
future time. Yet kindly and cautiously as this movement
was made, the whole South resented it, and Governor
Troup called to the Legislature and people of
Georgia, to “stand to their arms.” In 18271827 the people
of Baltimore presented a memorial to Congress, praying
that slaves born in the District of Colombia after a given
time, specified by law, might become free on arriving
at a certain age. A famous member from South
Carolina called this an “impertinent interference, and
a violation of the principles of liberty!” and the petition
was not even committed. Another Southern gentleman in
Congress objected to the Panama mission because Bolivar
had proclaimed liberty to the slaves.

Mr Hayne, in his reply to Mr Webster, says: “There
is a spirit, which, like the father of evil, is constantly
walking to and fro about the earth, seeking whom it may
devour; it is the spirit of false philanthropy. When
this is infused into the bosom of a statesman (if one so
possessed can be called a statesman) it converts him at
once into a visionary enthusiast. Then he indulges in
golden dreams of national greatness and prosperity. He
discovers that ‘liberty is power,’ and not content with
vast schemes of improvement at home, which it would
bankrupt the treasury of the world to execute, he flies to
foreign lands to fulfil ‘obligations to the human race, by
inculcating the principles of civil and religious liberty,’
&c. This spirit has long been busy with the slaves of
the South; and it is even now displaying itself in vain efforts
to drive the government from its wise policy in relation
to the Indians.”

9(6)v 108

Governor Miller, of South Carolina, speaking of the
tariff and “the remedy,” asserted that slave labor was
preferable to free, and challenged the free states to competition
on fair terms. Governor Hamilton of the same
State, in delivering an address on the same subject, uttered
a eulogy upon slavery; concluding as usual that
nothing but the tariff — nothing but the rapacity of
Northerners, could have nullified such great blessings
of Providence, as the cheap labor and fertile soil of
Carolina. Mr Calhoun, in his late speech in the Senate,
alludes in a tone of strong disapprobation, and almost
of reprimand, to the remarkable debate in the Virginia
Legislature; the occurence of which offence he charges
to the opinions and policy of the north.

If these things evince any real desire to do away the
evil, I cannot discover it. There are many who inherit
the misfortune of slavery, and would gladly renounce the
miserable birthright if they could; for their sakes, I wish
the majority were guided by a better spirit and a wiser
policy. But this state of things cannot last. The operations
of Divine Providence are hastening the crisis,
and move which way we will, it must come in some form
or other; if we take warning in time, it may come as
a blessing. The spirit of philanthropy, which Mr Hayne
calls “false,” is walking to and fro in the earth; and it
will not pause, or turn back, till it has fastened the
golden band of love and peace around a sinful world. —
The sun of knowledge and liberty is already high in the
heavens — it is peeping into every dark nook and corner
of the earth — and the African cannot be always excluded
from its beams.

The advocates of slavery remind me of a comparison I
once heard differently applied: Even thus does a dog,
unwilling to follow his master’s carriage, bite the wheels,
in a vain effort to stop its progress.

10(1)r

Chapter IV.

Influence of Slavery on the Politics of the United
States.

When slave representation was admitted into the Constitution
of the United States, a wedge was introduced,
which has ever since effectually sundered the sympathies
and interests of different portions of the country. By
this step, the slave States acquired an undue advantage,
which they have maintained with anxious jealousy, and
in which the free States have never perfectly acquiesced.
The latter would probably never have made the concession,
so contrary to their principles, and the express provisions
of their State constitutions, if powerful motives
had not been offered by the South. These consisted, first,
in taking upon themselves a proportion of direct taxes,
increased in the same ratio as their representation was
increased by the concession to their slaves.

Second. — In conceding to the small States an entire
equality in the Senate. This was not indeed proposed
as an item of the adjustment, but it operated as such;
for the small States, with the exception of Georgia, (which
in fact expected to become one of the largest,) lay in the
North, and were either free, or likely soon to become so.

During most of the contest, Massachusetts, then one
of the large States, voted with Virginia and Pennsylvania
for unequal representation in the Senate; but on the
final question she was divided, and gave no vote. There 10 10(1)v 110
was probably an increasing tendency to view this part of
the compromise not merely as a concession of the large
to the small States, but also of the largely slave-holding,
to the free, or slightly slave-holding States. The two
questions of direct taxes in proportion to slave representations
Open note a040-rotaHandwritten addition in margin: with a
proportional
increase

of direct
taxes and of perfect equality in the Senate, were always
connected together; and a large committee of compromise,
consisting of one member from each State, expressly
recommended that both provisions should be
adopted, but neither of them without the other.

Such were the equivalents, directly or indirectly offered,
by which the free States were induced to consent
to slave representation. It was not without very considerable
struggles that they overcame their repugnance to
admitting such a principle in the construction of a republican
government. Mr Gerry, of Massachusetts, at first
exclaimed against it with evident horror, but at last, he
was chairman of the committee of compromise. Even
the slave States themselves, seem to have been a little
embarrassed with the discordant element. A curious
proof of this is given in the language of the Constitution.
The ugly feature is covered as cautiously as the deformed
visage of the Veiled Prophet. The words are as follows:
“Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned
among the States according to their respective numbers;
which shall be ascertained by adding to the whole number
of free persons, including those bound to servitude
for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed,
three fifths of all other persons.” In this most elaborate
sentence, a foreigner would discern no slavery. None
but those who already knew the venomous serpent, would
be able to discover its sting.

Governor Wright, of Maryland, a contemporary of all
these transactions, and a slave holder, after delivering a
eulogy upon the kindness of mastersOpen note a29-rota It was stated, at the time, that this person frequently steamed his
negroes, in order to reduce their size to an equal weight for riding
race horses. This practice is understood to be common at the South. expressed himself
as follows: “The Constitution guaranties to us the services
of these persons. It does not say ‘slaves’; for the 10(2)r 111
feelings of the framers of that glorious instrument would
not suffer them to use that word, on account of its anticongeniality
— its incongeniality to the idea of a constitution
for freemen. It says, ‘persons held to service, or labor.’”
— Gov. Wright’s Speech in Congress, 1822-03March,
1822.

This high praise bestowed on the form of our constitution,
reminds me of an anecdote. A clergyman in a
neighboring State, being obliged to be absent from his
parish, procured a young man to supply his place, who
was very worldly in his inclinations, and very gay in his
manners. When the minister returned, his people said
somewhat reproachfully, “How could you provide such
a man to preach for us; you might at least have left us a
hypocrite.”

While all parties agreed to act in opposition to the
principles of justice, they all concurred to pay homage
to them by hypocrisy of language! Men are willing to
try all means to appear honest, except the simple experiment
of being so. It is true, there were individuals
who distrusted this compromise at the time, if they did
not wholly disapprove of it. It is said that Washington,
as he was walking thoughtfully near the Schuylkill, was
met by a menber of the Convention, to whom, in the
course of conversation, he acknowledged that he was
meditating whether it would not be better to separate,
without proposing a constitution to the people; for he
was in great doubt whether the frame of government,
which was now nearly completed, would be better for
them, than to trust to the course of events, and await
future emergencies.

This anecdote was derived from an authentic source,
and I have no doubt of its truth; neither is there any
doubt that Washington had in his mind this great compromise,
the pivot on which the system of government
was to turn.

If avarice was induced to shake hands with injustice,
from the expectation of increased direct taxation upon
the South, she gained little by the bargain. With the
exception of two brief periods, during the French war,
and the last war with England, the revenue of the 10(2)v 112
United States has been raised by duties on imports.—
The heavy debts and expenditures of the several States,
which they had been accustomed to provide for by
direct taxes, and which they probably expected to
see provided for by the same means in time to come,
have been all paid by duties on imports. The greatest
proportion of these duties are, of course, paid by the free
States; for here, the poorest laborer daily consumes
several articles of foreign production, of which from one
eighth to one half the price is a tax paid to government.
The clothing of the slave population increases the revenue
very little, and their food almost none at all.

Wherever free labor and slave labor exist under the
same government, there must be a perpetual clashing of
interests. The legislation required for one, is, in its
spirit and maxims, diametrically opposed to that required
for the other. Hence Mr Madison predicted, in the
convention, which formed our Federal Constitution, that
the contests would be between the great geographical
sections; that such had been the division, even during
the war and the confederacy.

In the same convention, Charles Pinckney, a man of
great sagacity, spoke of the equal representation of large
and small States as a matter of slight consequence; no
difficulties would ever arise on that point, he said; the
question would always be between the slave-holding and
non-slave-holding interests.

If the pressure of common danger, and the sense of
individual weakness, during our contest for independence,
could not bring the States to mutual confidence,
nothing ever can do it, except a change of character.—
From the adoption of the constitution to the present time,
the breach has been gradually widening. The South
has pursued a uniform and sagacious system of policy,
which, in all its bearings, direct and indirect, has been
framed for the preservation and extension of slave power.
This system, has in the very nature of the two things,
constantly interfered with the interests of the free States;
and hitherto the South have always gained the victory.
This has principally been accomplished by yoking all
important questions together in pairs, and strenuously
resisting the passage of one, unless accompanied by the 10(3)v 113
other. The South was desirous of removing the seat of
government from Philadelphia to Washington, because
the latter is in a slave territory, where republican representatives
and magistrates can bring their slaves without
danger of losing them, or having them contaminated by
the principles of universal liberty: The assumption of
the State debts, likely to bring considerable money back
to the North, was linked with this question, and both
were carried. The admission of Maine into the Union
as a free State, and of Missouri as a slave State, were
two more of these Siamese twins, not allowed to be separated
from each other. A numerous smaller progeny
may be found in the laying of imposts, and the successive
adjustment of protection to navigation, the fisheries,
agriculture, and manufactures.

There would perhaps be no harm in this system of
compromises, or any objection to its continuing in infinite
series, if no injustice were done to a third party,
which is never heard or noticed, except for purposes of
oppression.

I reverence the wisdom of our early legislators; but
they certainly did very wrong to admit slavery as an element
into a free constitution; and to sacrifice the known
and declared rights of a third and weaker party, in order
to cement a union between two stronger ones. Such an
arrangement ought not, and could not, come to good. It
has given the slave States a controlling power which they
will always keep, so long as we remain together.

President John Adams was of opinion, that this
ascendency might be attributed to an early mistake,
originating in what he called the “Frankford advice.”
When the first Congress was summoned in Philadelphia,
Doctor Rush, and two or three other eminent men of
Pennsylvania, met the Massachusetts delegates at Frankford,
a few miles from Philadelphia, and conjured them,
as they valued the success of the common cause, to let no
measure of importance appear to originate with the
North, to yield precedence in all things to Virginia, and
lead her if possible to commit herself to the Revolution.
Above all, they begged that not a word might be said
about “independence;” for that a strong prejudice 10* 10(3)v 114
already existed against the delegates from New England,
on account of a supposed design to throw off their allegiance
to the mother country. The “Frankford advice”
was followed. The delegates from Virginia took the
lead on all occasions.

His son, John Q. Adams, finds a more substantial
reason. In his speech on the Tariff, 1833-02-04February 4, 1833,
he said; “Not three days since, Mr Clayton of Georgia,
called that species of population (viz. slaves) the
machinery of the South. Now that machinery had
twenty odd representativesOpen note a30-rota There are now twentyfive odd representatives — that is, representatives
of slaves. in that hall, — not elected
by the machinery, but by those who owned it. And if
he should go back to the history of this government from
its foundation, it would be easy to prove that its decisions
had been effected, in general, by less majorities than
that. Nay, he might go farther, and insist that that very
representation had ever been, in fact, the ruling power of
this government.”

“The history of the Union has afforded a continual
proof that this representation of property, which they
enjoy, as well in the election of President and Vice President
of the United States, as upon the floor of the
House of Representatives, has secured to the slave-holding
States the entire control of the national policy, and,
almost without exception, the possession of the highest
executive office of the Union. Always united in the purpose
of regulating the affairs of the whole Union by the
standard of the slave-holding interest, their disproportionate
numbers in the electoral colleges have enabled them,
in ten out of twelve quadrennial elections, to confer the
Chief Magistracy upon one of their own citizens. —
Their suffrages at every election, without exception, have
been almost exclusively confined to a candidate of their
own caste. Availing themselves of the divisions which,
from the nature of man, always prevail in communities
entirely free, they have sought and found auxiliaries in
the other quarters of the Union, by associating the passions
of parties, and the ambition of individuals, with
their own purposes, to establish and maintain throughout
the confederated nations the slave-holding policy. The 10(4)r 115
office of Vice President, a station of high dignity, but of
little other than contingent power, had been usually, by
their indulgence, conceded to a citizen of the other section;
but even this political courtesy was superseded at
the election before the last, and both the offices of President
and Vice President of the United States were, by
the preponderancy of slave-holding votes, bestowed upon
citizens of two adjoining and both slave-holding States.
At this moment the President of the United States, the
President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of
Representatives, and the Chief Justice of the United
States, are all citizens of that favored portion of the united
republic. The last of these offices, being, under the
constitution, held by the tenure of good behaviour, has
been honored and dignified by the occupation of the present
incumbent upwards of thirty years. An overruling
sense of the high responsibilities under which it is held,
has effectually guarded him from permitting the sectional
slave-holding spirit to ascend the tribunal of justice; and
it is not difficult to discern, in this inflexible impartiality,
the source of the obloquy which that same spirit has not
been inactive in attempting to excite against the Supreme
Court of the United States itself; and of the insuperable
aversion of the votaries of nullification to encounter
or abide by the decision of that tribunal, the true and
legitimate umpire of constitutional, controverted law.” Open note a31-rota It seems to me that a political pamphlet was never written with
more ability, clearness, and moderation, than Mr Adams’s Report on
the Tariff.

It is worthy of observation that this slave representation
is always used to protect and extend slave power; and
in this way, the slaves themselves are made to vote for
slavery: they are compelled to furnish halters to hang
their posterity.

Machiavel says that “the whole politics of rival states
consist in checking the growth of one another.” It is
sufficiently obvious, that the slave and free States are, and
must be, rivals, owing to the inevitable contradiction of
their interests. It needed no Machiavel to predict the
result. A continual strife has been going on, more or
less earnest, according to the nature of the interests it
involved, and the South has always had strength and 10(4)v 116
skill to carry her point. Of all our Presidents, Washington
alone, had power to keep the jealousies of his countymen
in check; and he used his influence nobly. —
Some of his successors have cherished those jealousies,
and made effective use of them.

The people of the North have to manage a rocky and
reluctant soil; hence commerce and the fisheries early
attracted their attention. The products of these employments
were, as they should be, proportioned to the dexterity
and hard labor required in their pursuit. The
North grew opulent; and her politicians, who came in
contact with those of the South with anything like rival
pretensions, represented the commercial class, which
was the nucleus of the old Federal party.

The Southerners have a genial climate and a fertile
soil; but in consequence of the cumbrous machinery of
slave labor, which is slow for everything, (except exhausting
the soil,) they have always been less prosperous than
the free States. It is said, I know not with how much
truth, but it is certainly very credible, that a great proportion
of their plantations are deeply mortgaged in New
York and Philadelphia. It is likewise said that the expenses
of the planters are generally one or two years in
advance of their income. Whether these statements be
true or not, the most casual observer will decide, that the
free States are uniformly the most prosperous, notwithstanding
the South possesses a political power, by which
she manages to check-mate us at every important move.
When we add this to the original jealousy spoken of by
Mr Madison, it is not wonderful that Southern politicians
take so little pains to conceal their strong dislike of the
North.

A striking difference of manners, also caused by
slavery, serves to aggravate other differences. Slave
holders have the habit of command; and from the superior
ease with which it sits upon them, they seem to
imagine that they were “born to command,” and we to
obey. In time of war, they tauntingly told us that we
might furnish the men, and they would furnish the officers;
but in time of peace they find our list of pensioners
so large, they complain that we did furnish so many men.

10(5)r 117

At the North, every body is busy in some employment,
and politics, with very few exceptions, form but a
brief episode in the lives of the citizens. But the
Southern politicians are men of leisure. They have
nothing to do but to ride round their plantations, hunt,
attend the races, study politics for the next legislative
or congressional campaign, and decide how to use the
prodigious mechanical power, of slave representation,
which a political Archimedes may effectually wield for
the destruction of commerce, or anything else, involving
the prosperity of the free States.

It has been already said, that most of the wealth in
New England was made by commerce; consequently
the South became unfriendly to commerce. There
was a class in New England, jealous, and not without
reason, of their own commercial aristocracy. It
was the policy of the South to foment these passions, and
increase these prejudices. Thus was the old Democratic
party formed; and while that party honestly supposed
they were merely resisting the encroachments of a nobility
at home, they were actually playing a game for one
of the most aristocratic classes in the world — viz. the
Southern planters. A famous slave owner and politician,
openly boasted, that the South could always put
down the aristocracy of the North, by means of her own
democracy. In this point of view, democracy becomes
a machine used by one aristocratic class against another,
that has less power, and is therefore less dangerous.

There are features in the organization of society, resulting
from slavery, which are conducive to anything
but the union of those States. A large class are without
employment, are accustomed to command, and have a
strong contempt for habits of industry. This class, like
the nobility of feudal times, are restless, impetuous, eager
for excitement, and prompt to settle all questions with the
sword. Like the fierce old barons, at the head of their
vassals, they are ever ready to resist and nullify the central
power of the State, whenever it interferes with their
individual interests, or even approaches the strong holds
of their prejudices. All history shows, that men possessing
hereditary, despotic power, cannot easily be brought 10(5)v 118
to acknowledge a superior, either in the administrators
of the laws, or in the law itself. It was precisely such a
class of men that covered Europe with camps, for upwards
of ten centuries.

A Southern governor has dignified duelling with the
name of an “institution”; and the planters generally,
seem to regard it as among those which they have denominated
their “peculiar institutions.” General Wilkinson,
who was the son of a slave owner, expresses in his memoirs,
great abhorrence of duelling, and laments the
powerful influence which his father’s injunction, when
a boy, had upon his after life: “James,” said the old
gentleman, “if you ever take an insult, I will disinherit
you.”

A young lawyer, who went from Massachusetts to reside
at the South, has frequently declared that he could
not take any stand there as a lawyer, or a gentleman,
until he had fought: he was subject to continual insult
and degredation, until he had evinced his readiness to
kill, or be killed. It is obvious that such a state of morals
elevates mere physical courage into a most undue importance.
There are indeed emergencies, when all the
virtues, and all the best affections of man, are intertwined
with personal bravery; but this is not the kind of courage,
which makes duelling in fashion. The patriot nobly
sacrifices himself for the good of others; the duellist
wantonly sacrifices others to himself.

Brow-beating, which is the pioneer of the pistol,
characterizes, particularly of late years, the Southern
legislation. By these means, they seek to overawe the
Representatives from the free States, whenever any question
even remotely connected with slavery is about to be
discussed; and this, united with our strong reverence for
the Union, has made our legislators shamefully cautious
with regard to a subject, which peculiarly demands moral
courage, and an abandonment of selfish considerations.
If a member of Congress does stand his ground firmly, if
he wants no preferment or profit, which the all powerful
Southern influence can give, an effort is then made to
intimidate him. The instances are numerous in which
Northern men have been insulted and challenged by
their Southern brethren, in consequence of the adverse 10(6)r 119
influence they exerted over the measures of the Federal
government. This turbulent evil exists only in our slave
States; and the peace of the country is committed to
their hands whenever twentyfive votes in Congress can
turn the scale in favor of war.

The statesmen of the South have generally been
planters. Their agricultural products must pay the
merchants— foreign and domestic, — the ship owner, the
manufacturer, — and all others concerned in the exchange
or manipulation of them. It is universally
agreed that the production of the raw materials is the
least profitable employment of capital. The planters
have always entertained a jealous dislike of those engaged
in the more profitable business of the manufacture and
exchange of products; particularly as the existence of
slavery among them destroys ingenuity and enterprise,
and compels them to employ the merchants, manufacturers,
and sailors of the free States.Open note a32-rota Virginia has great natural advantages for becoming a manufacturing
country; but slavery, that does evil to all and good to none,
produces a state of things which renders that impossible. Hence there has ever
been a tendency to check New England, whenever she
appears to shoot up with vigorous rapidity. Whether
she tries to live by hook or by crook, there is always an
effort to restrain her within certain limited bounds. The
embargo, passed without limitation of time, (a thing
unprecedented,) was fastened upon the bosom of her
commerce, until life was extinguished. The ostensible
object of this measure, was to force Great Britain to
terms, by distressing the West Indies for food. But
while England commanded the seas, her colonies were
not likely to starve; and for the sake of this doubtful
experiment, a certain and incalculable injury was inflicted
upon the Northern States. Seamen, and the
numerous classes of mechanics connected with navigation,
were thrown out of employment, as suddenly as if
they had been cast on a desert island by some convulsion
of nature. Thousands of families were ruined by that
ill-judged measure. Has any government a right to inflict
so much direct suffering on a very large portion of
their own people, for the sake of an indirect and remote
evil which may possibly be inflicted on an enemy?

10(6)v 120

It is true, agriculture suffered as well as commerce;
but agricultural products could be converted into food
and clothing; they would not decay like ships, nor would
the producers be deprived of employment and sustenance,
like those connected with navigation.

Whether this step was intended to paralyze the
North or not, it most suddenly and decidedly produced
that effect. We were told that it was done to save our
commerce from falling into the hands of the English and
French. But our merchants earnestly entreated not to
be thus saved. At the very moment of the embargo,
underwriters were ready to insure at the usual rates.

The non-intercourse was of the same general character
as the embargo, but less offensive and injurious.
The war crowned this course of policy; and like the
other measures, was carried by slave votes. It was emphatically
a Southern, not a national war. Individuals
gained glory by it, and many of them nobly deserved it;
but the amount of benefit which the country derived
from that war might be told in much fewer words than
would enumerate the mischiefs it produced.

The commercial States, particularly New England,
have been frequently reproached for not being willing to
go to war for the protection of their own interests; and
have been charged with pusillanimity and ingratitude for
not warmly seconding those who were so zealous to defend
their cause. Mr Hayne, during the great debate
with Mr Webster, in the Senate, made use of this customary
sarcasm. It is revived whenever the sectional
spirit of the South, or party spirit in the North, prompts
individuals to depreciate the talents and character of any
eminent Northern man. The Southern States have even
gone so far on this subject, as to assume the designation
of “patriot States,” in contra-distinction to their
northern neighbors — and this too, while Bunker Hill and
Faneuil Hall are still standing! It certainly was a pleasant
idea to exchange the appellation of slave States for
that of patriot States — it removed a word which in a
republic is unseemly and inconsistent.

Whatever may be thought of the justice and expediency
of the last war, it was certainly undertaken against 11(1)r 121
the earnest wishes of the commercial States — two thirds
of the Representatives from those States voted in opposition
to the measure. According to the spirit of the
constitution it ought not to have passed unless there
were two thirds in favor of it. Why then should the
South have insisted upon conferring a boon, which was
not wanted; and how happened it, that Yankees, with
all their acknowledged shrewdness in money matters,
could never to this day perceive how they were protected
by it? Yet New England is reproached with cowardice
and ingratitude to her Southern benefactors! If one
man were to knock another down with a broad axe, in
the attempt to brush a fly from his face, and then blame
him for not being sufficiently thankful, it would exactly
illustrate the relation between the North and the South
on this subject.

If the protection of commerce had been the real object
of the war, would not some preparations have been
made for a navy? It was ever the policy of the slave
States to destroy the navy. Vast conquests by land were
contemplated, for the protection of Northern commerce.
Whatever was intended, the work of destruction was
done. The policy of the South stood for a while like a
giant among ruins. New England received a blow,
which crushed her energies, but could not annihilate
them. Where the system of free labor prevails, and
there is work of any kind to be done, there is a safety
valve provided for any pressure. In such a community
there is a vital and active principle, which cannot be
long repressed. You may dam up the busy waters, but
they will sweep away any obstructions, or force a new channel.

Immediately after the peace, when commerce again
began to try her broken wings, the South took care to
keep her down, by multiplying permanent embarrassments,
in the shape of duties. The direct tax (which
would have borne equally upon them, and which in the
original compact was the equivalent for slave representation),
was forthwith repealed, and commerce was burdened
with the payment of the national debt. The
encouragement of manufactures, the consumption of
domestic products, or living within ourselves, was then 11 11(1)v 122
urged upon us. This was an ancient doctrine of the
democratic party. Mr Jefferson was its strongest advocate.
Did he think it likely to bear unfavorably upon
“the nation of shop keepers and peddlers?”Open note q191-rota Mr Jefferson’s description of New England. The
Northerners adopted it with sincere views to economy,
and more perfect independence. The duties were so
adjusted as to embarrass commerce, and to guard the interests
of a few in the North, who, from patriotism, party
spirit, or private interest, had established manufactures
on a considerable scale. This system of protection
opposed by the North, was begun in 18161816 by
Southern politicians, and enlarged and confirmed by them
in 18241824. It was carried nearly as much by Southern influence,
as was the war itself; and if the votes were placed
side by side, there could not be a doubt of the identity of the
interests and passions, which lay concealed under both.
But enterprise, that moral perpetual-motion, overcomes all
obstacles. Neat and flourishing villages rose in every
valley of New England. The busy hum of machinery
made music with her neglected waterfalls. All her
streams, like the famous Pactolus, flowed with gold. From
her discouraged and embarrassed commerce arose a
greater blessing, apparently indestructible. Walls of
brick and granite could not easily be overturned by the
Southern lever, and left to decay, as the ship timber had
done. Thus Mordecai was again seated in the king’s
gate, by means of the very system intended for his
ruin. As soon as this state of things became perceptible,
the South commenced active hostility with manufactures.
Doleful pictures of Southern desolation and
decay were given, and all attributed to manufactures.
The North was said to be plundering the South, while
she, poor dame, was enriching her neighbors, and
growing poor upon her extensive labors. (If this statement
be true, how much gratitude do we owe the negroes:
for they do all the work that is done at the
South. Their masters only serve to keep them in a
condition, where they do not accomplish half as much
as they otherwise would.).

11(2)r 123

New England seems to be like the poor lamb that tried
to drink at the same stream with the wolf. “You make
the water so muddy I can’t drink,” says the wolf: “I
stand below you,” replied the lamb, “and therefore it
cannot be.” “You did me an injury last year,” retorted
the wolf. “I was not born last year,” rejoined the lamb.
“Well, well,” exclaimed the wolf, “then it was your
father or mother. I’ll eat you, at all events.”

The bitter discussions in Congress have grown out of
this strong dislike to the free States; and the crown of
the whole policy is nullification. The single state of
South Carolina has undertaken to abolish the revenues
of the whole nation; and threatened the Federal Government
with seccession from the Union, in case the
laws were enforced by any other means than through the
judicial tribunals.

“South Carolina has the privilege of excessive representation,
and is released from the payment of direct taxes,
which, according to the ratio of her representation, would
be nearly double that of any non-slave-holding State;
it is therefore not a little extraordinary that she should
complain of an unequal proportion of duties of imposts.” “It is not a little extraordinary that this new pretension
of South Carolina, the State which above all others enjoys
this unrequited privilege of excessive representation,
released from all payment of the direct taxes, of
which her proportion would be nearly double that of any
non-slave-holding State, should proceed from that very
complaint that she bears an unequal proportion of duties
of imposts, which, by the constitution of the United
States, are required to be uniform throughout the Union.
Vermont, with a free population of two hundred and eighty
thousand souls, has five representatives in the popular
House of Congress, and seven Electors for President and
Vice President. South Carolina, with a free population of
less than two hundred and sixty thousand souls, sends nine
members to the House of Representatives, and honors
the Governor of Virginia with eleven votes for the office
of President of the United States. If the rule of representation
were the same for South Carolina and for
Vermont, they would have the same number of Representatives 11(2)v 124
in the House, and the same number of Electors
for the choice of President and Vice President. She
has nearly double the number of both.”

What would the South have? They took the management
at the very threshold of our government, and,
excepting the rigidly just administration of Washington,
they have kept it ever since. They claimed slave representation,
and obtained it. For their convenience the
revenues were raised by imposts instead of direct taxes,
and thus they give little or nothing in exchange for their
excessive representation. They have increased the slave
States, till they have twentyfive votes in Congress—
They have laid the embargo, and declared war — They
have controlled the expenditures of the nation — They
have acquired Louisiana and Florida for an eternal slave
market, and perchance for the manufactory of more
slave States — They have given five presidents out of
seven to the United States — And in their attack upon
manufactures, they have gained Mr Clay’s concession
bill. “But all this availeth not, so long as Mordecai the
Jew sitteth in the king’s gate.” The free States must
be kept down. But change their policy as they will, free
States cannot be kept down. There is but one way to
ruin them; and that is to make them slave States. If
the South with all her power and skill cannot manage
herself into prosperity, it is because the difficulty lies at
her own doors, and she will not remove it. At one time
her deserted villages were attributed to the undue patronage
bestowed upon settlers on the public lands; at
another, the tariff is the cause of her desolation. Slavery,
the real root of the evil, is carefully kept out of sight, as
a “delicate subject,” which must not be alluded to. It is
a singular fact in the present age of the world, that delicate
and indelicate subjects mean precisely the same thing.

If any proof were wanted, that slavery is the cause
of all this discord, it is furnished by Eastern and Western
Virginia. They belong to the same State, and are
protected by the same laws; but in the former, the slave-
holding interest is very strong — while in the latter, it
is scarcely anything. The result is, warfare, and continual
complaints, and threats of separation. There are 11(3)r 125
no such contentions between the different sections of
free States; simply because slavery, the exciting cause of
strife, does not exist among them.

The constant threat of the slave-holding States is the
dissolution of the Union; and they have repeated it with
all the earnestness of sincerity, though there are powerful
reasons why it would not be well of them to venture
upon that untried state of being. In one respect only,
are these threats of any consequence — thay have familiarized
the public mind with the subject of separation,
and diminished the reverence, with which the free States
have hitherto regarded the Union. The farewell advice
of Washington operated like a spell upon the hearts and
consciences of his countrymen. For many, many years
after his death, it would almost have been deemed blasphemy
to speak of separation as a possible event. I
would that it still continued so! But it is now an everyday
occurence, to hear politicians, of all parties, conjecturing
what system would be pursued by different sections
of the country, in case of a dissolution of the Union.
This evil is likewise chargeable upon slavery. The threats
of separation have uniformly come from the slave-holding
States; and on many important measures the free
States have been awed into acquiescence by their respect
for the Union.

Mr Adams, in the able and manly report before alluded
to, says: “It cannot be denied that in a community
spreading over a large extent of territory, and politically
founded upon the principles proclaimed in the declaration
of independence, but differing so widely in the elements
of their social condition, that the inhabitants of
one half the territory are wholly free, and those of the
other half divided into masters and slaves, deep if not
irreconcilable collisions of interest must abound. The
question whether such a community can exist under
one common government, is a subject of profound, philosophical
speculation in theory. Whether it can continue
long to exist, is a question to be solved only by the
experiment now making by the people of this Union, under
that national compact, the constitution of the United
States.”

11* 11(3)v 126

The admission of Missouri into the Union is another
clear illustration of the slave-holding power. That
contest was marked by the same violence and the same
threats as have characterized nullification. On both
occasions the planters were pitted against the commercial
and manufacturing sections of the country. On both
occasions the democracy of the North was, by one
means or another, induced to throw its strength upon
the Southern lever, to increase its already prodigious
power. On both, and on all occasions, some little support
has been given to Northern principles in Maryland, Virginia,
and North Carolina; because in portions of those
States there is a considerable commercial interest, and
some encouragement of free labor. So true it is, in the
minutest details, that slavery and freedom are always
arrayed in opposition to each other.

At the time of the Missouri question, the pestiferous
effects of slavery had become too obvious to escape the
observation of the most superficial statesman. The
new free States admitted into the Union enjoyed tenfold
prosperity compared with the new slave States. Give a
free laborer a barren rock, and he will soon cover it
with vegetation; while the slave and his task-master,
would change the garden of Eden to a desert.

But Missouri must be admitted as a slave State, for
two strong reasons. First, that the planters might perpetuate
their predominant influence by adding to the
slave representation, — the power of which is always
concentrated against the interests of the free States. —
Second, that a new market might be opened for their
surplus slaves. It is lamentable to think that two votes
in favor of Missouri slavery, were given by Massachusetts
men; and that those two votes would have turned
the scale. The planters loudly threatened to dissolve
the Union, if slavery were not extended beyond the Mississippi.
If the Union cannot be preserved without
crime, it is an eternal truth that nothing good can be
preserved by crime. The immense territories of Louisiana,
Arkansas, and Florida are very likely to be formed
into slave States; and every new vote on this side, places
the free States more and more at the mercy of the South- 11(4)r 127
and gives a renewed and apparently interminable lease
to the duration of slavery.

The purchase or the conquest of the Texas, is a favorite
scheme with Southerners, because it would occasion
such an inexhaustible demand for slaves. A gentleman
in the Virginia convention thought the acquisition of the
Texas so certain, that he made calculations upon the increased
value of negroes. We have reason to thank God
that the jealousy of the Mexican government places a
barrier in that direction.

The existence of slavery among us prevents the recognition
of Haytian independence. That republic is fast
increasing in wealth, intelligence and refinement. — Her
commerce is valuable to us and might become much
more so. But our Northern representatives have never
even made an effort to have her independence acknowledged,
because a colored ambassador would be so disagreeable
to our prejudices.

Few are aware of the extent of sectional dislike in this
country; and I would not speak of it, if I thought it possible
to add to it. The late John Taylor, a man of great
natural talent, wrote a book on the agriculture of Virginia,
in which he acknowledges impoverishment, but
attributes it all to the mismanagement of overseers. In
this work, Mr Taylor has embodied more of the genuine
spirit, the ethics and politics, of planters, than any other
man; excepting perhaps, John Randolph in his speeches.
He treats merchants, capitalists, bankers, and all other
people not planters, as so many robbers, who live by
plundering the slave owner, apparently forgetting by what
plunder they themselves live.

Mr Jefferson and other eminent men from the South,
have occasionally betrayed the same strong prejudices;
but they were more guarded, lest the democracy of the
North should be undeceived, and their votes lost. Mr
Taylor’s book is in high repute in the Southern States, and
its sentiments widely echoed; but it is little known here.

A year or two since, I received a letter from a publisher
who largely supplies the Southern market, in which
he assured me that no book from the North would sell at 11(4)v 128
the South, unless the source from which it came, were
carefully concealed! Yet New England has always
yielded to Southern policy in preference to uniting with
the Middle States, with which she has in most respects,
a congeniality of interests and habits. It has been the
constant policy of the slave States to prevent the free
States from acting together.

Who does not see that the American people are walking
over a subterranean fire, the flames of which are fed
by slavery?

The South no doubt gave her influence to General
Jackson, from the conviction that a slave owner would
support the slave-holding interest. The Proclamation
against the nullifiers, which has given the President such
sudden popularity at the North, has of course offended
them. No person has a right to say that Proclamation
is insincere. It will be extraordinary if a slave owner
does in reality depart from the uniform system of
his brethren. In the President’s last Message, it is
maintained that the wealthy land holders, that is, the
planters, are the best part of the population; — it admits
that the laws for raising of revenue by imposts have been
in their operation oppressive to the South; — it recommends
a gradual withdrawing of protection from manufactures;
— it advises that the public lands shall cease to
be a source of revenue, as soon as practicable — that
they be sold to settlers — and in a convenient time the
disposal of the soil be surrendered to the States respectively
in which it lies; — lastly, the Message tends to
discourage future appropriations of public money for
purposes of internal improvement.

Every one of these items is a concession to the slave-
holding policy. If the public lands are taken from the
nation, and given to the States in which the soil lies,
who will get the largest share? That best part of the
population called planters.

The Proclamation and the Message are very unlike
each other. Perhaps South Carolina is to obtain her
own will by a route more certain, though more circuitous,
than open rebellion. Time will show.