Southern institutes : or, An inquiry into the origin and early prevalence of slavery and the slave-...

SI ts ORAS Te See ee ie? ate, rr a? te ds Les nn e ° 7 . no S omen
fron te, (Sen moaaRtinn pe is Scat ora eIe” er Miliday. SE ae ee ee RR ee cere a er ee ea ea ae er a aa ee eae Gre.
ve. PO, I gn Siac et yim se aad - “ Ah. Fore PRPS, 4 tak > aa iE eee cae | iste Td. FSS reys ape : ! ate oi 5 t ’ Ieee PerirrT ole che s 4 ge 2
i be ke bp oe .e : 3 : . se%e6% e é at brs st Sl er ate “ > = a roe bo 82 wo Si. 20 Sle, Se SiS! Ole er or0 8.8, CP ROA LTD ee he et tele mt:
ane 2s Rear Pe SR Settee emia asta Goma ae aban aon yeaheah Se EG hes ize? sae tow LEP Ka aa al pana sai esc tie t ak hi eit ob ct % n ig E
Re Sais odigrecaeee st 4 wesiss pee aseigieiste teats =a Lpeats tees ‘ ; fee

as 6 5 hs co sere ar ny tstses Tonspoeitae

. . * 2 ws “ - . - = . -
onoa Sasa stepies ste aysieee nininiehoigtiebvieleioishstsaislnettscsaabajesaueasuibalcteeteest wr itsgrestiae arti... . -oifees ae pon aa: -
pies wun Gagpaeeers pees 5 sa F oT ses ESRD SMAI MATMAUS IGE eset cee te ener Stat er 30s 4f55 (G9 ~ sSeSESSA SES AAS
rhe zs STIS Pree A Des eg LaMIace dette ue et x : SSRIS - <6 Ean gene nen ee ene 5

giihaies

RESP RGEP AT ET HRA GSES
irate gle an Bee ee
~ ts ee Se oes . ae TT NE See
3 = oe Uh feant:< Peete. 333
eho at Seed ao ; ; ,
art t ob, Lf hbo
digabe redgene

aELaSiadetadtentendeer she

ee EN

Perey deka ae anaes

wero ada ike ass mh ana en re cameron bis
9 | Slept ETT ey Bie ALT BP hah tl fe te ee Suen ey bei AL

SS 9 IE NR BES TEES NY WB

Hh
PESEPIVETALELETLETETLTEIELT TE LILeATL at ieeetii

Soy bene . C - cadmeotmneneveneen ncaa ist anh ssesTeRaCErE ee
or 271 Sh han esi Gani ts eo poteehbeitdnanepieibaneneenineteinineeenbemsaneinereadee sine tine ai acoama sic iaianin n hiteicenimaatriarirentntenitiantiitineeineaaiaiatiiains =

PPYTTSTTTTTTETTTTTTTTATTTTTTTTCITTETITTTTTTTTTTTTT TTT PTET TT TTT TT TTT TTT TTT ITT rer ere rr rT eet

LERLLELSLILAPLOLLLASLLEALLI Leet

TIietitlititriiihiuiii

Acorasionginee*2 oe Ae bo |

| IA, 1¥0-

Gand Wy IS IPED. wa

aie ap
a7 i ne

.
iy
Ew

SOUTHERN INSTITUTES:

OR,

AN INQUIRY

INTO THE

ORIGIN AND EARLY PREVALENCE -

OF

SLAVERY AND THE SLAVE-TRADE:

WITH AN
ANALYSIS OF THE LAWS, HISTORY, AND GOVERNMENT OF THE INSTITUTION

IN THE PRINCIPAL NATIONS, ANCIENT AND MODERN, FROM
THE EARLIEST AGES DOWN TO THE PRESENT TIME.

WITH

Hotes ant Comments

IN DEFENCE OF THE

SOUTHERN INSTITUTIONS.

BY,
GEORGE 8S. SAWYER,

A MEMBER OF THE BAR OF LOUISIANA.

He that is despised, and hath a servant, is better than he that
honoreth himself, and lacketh bread. — PROV. xii. 9.

PHILADELPHIA:

ese be TN OO DD 100:
1858.

m tee c: 2 A. 5, saan ne ¢.ee> ty ae « Oe Aa” ae
Fires: Ne! a Sete ME Seas: ures
‘ ’ ahh rye a)
ay oe ee a ' 4
7 "Te i ' .
t ’
ms 3
4 vis +.
*)
'
F
+
-
.
-
es 4 a bh '
s % j A . 4 .
‘ a Po ee se ‘
--
f
.

_ Entered, according to the Act of Ounygensae in theryed 1858,

‘ . J.B. LIPPINCOTT & Cos
in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United Bates ir the str

of Pennsylvania.

A co y af
Rae AT ee
2 a
Nd ds aw
TAREE. # OF to ORR cen A as
RS By ee iy RE Ra eae

© bth Agee

wee

PREFACE.

In presenting a treatise of this character to the public,
it may not be improper to state the motives which have
actuated the author, and the causes that have led to its
production. |

No one inured to the institutions, habits, manners,
-and customs of the South, can mingle to any consider-
able extent in social circles in ‘portions of the free
States, without coming:in collision with sentiments and
feelings that find no sympathy in his own heart — no
welcome response in his own bosom. Repeated alter-
eations of this character, within the last few years, have
convinced him of the gross ignorance and misconcep-
tion of the true spirit of our institutions, and of the facts
of their details, that pervade public opinion generally
in those sections of the Union. Born, and reared to the
verge of manhood, in a New England State; educated at
one of her oldest colleges; and having been for the last
fifteen years a resident of Louisiana, and almost an
annual sojourner for a season in some portion of the
free States — the author has enjoyed the opportunity of
becoming acquainted with the sources of information

(iii)

iV PREFACE.

accessible to the public, and with the misrepresentations
and frauds practised to perpetuate these errors on the
public mind.

The only hope or expectation of reward that he pro-
mises himself, is that of being able, to some extent,
to expose the imposition and frauds of designing men
and women, to elicit inquiry after the truth, and thus
to assist in forming a sound and correct public opinion.
Had it been his design to hire out his pen, after the
common custom of those petty scribblers, who flatter
popular error and pander to popular prejudice, for a
trifling reward of pelf and fame, the author would have
selected some subject more congenial to the vitiated taste
of the age. It is the duty of every friend of the Union,
as well as of every true lover of his country, to cast his
mite of oil upon the troubled waters, however feeble be
the effort and apparently powerless the effect—perchance
he may do something to allay the angry billows of fac-
tion, to still the tempest of party conflict, and to assuage
the acrimony of sectional animosities. We respectfully
submit to the Southern people, if there is not too much
apathy and indifference in literary and _ professional
circles, in regard to the insidious influences of the com-
bined system of our enemies to undermine our institu-
tions and upheave our social fabric.

There is a large and respectable portion of the good
citizens of the free States who are pledged to their
country, and to one another, to put down all this dis-
organizing work of fanaticism, to protect our institu-

PREFACE. V

tions from all lawless interference, and to stand firmly
by the constitutional rights of the South; and it is the
duty of the Southern people to come to their aid, and
to furnish them with all the information and all the
legitimate means of defence in their power. Such is the
principal object of this treatise. It has been carefully
written, with the purpose of avoiding all sectarian views
in morals, politics, and religion, and of preserving, as far
as the author is capable, a high tone of moral and re-
ligious sentiment. In answering objections, and exposing
error in its various forms, many facts have been cited,
and much matter included in this inquiry, which might
not be pertinent to an impartial history. So also many
expressions have been used, arguendo, and numerous
remarks made, ex talione, that might well be omitted in
. a purely literary treatise. For this we offer no apology
but the just provocation given us by our opponents.
These essays were all prepared for the press as early
as July, 1855 (as is well known in the book market);
but it was thought advisable, by many of the friends of
the South, to suspend their publication at that time, in
the hope that the agitation of the entire subject might
cease. Accordingly they have been withheld till the
present time, vainly awaiting the long expected event.
But, unfortunately, we have waited only to see the
breach widen and the combat thicken. It is now con-
ceded by all acquainted with the contents of this work,
that the present crisis imperiously demands something

of the kind. Consequently the author has endeavored to
1*

vi PREFACE.

modernize such portions of it as relate to the present
time, by the insertion of some additional matter, as well
as by appending notes and remarks upon passing events.
Meanwhile, some of the grounds seem to have been
partially occupied by others; but still no disposition is
felt to change the main features of the book.

During the limited period that has been devoted to
this work, burdened as he was with the duties of" his
profession, it has been impossible for the author to
devote such care and attention to style, in all its parts,
as might perhaps have rendered it more palatable to the
general reader; but it being designed more as a prac-
tical delineator of facts and principles, than as a display
of beautiful composition, greater attention has been
devoted to the collection of the materials than to any
polish in the style of their presentation and arrangement.

ConcorpiA, La., October 1, 1857.

AN ANALYTICAL

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

MURIEL TEIN tc ceisaciursivcstvolevies toces os heds esviens'ceccee syscer anvaes Page 13-16

ESSAY FIRST.

ON THE ORIGIN AND GENERAL PREVALENCE OF SLAVERY
AND THE SLAVE TRADE.

The analogy of its origin to other principles of law — Its ne-
cessity in the early days of nations as a principle of human
government—A penalty substituted for capital punishment,
by the dictates of humanity — Its justice — Its early preva-
lence — Egyptian Slavery — Patriarchal Slavery and the
Slave Trade — A principle of national law, founded on cus-
tom — The Slave Trade in Ancient Europe—The title of the
TOT cota ge sna ccvsesass cbveds scvere bqrsencan caases ois exe sts 16-29

ESSAY SECOND.
ON HEBREW SLAVERY, OR SLAVERY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT.

The Old Testament as a code of civil laws — The relation of
master and slave in the same — An analysis of the statutes
of Moses upon — Did not create, but presuppose existence
of —Its prevalence by the force of custom — The property
of the master liable to be bought and sold—The distinction
between the right of the master over slaves of Hebrew and
foreign origin — Position and treatment of — Manner of be-
coming such — The government of the Hebrew nation —Its
influence upon the character of their laws — The necessity
for the consistency of the prophets with the laws of Moses.. 29-50

{ vii )

Vili AN ANALYTICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS.

ESSAY THIRD.
GREEK SLAVERY.

Its origin — Early use of terms to denote slaves — Founded
upon custom, or the law of nations — Argument of Aristotle
in support of—His definition of—Mode of becoming such—
Remarks of Plato upon— Notes of reference to, and pas-
sages from, original authors— An analysis of the laws of
Greece upon — Position and treatment of — Punishments,
&c. — Number of — Classes and various employments of —
Value of — Mode of selling — Nations from which they were
obtained—Instances of voluntary slavery—Analogy between
Greek and Hebrew Slavery — Use of the words dovdos and

oveeee 50-68

OUKETTICNS tenet ccas cadens cs peusecks

ESSAY FOURTH.
ROMAN SLAVERY.

Recognized by the force of custom— Approved by most hu-
mane writers — Definition of a slave by the Roman code —
Manner of becoming such — Nations from which they were
«principally obtained — Difference between treatment and
use of Greek and Roman slaves — The immense number of
— Numerous classification — Position, rights, and mode of
treatment of — Ergastula—Various modes of punishment—
Power of life and death over, by the master — Character of
Roman ladies towards — Various quotations from Roman
authors in notes upon—lIts vast extent through the Pro-
vinces, and the vast number in the Empire, at the com-
mencement of the Christian Era... ....s. sce sss ses cee see verses cee eee 69-98

HSBAY FIFTH.
SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

The relation of Christianity to the institutions of civil govern-
ment—Only points of conflict—The influence of Christianity

AN ANALYTICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS. ix

in vindicating moral and religious principles, and consist-
ency with Christian rectitude—Various instances of conflict
with civil institutions upon these points — Instances of the
gainsayings of Jesus Christ and his Apostles of the civil
laws — Instances of the approval of the relation of master
and slave— Figures of illustration drawn from — The Epis-
tles of Peter and Paul to the various places, persons and
churches to whom they were directed, considered—Analysis
of the laws and government of the Church upon, from
canons of, &c.—History of the English word “slave’—The
reason why it is not used more frequently in the Bible —
Numerous quotations from Greek authors to show that dovdos
TNCANS B BIAVE..0001 secncrers ceceeee Fodeaheu*vonvoipcuibs,rendgaicavereehstd 99-132

ESSAY SIXTH.
SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

Tacitus’ description of German Slavery — Slavery among the
Lombards in Italy — Among the French in Gaul — Among
the Goths — Force of national law — Analysis of their va-
rious laws — Slavery in France — Instances and manner of
emancipation — Slavery in Britain— Slave Trade there —
Classification from Doomsday Book — Continued down to a
late period — Also in France — African Slave Trade com-
menced by Portuguese — Slavery of the Indians of America
— Spain engages in the same traffic — Royal Ordinance au-
thorizing negro slavery in America — Causes that abolished
the slavery of these nations.......+. sssceeee oe soneecs cons on copes vee 183-147

ESSAY SEVENTH.
MORAL ATTITUDE OF SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES.

‘¢ Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you,” &c., con-
sidered with reference to—Objections stated and considered
— ‘‘Hath made of one blood,” &c., comments upon — Criti-
cism upon translation of the original of — The doctrine of
the unity, equality, and common origin of mankind, consi-

x AN ANALYTICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS,

dered with reference to physical facts— Physical and intel-
lectual condition of Africa and the Africans — Physical and
mental facts relative to the unity theory—Description of the
various divisions and tribes of Africa, at some length —
Physical and moral impossibilities relative to their Asiatic
origin—The social and political history of the negro race—
Incapacity for native improvement — Contrasted with other
nations — Cause of their inferiority seated in their physical
organization—Anatomical facts relative to—Correspondence
of their anatomical structure with their mental and moral
OHELACCET acs edoe neh: Sat denaee tsbeda os oacedac snececsed ovsean asuseuamsrepsaninie Lae Od

ESSAY EIGHTH.
THE RELATIVE POSITION AND TREATMENT OF NEGROES.

Origin of Negro Slavery — Slavery in Africa — Slave Trade
designed originally as a blessing to—-Countenanced upon
principles of national law...... 0s sesseeeee ovsees bonnes SUNS TaNasuye 201-205

ORIGIN OF SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES.

It came here through the force of custom — Opposed by the
Colonists — Remark of Jefferson upon— Number. of slaves
at the adoption of the Constitution — ‘‘All men are created
equal,” &c., considered — Not original with Jefferson —
Original meaning of, perverted by him — Value of slaves at
that time — Government could not pay ...... ..seessecersceeceeee 205-211

THE POSITION AND TREATMENT OF THE SLAVES.

Definition of — Fiction of law relative to the idea of property
in — The power of the master to sell, a blessing to the slave
—lIs not a chattel—Slavery the happiest condition the negro
can have in this country—Their employment, food, clothing,
punishment, and general mode of life— Their peculium—
Opportunities they have to acquire — Religious privileges—
Their chastity protected, as much as possible — Families
are not generally separated, laws against— The Southern
master the only true friend of the slave — Difference be-
tween the position of free blacks at the North and at the
South — Some objections answered .......s.ceessssessecsessveerere 211-286

AN ANALYTICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS.

BSeank NINTH.

' THE ABOLITIONISTS: CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS.

Who is meant by— Errors and misrepresentations of stated —
Injustice of charging slavery with its abuses—The same
might be applied to marriage, &c.— Instances cited ..........

Britiso SLAVERY.

The Press-gang, horrors of — Philosophical definition of

SIAVETY 000000 seeceecvcees seove ye Wnlsapsiokonihive sncmaess§ bees eeeees

236-248

- 248-249

SLAVERY OF THE AGRICULTURAL PEASANTRY OF BRITAIN.

Their low wages, miserable hovels, food, clothing, &¢. — Con-
dition of Irish peasants — Impossible to extricate them-
selves POCHHS CHESHSE -SORSESHE CHOCHHSE HSE CHHHSSE CHHSHHOEF BESET SEHHHE CHOTA BEE ES

SLAVERY IN THE BritisH MINEs.

The colliers’ condition— Male and Female — Infants — In-
stances of most revolting scenes of barbarism, from Report
Tce. ccc aap uc cont'nce ess cabtenednecd vestenstleans

SLAVERY IN British MANUFACTORIES.

Account of the trials, hardships, and sufferings of the opera-
tives, at some length, compiled from English authorities.....

British SLAVERY IN GENERAL.

This account includes all their work-shops, street begging,
domestic service, &e. eteeeeeee oe SOC ES COCECHSES CHEHEE GEESE EEE

SLAVERY WorxK-HovusE System.

Number of paupers in— Miserable condition of the Irish pea-
santry — Coolie Trade to the West Indies — Their con-
dition eeeeee eevere SOCSSHHST COFFE SEHS CHESHESE SESH ET SEE SHH SeS SEF Bene

SLAVERY IN Britisy INDIA.

The tea and opium trade, salt monopoly, and all their attend-
ant consequences upon the poor natives — Sympathy of the
Abolitionists with — The history of conscience.....- ...eeeeee

249-256

256-262

262-271

271-275

275-280

280-293

xii AN ANALYTICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS.

ESSAY TENTH.

THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF SLAVERY IN THE
UNITED STATES.

Remarks upon the Dred Scott case—Criticism upon dissenting
opinions — Definition of slavery further considered — Expo-
sition of the master’s right of property in a slave, or of
chattel slavery— Laws of different Slave States for the pro-
tection of slaves quoted, in a note— The power of the mas-
ter to sell and alienate the services of, a blessing to the
slave — The right of property in the services of the slave,
and to control his person so far, exists at common law — It
is recognized by the earliest decisions of the Courts of Eng-
land—Numerous decisions and Acts of Parliament quoted—
The same in this country — Decisions of Massachusetts and
others — The foundation of the title of the master to........ 293-332

CoLONIAL SLAVERY IN THIS COUNTRY.

Their ‘fugitive slave law”— Their Slave Trade, foreign and
domestic — Early manifestations upon, after formation of
the Union — Early legislation upon — Ordinance of 1787 —
Convention—Missouri Compromise — First violated by Abo-
litionists — Non-intervention — The rights of the South —
Abolition and Free-Soilism with reference to the Union and
its FUGUE PLOSPCCtS....0. sevens caver snccce vosese oncees as.ceee pauieeee tit

.
‘

SOUTHERN INSTITUTES.

~

ENE RODUCTION.

Ir is essentially the highest genius of the statesman and
political philosopher to place human institutions and human
progress upon their true foundation. Government, laws, and
the organic principles of society owe their perpetuity and ad-
vancement to the true theory of their existence. History is his
only measure of human experience; and the experience of the
past can alone light the dark pathway of the future. The
smoke and din of turmoil and commotion may for a while over-
shadow its radiance, but to the undeviating eye of philosophy
and truth, it gradually reveals its twilight beams far in the dim
distance, and they brighten upon his view like constellations in
the celestial fields upon the steadfast gaze of the astronomer.
The eye of the true statesman and political philosopher is the
eye of faith ; it pierces the dim war-clouds of contending factions,
penetrating into regions of pure truth, into higher and more ample
fields of being, and then basks in balmy daylight as calm and
peaceful as summer sunshine, after the angry thunder-storm has
spent its fury and passed away. The theory of the South has
seldom yet been founded in truth, nor the philosophy of her
institutions put upon its true ground.

The faithful student of history will find, in the arrangement
of the following essays, such a continued chain of events in the
history of slavery and the slave-trade, as to show the analogy
of their origin and principles to those of all other laws and
institutions, and that they came down to us as well authenticated
by custom and usage, sanctioned, proved, and improved by the
wisdom and experience of ages, as any other right rule or rela-

tion of mankind towards one another. He will find from such
(18)

14 INTRODUCTION.

a source and from such authority the substantial relation of
master and slave as necessary a regulation in the order of
human government as any other that enters into the organiza-
tion of society. In the history of this relation, the philosophy
of Aristotle upon the relation of mankind towards one another
is strikingly verified, ‘‘It is the province of mind to rule and
of matter to serve, of the strong to command and of the weak
to obey.”?. This is a fixed fact in the philosophy of human
nature and lays at the foundation of all human progress.

Is it asked upon what principle slavery can be justified ? It
is upon the principle of the superiority of mind over matter,
of intellect and intelligence over instinct and brute force. As
the cause of this inequality lies beyond all human control and
beyond all human conceptions of right and wrong, so does the
substantial relation of master and slave. As well might we
be called upon to uphold or condemn sickness as health, sanity
as insanity, the sense of hearing as deafness, seeing as blind-
ness, idiocy as sound sense, folly as wisdom; and a thousand
other mental and=physical imbecilities and their attendant con-
sequences, incident to mankind, that arise wholly from the
imperfections of human nature. These must all alike remain
fixed facts in the philosophy of human nature, beyond the reach
of human laws, or remedy by human means. Laws and regu-
lations relate to them only upon the true principle of self-
government— the greatest amount of good to the greatest
number. The highest office of the philosopher, statesman, or
reformer, is to adopt the best possible means for the accom-
plishment of a given end, which implies an adequate knowledge
of the cause of the evil sought to be remedied; and as an
essential principle of self-government, the State where the
remedy is sought should be the arbiter of its own policy.

But the world is full of visionary theorists and Utopian
dreamers, who set themselves up as the custos morum of all.
These transcendentalists live too much in the ideal regions of
fancy, beyond the reach of practical reason, truth, and the sober
realities of life. Mistaking the world of men and things as
they really are, for a fanciful sketch, as they vainly conceive it
should, be, they erect an ethereal standard of right, moralize in
higher elements, legislate upon higher principles and govern by
‘‘higher laws,’’ than practically relate to this sublunary world.
Talent, for practical usefulness and motive power, everywhere
degenerates under their influence. Behold Massachusetts !
‘‘There is her history! The world knows it by heart.’’ Once
the home of statesmen and of jurists; the proud emporium of

INTRODUCTION. 15

law, literature, and learning. But alas! ‘‘ Hath the glory
departed from Israel and the sceptre from Mount Lebanon.”
Where now are her Adamses, her Parsons, her Storys, her
Websters? And when her Everetts and her Prescotts are no
more, the last echo of the great spirit of Seventy-Six will have
died away from his native hills, and the last link be broken in
the golden chain that connects the present and future with the
ast.

The wisdom of modern philosophy has taught the world that
facts are'the basis of all reasoning and all calculations; that
truth is developed only step by step, by the slow and tedious,
yet sure, process of induction. The experience of the past
must lay the foundation of theory for the future; that alone
can place truth and human improvement upon the true theory
of their advancement. Facts have always held a definite
relation to theory, but the distinction between ancient and
modern philosophy was in the relative position which they
occupied towards one another. Truth was too pure and exalted,
in the estimation of the Father of Grecian philosophy, to be
contaminated by the sordid position of a secondary relation to
facts in the order of investigation ; hence, by a single bound, he
reached the lofty goal, and then strove to wield the airy sceptre
of theory, like the sword of Ossian’s ghost, over the warring
elements that lay beneath.

There is no philosophy beyond that which is the basis of the
operations of nature and of the transactions of mankind; and
as theories and calculations that do not weigh and properly
estimate all the modifying conditions attending physical pheno-
mena are valueless, so all schemes of reform, and enterprizes for
moral or political improvement, are intellectually shallow, false
to facts, and faithless to the primal precepts of Christianity, if
the qualifying circumstances and conditions, combining to con-
stitute any particular form of evil, are not duly heeded and
entertained. The static laws of nature may be deranged in
their operation by the weight of a single particle of dust, thrown
by the feeble hand of man at his feet; the proudest intellect
of man himself may be devoted from its stern purpose by the
unseen agency of a breath of summer wind, or shattered by so
little a thing as even the negative mind of another, a neglect to
satisfy a dream of love, or a vain hope of ambition. Such are
the imperfections and irregularities in both the moral and
physical world. The physician cannot sit at his desk and*pre-
scribe an effective remedy for any specific class of maladies,
independent of the circumstances under which they exist. The

16 ORIGIN AND GENERAL PREVALENCE

mathematician and student of general science finds that abstract
theories, principles, and formulas, are but the stepping-stone to
a practical education, and without the aid of experience they
furnish but vague and uncertain directions for their own prac-
tical application. The astronomer may collect all his data and
prepare all his formula by the most skilful observations, but he
finds that many allowances for errors and many corrections for
irregularities must be made, even to approximate the truth in
any practical result. So, too, the tempest-tossed mariner finds
that the needle does not always follow the exact line of the
polar star, and that it will furnish but a blind guide to his
pathway across the deep, unless his calculations be made, and
his reckonings be kept, with a view to its natural variations.

iS ALY Ga

ORIGIN AND GENERAL PREVALENCE OF SLAVERY AND THE
SLAVE TRADE.

LAW, in its most comprehensive sense, has been very cor-
rectly defined as a rule of action—a necessity arising from ex-
isting relations. This definition illustrates a general principle
in the philosophy of both the natural and civil law, which, in
this respect, as well as in many others, present striking points of
analogy. For law, whether natural or civil, human or divine,
can be nothing more than a set of rules, necessarily observed,
in order to secure the harmonious operation of any general
system of things. Hence, all general laws, to be perfect, must
be comprehensive in their designs, and universal in their appli-
cation: then their system of co-operation will be harmonious
throughout; and constitute a perfect whole, just in all its pro-
portions, beautiful in its symmetry, and knit together by
the cohesive power of similar parts and analogous principles.
But such perfection in government can only be found in the
operation of natural or physical laws—those established by
Omniscience, or.that have arisen ex necessitate ret, and neces-
sarily commanded obedience from the exigency of the existing
relations between the things to be governed. The same is true
in the origin and progress of buman government and laws.
Hence, laws become authoritative and powerful just in propor-

OF SLAVERY AND THE SLAVE TRADE. 17

tion to the necessity that exists for obeying them; and those
that are just and right will necessarily secure their own perpe.
tuity and supremacy.' Another source of the origin and
authority of civil law consists in the antiquity and absolute
force of the rule; hence its necessity is tested and proven by
the wisdom and experience of ages; and customs long esta-
blished, and universally observed, become, by this means, the
most potent sources of law. When customs are so old that
the memory of man runneth not to the contrary, their origin is
lost in the oracles and mythical edicts of the gods. The feel-
ing of dependence upon the great wisdom and foresight neces-
sary to give validity, force, and effect to the institutions of go-
vernment and laws among men, has ever induced nations, in
their early ages, to attribute their origin to a divine source,
and to combine the civil, moral, and divine law all in a single
code.

The laws of Draco, Solon, and Lycurgus, were venerated
as the propitious gifts of the divinities that presided over the
destinies of Greece, and contained the whole code of morals,
theology, and national religion. Rome, too, claimed that the
foundation of her vast empire was laid by divine authority, and
that her laws were dictated and her destiny wielded by the na-
tional deities that her institutions had established. . And hence
all moral and religious duties were reduced to the forms of
penal laws, and the Twelve Tables were studied and committed
with as much veneration by the Roman student, as the ten com-
mandments are at the present day. But the most perfect illus-
tration of this principle is found in the constitution and laws
of Moses. Here was a nation founded by the immediate direc-
tion of the one living and true God, and a constitution and
laws given them for their government in all time by Him.
Here, too, was an inseparable combination of the moral, civil
and ecclesiastical, or divine law, in a single code, emanating
from the same source, and administered by the same authority.
Whence, ecclesiastical or .canon law has held an important
influence in the subsequent government of nations, and the
origin and formation of their laws. So, we see, that such is
the connection and relation existing between the physical, the
moral or divine, and the civil law, and such is the analogy of

1 According to the adage that necessity is the mother of invention, as
in the arts, so in government and laws, those most needed to supply the
wants of mankind are first to be discovered and brought into use: and
slavery and the slave trade is an example —it originated in the law of
necessity.

2* B

18 ORIGIN AND GENERAL PREVALENCE

their principles, the influence the one has over the other, and
the perfect consistency that should at all times exist in relation
to them, that no jurist can be master.of the science without
being a philosopher, a moralist, and, to some extent, a theo-
logian. It is as much the province of the jurist as the priest
to discuss all theological and moral questions, so far as they
affect the interpretation and force of the laws of the land.
Man, it has been very truly said, is a social creature; that such
is the constitution and law of his being as to render society a
condition essential to the development of his faculties, the per-
fection of his nature, and the attainment of the final design
and end of his creation. But the existence of society neces-
sarily implies the existence of government. But government
is nothing but obedience to a system of law, which is essentially
the foundation of society. The doctrine, then, of the supre-
macy of conscience, or that each one must be a law unto him-
self, would constitute each one of the individual members of the
body politic an independent sovereignty within themselves, and
resolve society into its original elements.

It is one of the fundamental principles acknowledged in the
philosophy of government, that each one of the governed
surrenders a certain portion of his so-called natural rights, for
the more safe and certain protection of those that remain. In
this sense, all self-government of nations is a contract, or com-
promise; one of the necessary stipulations of which is obedience
to ‘‘the powers that be,’’ and a proper deference and respect
to the majesty and authority of the law. Hence, to rise up
against the State, to bid defiance to the edicts of the law-
making power, is treasonable and revolutionary, and necessarily
arms the compulsory power of the State against the offender.
There is no other alternative: or the institutions of all free
governments would be but a bundle of inconsistencies ; for one
of their fundamental principles is self-preservation and perpe-
tuity. Without coercion, constitutions and laws, like the old
American Articles of Confederation, would be but a soul ere-
ated under the ribs of death, a voluminous dead letter, as pow-
erless as the ponderous folios that contain their edicts. _Who-
soever, then, shall bid defiance to the laws of the land, and
shall teach men so, the same is at heart a rebel and a traitor,
‘‘and it were better for him that he had never been born,’’ and
infinitely better for the world had he never lived. The neces-
sity of some supreme authority manifests itself in every grade
of society, and in every form of action. The absolute necessity
of rule or command implies the corresponding necessity of

OF SLAVERY AND THE SLAVE TRADE. 19

obedience. The laws of nations, in their infancy, are all
founded and take their source from customs. The province of
the legislator is at first to modify and adapt them to the wants
and condition of the nations to which they relate. These
consuetudinary regulations arise necessarily and imperceptibly
from the existing state of society, rather than from any specific
enactment of legislative will. It is not till the progress of the
arts, sciences, and civilization, have multiplied man’s wants,
and thus produced a more multifarious, minute and complicated
classification of their rights, that those customs require to be
modified and digested into regular codes of laws. Hence, we
see the connection between history and jurisprudence, and the
light that they may naturally throw upon each other. The
surest key to the interpretation of the moral character and
political force of the laws of any nation, is its history. And,
in a like manner, when the history of any period is dark and
uncertain, these obscurities are best elucidated by the study of
its ancient laws. Many laws contain, in their preambles, the
causes that gave rise to the necessity of their enactment, and
thus reflect the image of the existing state of society. Others
point, in general terms, to the manners and customs, and thus
furnish, in themselves, a commentary upon the private and
public vices against which they have been enacted.

The advancement from barbarism to the various degrees of
civilization is a very slow and gradual process, as every step is
the result of a long struggle to correct a barbarous custom, or
overcome a vicious habit. This sad experience, at length, from
necessity fixes upon some general rules to be observed by all ;
and hence those rules, being long adhered to, become positive
laws, enforced by various penalties, according to the existing
state of society. The wild and ferocious manners, the untamed
passions and feelings of nations in their infancy, require more
vigorous laws and penalties; the ruder and more intractable a —
people, the severer must be the laws and penalties necessary
to govern them. Hence, the penal laws of all the ancient
nations have been extremely barbarous and severe. By the
laws of ancient Egypt, he who had it in his power to save the
life of another, and neglected to do it, was punished as a mur-
derer. The city in which a body was found murdered was
obliged to embalm and bestow a costly burial upon it. Perjury
was punished with death. The calumniator was subjected to
the same disadvantages, disabilities and disgrace that the
calumniated would have been had the slander been believed.
Forgery and counterfeiting were punished by cutting off the

20 ORIGIN AND GENERAL PREVALENCE

hands of the offenders. Treachery and the betrayal of the
secrets of the nation were punished by cutting out the tongue
of the traitor. Adultery by burning to death.’

By the Mosaic law, the crimes of incest, rape, adultery, homi-
cide, Sabbath breaking, &c., were punished with stoning, burn-
ing, or some other barbarous execution.

The first penal laws of Athens, framed by Draco, were pro-
verbial for their cruelty. The ancient laws of the Romans,
especially the Twelve Tables, were full of the most severe
punishments and capital inflictions for trifling offences. ‘The
earliest period of nations is that in which the patriarchal rule
obtains, where the heads of single families were supreme au-
thority. This state of things must give rise to a multitude of
belligerent communities in a single province, and frequent wars
and dissensions among them. In these marauding and preda-
tory excursions the strong would necessarily overpower the
weak, and hence give rise to a combination of families to defend
themselves against the encroachments of their enemies. This
would give rise to united communities, in the form of tribes or
clans, with the head of a family ruling by his original authority
(except what was necessary to delegate to the chief ruler, as
king, for their common defence). Hence, it may fairly be sup-
posed the next step in governments, after that of the patri-
archal, was that of limited monarchies. Wars and dissensions
would necessarily arise among them, to enlarge and enrich
their dominions. Rapine, piracy and plunder would be the
predominant incentives to action. To restrain the depredations
of these marauding banditti, severe laws must be enforced
against them, and severe punishments inflicted upon them when
taken captive; and hence the origin of the custom of saving
their lives, and reducing them and their descendants to slavery.

The custom grew into a positive law of nations, which has
obtained in all ages of the world, the moral character of which
will be hereafter considered. The first attempts at conquest
and plunder must have proceeded from wandering shepherd
tribes or clans, like the Tartars and Scythians, who wished to
change their territory for new pasturage (as the Black Feet
do their hunting grounds), and would often make incursions
upon fixed dominions of partially cultivated countries. Such
were the shepherd kings from Ethiopia, who were the first con-
querors of Egypt; and, as we shall see, reduced many of the
Egyptians to bondage. Of such was the descent of ‘‘Amra-

1 Joquet, Origin of Laws.

OF SLAVERY AND THE SLAVE TRADE. A |

phel, king of Sinai, Arioch of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer, king of
Elam, and Tidal, king of nations, upon Bera, king of Sodom,
and others in the vale of Siddim,’’ who put the kings of Sodom
and Gomorrah to flight, ‘‘and took Abram’s nephew and all
his goods, and departed.’”? But when Abram heard that. his
nephew was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born
in his own house, and pursued them. And Abram, with his
three hundred and eighteen well-disciplined servants, over-
powered the robbers, ‘‘and brought back all the goods, and
also his nephew Lot and his goods, and the women and the
people.”

By this it would seem that Abram took quite a number of
captives from these tribes, both men and women, and the king
of Sodom wanted to divide with Abram, and take the persons
and give Abram the goods, and Abram did so.‘ Here were
five kings, with their tribes or clans, combined against the five
kings of Sodom and their neighbors, who put them all to flight
and despoiled them of their goods, yet Abram, with three hun-
dred and eighteen servants, conquered the victors, took them
captive, and returned the goods. We should judge from this
fact that the tribes over which each king had rule were very
small, and little else than marauding banditti. And hence the
necessity of inflicting a severe punishment upon them when
taken, to deter them from their frequent depredations. Here,
perhaps, occurs the first instance in the history of the human
race, of reducing captives taken in war to slavery. It cannot
be doubted that necessity gave rise to it as a penalty to prevent
piracy, pillage, and plunder, so common to these nomadic races
at this age of the world. It originated in mercy; it spared
the life of the captive convict, which was in the power of the
captor, and sentenced him and his posterity to bondage. And
where is the injustice? Had not a nation then as good a right
to protect itself by dooming its captives, taken in open at-
tempts at conquest (which was but another name for robbery,
pillage, and plunder), to perpetual bondage, as nations now
have to sentence certain criminals to the gallows. Grotius and
Puffendorff, two of the most authoritative writers upon the law
of nations, approve of this rule as a principle of national law, yet
some say that it is contrary to the law of nature, as every man
by that is entitled to his freedom; therefore, it is not right.’

1 Gen. 14: 1-21.

2 Vid. Argument of Mr. Alleny in the case of Summersett. Blackstone
attacked the justice of this law; but his remarks relate entirely to a bar-
barous kind of slavery peculiar to certain nations, and he views it wholly

22 ORIGIN AND GENERAL PREVALENCE

But this argument would destroy the whole coercive force of the
penal code. The belligerent attitude of nations necessarily
places them in the category of criminals with regard to one
another ; and, in barbarous ages, puts their lives in each others
hands. Hence they have, respectively, a right to consult their
own safety, protection and welfare, as well as the dictates of
humanity, in determining what punishment shall be inflicted
upon their captives. The same right and justice appertains to
them in this respect, that does to individual nations to regulate
their own internal policy with regard to crimes and offences.
The national law may as well, if necessity require it, doom a
captive and his posterity to perpetual bondage, as the muni-
cipal law may sentence a convict to Botany Bay, or the peni-
tentiary, for life, and thus cut off all hopes of posterity. As
nations become larger, more powerful, and are better capable of
defending themselves, and thus rendering life and property more
secure, the force and necessity of this penalty would be natu-
rally, as it has been in a degree, lost sight of. But, as we have
before said, to see the moral rectitude and political force of this
custom, we must look to the condition of those nations with
whom it originated, in their infancy and early ages. Look at
the condition of the English colonies in the first settlements of
New England; alone, weak and defenceless, in the wilderness,
surrounded by hostile tribes, they were in a condition to fully
appreciate the necessity, moral and political force of this prin-
ciple of national law. They annexed this penalty to the cap-
tivity of their enemies, and enforced it to its fullest extent.’
Look at the new settlements upon our Western frontier, and
the emigrant trains crossing the plains to the far-off shores of the
Pacific ; here are instances strikingly illustrating the primeval
history and condition of those oriental nations, in the ages of
which we are now speaking.

When they are attacked at dead of night by a marauding
band of Camanches, to plunder their goods and leave nothing
but the bones of men, women, and children to mark the spot
of the tragical scene; or, in the settlements, when the inhabit-
ants are startled at midnight from their slumbers, to rush into
the devouring flames of their dwellings and villages, or to fall
by the murderous blows of the death-dealing tomahawk, and
leave their wives and children to the unrelenting tortures of the

by the light and rule of enlightened life, both of which are inapplicable
to the principle. Paley approves it. Blac. Com. I., p. 423; Princip.
Philos., p. 158.

1 See Essay on Political and Judicial Attitude of Slavery, post, p. 298.

OF SLAVERY AND THE SLAVE TRADE. 20

merciless savage — were these settlements nations of themselves,
and these emigrant trains independent tribes, who made their
own laws and governed themselves, who would deny them the
right to reduce to slavery every savage son of these prowling
marauders whom they could capture ?

Weare not advocating the validity of the lex talionis ; but
an absolute necessity arising from the defence, safety, and
general welfare of these almost defenceless people, would
require that. death, or some such penalty should be inflicted
upon such invaders when captnred ; and it would be an act of
mercy to spare their lives. Thus, the different tribes of Israel
under the patriarchs, as well as the caravans belonging to
the ancient commercial cities and nations of the East, governed
themselves and made their own laws. Nations arrayed in the
attitude of war are, in barbarous ages, to all intents and pur-
poses, robbers and murderers in. the extermination of one
another, and as necessarily and justly forfeit their individual
rights, as men, to the captor, as the conviet does those of a
citizen, to the State. ‘Treaties of reciprocity for any specific
treatment of prisoners, expressed or implied, may, and’ have,
greatly improved their condition in later ages. But by the law
of nations the whole ancient world regarded captives taken in
war as slaves. It has been said that though one generation
might be reduced to slavery, yet they could not entail that curse
upon the succeeding one. But in the case of the captive, does
not his posterity owe their existence to the mercy of the law?
And may they not abide the condition it gives them? “ Hath
not the potter power over the clay ?”’? This law is still in force
among the different nations and tribes of Africa;' and insti-
gated by avarice of other nations, its original purpose has been
much perverted, and its provisions much abused. But this is
no argument against the law itself; no law, custom, or institu-
tion which may be right in its original intention, and designed,
if properly applied, to subserve a good purpose, is accountable
for the perversions and abuses which it receives from the
wickedness of mankind. Else we might condemn the law of
capital punishment, and even the Christian religion itself, for
these have all been made the wicked instruments of ostracism,
carnage, and bloodshed, for the gratification of the siuful
passions of man.

This custom dates back to a remote period in antiquity, to
which the knowledge of the world now reacheth not. The curse

1 Wheat’s Elements of International Law, p. 194.

24 ORIGIN AND GENERAL PREVALENCE

of Noah, uttered soon after the flood, that Canaan, the offspring
of his unfilial son Ham, should be a servant of servants, would
thus have been wholly unintelligible to the world unless there
had been some distinct idea preserved in the memory of Noah
and his family, of the relations of master and servant that
existed before the deluge. And here its necessity would seem
to be the more imperious, as we read that the earth was then
filled with violence.

Egypt, where are found the oldest landmarks of human
existence, was the great hot-bed and radiator of oriental servi-
tude; she is termed in sacred scripture ‘‘ the house of bondage.’’
Her hieroglyphic and monographic inscriptions, from the earliest
glimpses of her history, furnish striking pictures of captivity
and the most abject subjugation. The captives being brought
to Egypt were not only employed in the service of the monarch,
but were interspersed through the several classes, and served
as domestics and servitors to their owners. The oldest monu-
ments on Kgyptian soil are the work of slave labor. The
Syuostor Sovacr, or public slaves, were employed in building
temples, cutting canals, raising dykes, embankments, and other
public works. The Israelites seem to have belonged to this
class of slaves—their work was brickmaking. Some who were
purchased by the grandees were employed in the same capacity
as the Mamelukes of the present day. Women slaves were
also employed in the service of females, like the Greeks and
Circassians in modern Egypt, and other parts of the Turkish
Empire. In various tablets of ancient and Egyptian sculpture
and painting, we find them represented as being chained to-
gether by the neck and driven in gangs, accompanied by men
of their own nation, both negroes and whites. Hence, we con-
clude that a certain number were sent annually from the con-
quered provinces of the North-Hast, as well as Ethiopia.’
Hence it is evident that both whites and blacks were employed
as slaves, and that the ancient Egyptians followed the inexorable
custom of reducing captives taken in war to slavery. Whites
and blacks intermingled indiscriminately in the servile ranks of
bondage. From the same scenes of painting and sculpture, it
appears that they attended upon the guests when invited to the
house of their masters, something after the fashion of Greek and
Roman domestics, and were kept in the families of the priests,
as well as military chiefs. From this we may infer that the

1 See the plates of the great works of Belzoni, Champollion, and others,
taken from Egyptian art, to which reference is made post, p. 169, et seq.

OF SLAVERY AND THE SLAVE TRADE. 25

right of possessing slaves was not confined to those who had
taken them in war, but that they were liable to be bought and
sold as other articles of trade.

The traffic in slaves was certainly tolerated and practised by
the ancient Egyptians, as well as by the Phcenicians, Chaldeans,
Hebrews, and surrounding nations ; and doubtless many traders
were engaged in bringing them to Egypt for public sale, inde-
pendent of those who were sent as a tribute. Abram, when he
went forth to go into the land of Canaan, “took Sarai his wife,
and Lot, his brother’s son («at movta ta vaapyorra avtay doa
EXTYOWNTO, XA Macay, Luyxny jv extyoorro tx Kappov'), and all the pro-
perty which they had gathered together [accumulated or pur-
chased |, and all the souls that they had gotten in Haran’? [or
every soul that they had purchased or acquired in Haran’ ].

“And in the self-same day was Abraham circumcised and
Ishmael his son ;’’ ‘and all the men of his house born in his
house (xai ov ’orxoyevers avtov, xai ov apyvpwrnrot, &c.), and
bought with money of the stranger.’’?

Hence, it appears that Abraham, the founder of the Jewish
nation, both before and after the covenant, had trafficked in
slaves with the neighboring nations. When he went down into
Egypt, though as a private individual, yet to command the
attention and respect of Pharaoh, as well for the number of his
attendants, as for the beauty of his wife, he was accompanied
by a long train of ‘‘oxen and of he-asses, and men-servants
and maid-servants, and she-asses and camels.’? 4

Abraham’s household of servants was numerous; for when
he went up out of Egypt, ‘‘he was very rich in cattle, in silver
and gold;’’ and when he went in pursuit of the banditti who
had carried off his nephew Lot, and all his goods, he could
muster three hundred and fifteen well-disciplined servants, of
those born in his house and capable of bearing arms, without
any of those ‘‘ bought with his money of the stranger.” Taking
these, at a moderate estimate, to be one-fifth of his home-born
slaves, it would give him at that time the enormous family of
fifteen hundred and ninety servants in his household.

These were the souls that they had gotten in Haran, in

1 Septuagint, Te. K. 12-5. In the Greek text the same verb is used to
denote the acquisition of the souls, that is used to denote that of the
property, and may be translated by bought or purchased.

2Gen. 12: 5.

8 Gen. 17: 26, 27. The Greek text has «ai ’of apyvpwynroi e¢ addoyevwv
's0vdv. Sept., literally, ‘‘and those bought with silver from foreign nations,”

4 Gen. 12 : 16.

3

26 ORIGIN AND GENERAL PREVALENCE

Egypt, Damascus, and surrounding nations. Eliezer, the chief
servant of Abraham’s household, was a slave of Damascus ;
and Hagar, Sarah’s handmaid, was an Hgyptian woman.
Well might Abraham’s servant say to Sarah: ‘‘ And the Lord
hath blessed my master greatly, and he is become great: and
he hath given him flocks and herds, and silver and gold, and
men-servants and maid-servants, and camels and asses.’’!

And the Ishmaelites who bought Joseph of his brethren
readily sold him to Potiphar on carrying him to Egypt; for
such was the custom of those days.” The Phenicians, who
traded in slaves, sold the children of Juda and Jerusalem to
the Greeks ;° as the people of Caucasus sent their boys and
girls to Persia; as the modern Circassians do their children to
that country and to Turkey. Ancient Babylon, Tyre, and
Sidon, as well as all the cities and nations round about, were
slave markets, where the ‘‘ descendants of Javan, Tubal, and
Meshech, traded the persons of men and vessels of brass; and
the merchants of the earth bought their merchandize of horses,
chariots, slaves, and the souls of men.’’*

The Scythians of the desert had early established slavery
throughout the vast plains of the unknown North, whence all
the great slave markets of the South were supplied. The oldest
accounts of the land of Negroes, like the glimmerings of
Egyptian and Pheenician history, bear witness to domestic
slavery and the slave trade. Slavery outruns the oldest tradi-
tions of Greece.* The Greek pirates, like the corsairs of Bar-

1 Gen. 24: 25. This simple narrative of the marriage of Isaac, is one
of those historical incidents that show that human nature is the same in
all ages. His father, Abraham, being possessed of an immense fortune,
had, in his dotage, become too aristocratic and proud of his lineage to
allow his son to marry one of the Canaanites among whom he dwelt. He
therefore despatched his trusty servant to his native land, to induce some
Chaldean virgin to become his bride. He fits out a minister plenipotentiary
to negotiate the important matter of the marriage of his son; he doubtless
commissioned him with full instructions as to what inducements he should
hold out to the young lady to accept his proposals. And true to the
instinctive impulse of human nature, as the most potent and persuasive
reasons he could offer to the daughter of Bethuel, the damsel of the city
of Nahor, to induce her to follow him back to the land of the Canaanites,
he presented her with bracelets of gold, and depicted to her in glowing
terms the great wealth of Isaac’s father, and the great number of ser-
vants that he had.

2Gen. 89:1; 44: 9.

3 Amos 2:6; 8:6. ‘Because they sold the righteous for slaves and
the poor for a pair of shoes.”

4 Ezek. 27: 18; Rev. 18: 18.

5 Odyss. 15: 488. Il. 9: 595, Téxva 6é 7 GAdoé ayovor, &c. Il, 22: 62.
Odyss. 20: 149.

OF SLAVERY AND THE SLAVE TRADE. 27

bary roving in quest of slaves laid the foundation of Greek
commerce; each commercial town was a slave market, and
every cottage upon the seashore was in danger of the kid-
napper.' Every city that made war upon its neighbor exulted
over the number of its captives. The earliest slave markets
of Rome were filled with men of every complexion and nearly
every clime.* In early times the Romans, like the Greeks, ob-
tained most of their slaves from Asia— Syrians, Lydians,
Carians, Mysians, and Cappadocians are specially mentioned.*
Though their trade afterwards extended to the western nations
of Europe, Germania, Gallia, and Britannia. When the Goths
and Vandals overran the Roman Hmpire, the great swarms of
Roman slaves began to disappear. But the middle ages wit-
nessed rather a change in the channels of the slave trade than
any diminution of its extent. The Saxon race carried the
most repulsive form of slavery into England; where the toll on
the sale of a slave was only four times that of an ox.® The
long wars between the German and Sclavonic tribes, imparted
to the slave trade of the middle ages its greatest activity. This
traffic filled France and its neighboring States with such num-
bers of Sclavonian captives, that they adopted the name of
those people for a condition of servitude and bondage. And
every nation in western Hurope still preserves a memento in its
language of the celebrated traffic in ‘‘Slaves.’?7 The Dneiper
early became a great highway through which the Russian.mer-
chants transported their slaves to Constantinople. Greece,
Georgia, and Circassia, were laid under contribution to furnish
their annual tribute of ten youths and ten virgins, to supply
the harems of the Moslem Minotari of Turkey.

Close upon the verge of those interminable conflicts between .
the Germans and Sclavonians of the North, followed those of
the Crusades and Holy Wars of the South and East. During

1 Tsoer, Plateans 9, p. 406. Timeeus apud Athen. 4, p. 264. Thucid.
1. i. ce. 4, 180: 181.

2 Arist. Polit., 1. i. p. 2.

3’ Agmina exoletorum per nationes coloresque descripta Senaca, cpt.
xcy. De Brey. Vit.

4 Beck’s Gall. 201.

5 Cesar’s Gall. Turner’s Hist. Anglo-Saxon R. p. 294: 337.

6 Temp.’s Int. to Hist. of Eng. p. 59.

7 Bancroft’s Hist. U. S., vol. i., Art. Hist. Slave Trade. The French
word for slave is esclave; German, Scluve; Dan., slave, sclave; Sw., slaf;
Arm., sclaff; It., schiavo; Sp., esclavo; Port., esclavo: see Webster. This
term is, therefore (as we shall show hereafter), of comparatively modern
origin. ;

28 ORIGIN OF SLAVERY AND THE SLAVE TRADE.

all these long and exhausting sieges and campaigns, the law of |
captivity was regularly enforced ; for centuries the two religions
waged a merciless war upon one another; and Christian,
Saracen, Jew, and Infidel, were indiscriminately sold in count-
less numbers into irredeemable slavery. At Lyons, in Venice,
and at Rome, they were exposed in market overt to be sold for
prices, and in lots, to suit purchasers. The whole number of
Moors brought under the yoke of the captor during the pro-
tracted wars of Granada, scarcely excels the number of Chris-
tians kidnapped and sold into slavery, by these roving corsairs
in Egypt and the Barbary States, after their expulsion and
emigration to Northern Africa.’

In the earliest gleamings of English history we ‘find the foot-
prints of this inexorable law of captivity, that doomed thousands
of the vanquished to be subject to the power and will of the
victors. It doubtless originated in the conquests of the
Romans in that country; but it continued through all the wars
of the Britons, Danes, and Saxons, triumphed as a para-
mount law during the existence of the Heptarchy, and subjected
thousands to hopeless bondage.’

The slave trade in England, the birthplace of American
jurisprudence, outlived the fusion of the five nations into one ;
survived the Norman Conquest, and continued, in a somewhat
modified form, under the disguised name of Villianage, down to
quite a late period in English history.’

We have thus given a brief outline of the origin, progress,
and early and general prevalence of the slave trade, to show
that slaves have been deemed lawful articles of commerce by .
the customs and laws of every nation; that the traffic in them
is as old and universally prevalent as that in any other comodity;
that the law of captivity, originating in necessity, and founded
in mercy, justice, and right, gradually inwrought itself into the
texture of government and society, and imposed its authority
so favorably upon communities, that it became a paramount
principle of national law, and gave the purchaser a right and
title to the captive or slave, which became in the eyes of all
nations a vested right, as indefeasible by the force of any sub-

1 See Art. Hist. of Slavery, &c., in Bancroft’s Hist. U. S. vol. i.

22d Black.’s, pp. 92, 93, by Monet. Lingard’s Hist. Eng., vol. i. In
the abstract of the population of England, in the Doomsday Book, at the
close of the reign of William the Conqueror, the whole population is stated
at 283,242, of which the servi are 25,156, the ancille, 967, &c. See Essay
on Slavery in the Middle Ages.

HEBREW SLAVERY. 29

sequent contravening custom, as that to any other species of
property.

A more minute inquiry into the laws, regulations, and extent
of the institution, in all the most important nations of antiquity,
as well as some of a more modern date, will follow in their
proper place. The more minutely we examine, and the later
we come down in the world’s history, the more striking we find
the evidence of the absolute and indefeasible right and title of
the master to his slave.

ESSAY II.
HEBREW SLAVERY.

WE have no authentic reference upon the subject of slavery
in the ancient Hebrew nation but the laws of Moses, as they
are written in the Bible. The Scriptures, of the Old Testament
particularly, aside from their sacred character, we contend, have
a place in the history of government, literature, and law. In
analyzing the laws that are found in these records, we have
nothing to do with the divine legation of the lawgiver. Our
inquiry will be directed to ascertain what the law was upon this
subject, without any special reference to its divine character.
For this purpose we shall look into the Mosaic code as into the
code of any other nation, and apply the same rules of construc-
tion and interpretation. Our inquiry upon this subject is not
a theological, but a legal investigation; we take up the
writings of Moses and the prophets as lawyers, legislators,
statesmen, and judges; and discuss the principles which they
contain accordingly.

The relation of master and servant, as we have seen, dates
back as far as we have any authentic records of the human
race. During the patriarchal government of Israel we find
frequent mention made of both men-servants and maid-servants ;
and they were classed with the flocks and herds, goods and
effects of the master, which Abraham “had gotten in Haran,’’
and which the Lord God had given in blessings unto him, and
which Abraham had given unto Isaac.’ The first question

1Gen, 24: 35, 36.

8 *

30 HEBREW SLAVERY.

that presents itself in this inquiry, is, whence arose this law
among the Patriarchs, in this early age of the Hebrew nation ?
Whence did Abraham, the founder of that nation, derive his
right and authority to buy and hold slaves? We answer, and
undertake to show, that it was derived from the universal cus-
tom of the age; that the practice was adhered to by common
consent, and had become a principle of international and com-
mon law; as much so as the right to purchase and hold flocks
and herds. It was one of the primordial classifications of
property, that, as we have seen, obtained in all nations; that
grew up, propria vigort, and enforced obedience to its prin-
ciples, in all ages, without the aid of legislative enactment.

The laws that first sprung up around this institution furnish
the only light upon its history, that has come down to us from
this remote period of antiquity. In analyzing the statutes of Jew-
ish law upon this subject, we may separate them, like all others,
into various classes. There are positive enactments of prin-
ciples that had'no previous existence; there are, also, statutes
that simply declare the law for the past, present, and future,
called declaratory statutes; there are, also, amendments de-
signed to remedy some existing evil, by altering or modifying
the existing laws; there are the directory statutes, that merely
prescribe certain forms as the most expedient to be observed.

The first question to be determined in arriving at a correct
understanding of any statute, is to determine to which of these
classes it belongs.

It has been asserted by the modern stoic professors of theo-
logy, that there is no evidence in the annals of Jewish law, that
slaves in that nation were saleable property; and they deny
that they were merchandize, liable to be bought and sold like
other commodities. But Moses, in penning the Hebrew sta-
tutes, seems to have taken a different view of this subject.
‘‘Tf a man smite his servant or his maid with a rod, and he die
under his hand, he shall surely be punished.” ‘‘ Notwith-
standing, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished ;
for he is his money.”’' ‘‘ He that smiteth a man so that he
die, shall surely be put to death.’’?

In these statutory provisions several important principles of
Jewish law are brought to light. The first is the distinct clas-
sification of persons, and the fundamental distinction of their
rank, as between ‘‘men” and “‘servants.’’? ‘T'o kill a man was
evidently a heinous crime, and required blood for blood; but

1 Exod. 21: 20, 21. 2 Exod. 21: 12.

HEBREW SLAVERY. 31

to kill a servant, in the act of chastisement, and ‘‘ with a rod,”’
was only visited with some form of punishment; yet we are no-
where informed what the penalty was... Now, upon what prin-
ciple is this distinction of persons founded, and upon what is
this discrimination of punishment based? It is all summed up
in the simple clause, (zo yap apyvprov avrov eotw,*) ‘for he is his
money ;’’ literally, for he is his silver coin— which signifies
something more than mere property or possession, a medium
of exchange that might be given and received for other com-
modities, a kind of instar omnium. This latter clause of the
statute is evidently of a declaratory character; it declares a
universal principle of law—a principle existing by common
consent — upon which is founded the reason for the exteption
in the penalty of homicide, in the former clause of the same.
‘‘For he is his money.” How so? He is not made so by
this provision of law; the principle declared is no part of the
enacting clauses. It must rest, then, upon time-honored cus-
tom—a great principle of common law, so well understood and
so universally acceded to, that it is used in the statute as a
legal axiom. It was the same principle that filled the slave
markets of Egypt, Assyria, and all the surrounding nations,
with ‘‘bond-men and bond-maids;’’ ‘‘ where the merchants of
the earth traded in their merchandize and souls of men.’’? It
was the same principle by which Abraham and Lot held the
‘“‘souls that they had gotten in Haran ;’’ by which he purchased
Elizur of Damascus, Hagar the Egyptian woman, and all those
that he ‘‘had bought with his money.’’ It was the same prin-
ciple by which the Ishmaelites bought Joseph of his brethren
for twenty pieces of silver ; by which they readily sold him to
Potiphar, when they got down into Egypt. It was the same
principle that caused Joseph’s brethren to fear that they would
be seized upon and sold for slaves when they went down to buy
corn in Egypt, and found the purchase-money in their sacks.
It was the same principle by which the children of Judah and
Jerusalem were sold to the Grecians*— ‘‘the righteous for
silver, and the poor for a pair of shoes.’? It was the same
principle by which ‘‘ they cast lots for the honorable men of

1 The punishment provided for by this statute was no more than that
which prohibited cruelty to animals; it seems to be founded wholly upon
animal sympathy, as much so as the duty to pull the ‘ox out of the pit;”
not upon any right of the servant, for he is his money —as much so as
the ox.

2 Septuagint. 8 Ez. 27: 18; Rev. 18: 138.

4 Joel 8: 8-8; Amos2:6; 8: 6.

32 HEBREW SLAVERY.

Nineveh, and all her great men were bound in chains.’’' It
was the same principle by which Jews were compelled to redeem
their brethren that had been sold to the heathen.?

‘“‘ Again, if thou buy a Hebrew servant, six years shall he
serve you.’’? This passage of law is predicated upon the ac-
knowledged right of the Jews to buy Hebrew and other ser-
vants; it is an amendatory provision, designed to remedy the
existing evil of making Hebrew servants perpetual bondmen
against their will, and necessarily implies that such was then
the law. It was an innovation in favor of liberty to the chosen
people.

‘Tf a man sell his daughter to be a maid-servant, she shall
not go‘out as the men-servants do.’’ ‘‘If she please not her
master who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her
be redeemed : to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no
power,’’*® &c. No one can deny that the object of this statute,
like the one quoted above, was to ameliorate the condition of
Hebrew maid-servants. The limited term of service provided
for Hebrew men-servants had not yet, and was not, for forty
years afterwards, made applicable to Hebrew maid-servants.*
But it was provided in their favor, that they could not be sold
to a strange nation. This amendatory statute is also predi-
cated upon two prevailing principles, and designed to remedy
a prevailing evil. It implies the right of a master to sell his
maid-servant or daughter to another master, and also the right
of the purchaser to sell her again, even to a strange nation,
which latter power is prohibited by its provisions.

The power to buy a Hebrew man or maid-servant necessarily
implied the power in all masters to sell them, as there can be no
vendee without a vendor. The whole tendency of the Mosaic
legislation upon this subject seems to be to ameliorate the con-
dition, particularly, of Hebrew slaves. What could have in-
duced Moses, educated, as he was, in the very hot-bed of Poly-
theism, and reared in ‘‘the house of bondage,’’ to so far
outstrip all heathen customs and legislators upon this subject,
we leave to the answer of those whose province it is to study

1Na. 3: 10. ‘

*Neh. 5: 8. ‘‘He that stealeth a man and selleth him,” &c.: Exod.
21:16. Again, ‘If aman be found stealing any of his brethren of the
children of Israel, and maketh merchandize of him or selleth him,” ce. :
Deut. 24: 7. Unless such things were possible and common, these penal
statutes would not have been enacted.

8 Exod. 21: 8.

4 Deut. 15:12. This was forty years after the enacting of the former
statute in favor of men-servants. See Deut. 1: 3.

HEBREW SLAVERY. 36

the Scriptures as a body of divinity, and not as a mere code
of municipal laws. But even Moses, with all his humane pro-
visions in favor of Hebrew servants, never once attempted to
alter the condition of heathen slaves. He left them to the un-
mitigated rigors of the ancient laws. His object seemed to be
(as we shall see) to abolish Hebrew slavery, and to substitute
that of other nations.

“Both thy bondmen and thy bondmaids which thou shalt
have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of
them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover, of the
children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them
shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which
they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children
after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your
bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of
Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigor.’’!

The object of this statute is to distinguish between the right
of the master over Hebrew and heathen slaves; it contains a
clear and unequivocal declaration of the right of the master to
purchase slaves of foreign nations, and even of alien families
resident among the Israelites, and to hold them as absolute
property, alienable and heritable: to be a perpetual possession
for themselves and their children after them. ‘‘ But if ye buy
a Hebrew servant, six years only shall he serve,” &c. For,
‘fover your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule
one over another with rigor.”’

The right of the master to buy, given in each of these
instances, at home and abroad, implies a right in the owner to
sell; who then can say there is no evidence of a power to sell
slaves among the Jews?

“And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her [7?. e. a cap-
tive virgin taken to wife], then thou shalt let her go whither she
will, but thou shalt not sell her at all for money; thou shalt
not make merchandize of her, because thou hast humbled her.’’?

This is another marked instance of an amendatory statute,
innovating upon a prevailing custom to remedy an existing
evil. ‘The universal custom was to reduce all captives to mer-
chandize, and to sell them for money; but here is an exception
created in favor of the captive virgin, humbled in the manner
spoken of in the statute. If such customs had not. existed,
there could have been no necessity for the prohibition. Slaves

1 Lev. 25: 44-46. b 2 Deut. 21: 14.

34 HEBREW SLAVERY.

under the Jewish law could become such by the law of nations
condemning captives to a state of bondage; but this related
more particularly to those of a heathen or foreign origin.’ He-
brews might become slaves to one another, first, by debt ;’
second, by theft, for the thief, if poor, was sold to repay the
property which he had stolen ; third, by birth, when the mother
was a slave —so that the children of the house, or born in the
house, became, as it were, a kind of proper name for slaves ;°
fourth, by sale or purchase. A man might sell himself, if he
‘‘waxed poor,’’* which was not common, or another who owned
a slave might sell him, but the seventh year broke his bonds.’

In relation to the position and treatment of slaves among
the Hebrews, it may be remarked that all servants, of every
kind, were to be circumcised,° partook of their religious privi-
leges, and rested on their feast and Sabbath days.’ But they
possessed no civil rights, and were not otherwise considered in
the rank of persons. Buta Hebrew sold for debt was not to
be treated with rigor, as a bond-servant, but as a hired servant,
and he shall be free with his family at the jubilee-year.®

Cruel chastisement was punished, if the slave died under the
hand of his master.? A master who smote out the eye or tooth
of his slave, was compelled to set him free.” Slaves enjoyed
rest on the Sabbath day, and attended the solemn feasts and
festivals.'' They were entitled to comfortable support.” But
they possessed no property, no civil rights of their own, and
were doomed to the most menial service. ‘‘ Now therefore
are ye cursed, and there shall none of you be freed from being
(Sovaos'*) bondmen and hewers of wood and drawers of water
for the house of my God.’’”

Though the men-servants, by the statutes of Moses, were
entitled to their freedom on the seventh year if they were of
Hebrew origin, yet those of heathen origin found no such favor
in the eye of the law. They were, from the earliest periods of

1 Numb. 81: 18, 32, 85, 40; Deut. 20: 14; 21: 10-12.

22 Kings 4: 1; Is. 50:1; Matt. 18: 25.

®Gen. 14: 14; 15:8; 17: 28; 21:10; Ps. 86: 16; 116876

* Lev. 25: 47.

5 Lev. 25: 25, 28, 89, 41. And by stealing them and selling them:
Ex. 21: 16; Deut. 24: 7.

6 Gen. 17 : 12-14.

7 Exod, 20: 10; Deut. 5: 14; 12: 17, 18; 16: 10, 11.

8 Lev. 25 : 39-43. 9 Exod. 21: 20, 21. 10 Exod. 21 : 26, 27.
11 Exod. 20: 10; Deut. 5: 14; Deut. 12: 17, 18; 16: 10, 11.
12 Deut. 25: 4; Tim. 5: 8; 1 Cor. 9: 9, 10. 132 Sam. 9: 10.

14 Septuagint. Josh. 9: 23

HEBREW SLAVERY. 35

Jewish history, made merchandize, and reduced to perpetual
bondage; even among the patriarchs they were heritable pro-
perty ; for Isaac, the legal heir of Abraham, had in possession
a great store of family servants,’ which he inherited from his
father’s estate, for Abraham gave all that he had unto Isaac,’
except the sons of his concubines, whom he gave gifts, and sent
them away eastward; in other words, he emancipated them
and sent them away,’ in his lifetime. We find mention made
of Abraham’s servants, that they were circumcised, both those
born in his household and those bought with his money of the
stranger.* By this it seems that the slave trade was carried on
with the heathen nations even at that time, and that they were
lawful articles of commerce; for Hagar, the mother of Ishmael,
was an Egyptian bondmaid, or female slave, belonging to
Sarah, Abraham’s wife, doubtless bought of an Egyptian
slave-dealer, or a stranger. Captives taken in war were also
doomed to slavery under the patriarchs. When Abraham pur-
sued the banditti that had carried away his nephew Lot, he
captured them and brought back the goods, the women and the
people.® It further appears that this right of property was
absolute, even to the power of life and death, over the slave ;
for when Sarah complained unto Abraham of the insolence of
Hagar, ‘‘Abraham said unto Sarah, Behold, thy maid is in thy
hand [completely under thy power]; do with her as it pleaseth
thee.”’® It should be remembered that what Abraham said
was law; he was the absolute lawgiver to his household. What,
then, may be supposed to have been the consequence of giving
his wife (influenced by jealousy) absolute power over her ser-
vant Hagar? As would be naturally supposed, she dealt so
harshly with her that she ran away. This is the first instance
we have on record of a runaway slave. But how was she re-
buked for running away by the heavenly messenger of the God
of Abraham, when the angel found her by the fountain in the
wilderness? Did he give countenance, means and direction
wherewith to assist her escape? ‘And the angel said unto
Sarah’s maid, Whence camest thou? and whither wilt thou
go?’? And when she answered, ‘‘I fled from the face of my
mistress Sarah,’’ ‘‘the angel of the Lord said unto her, Return
to thy mistress, and submit thyself into her hands.”’” It seems
by this that the poor Egyptian concubine had no place of refuge,

1 Gen. 26: 14. 2 Gen. 25: 5.
3 Gen. 25: 6. 4Gen. 17: 27.
5 Gen. 14: 16. 6 Gen. 16: 6.

7Gen. 16: 7-9.

36 HEBREW: SLAVERY.

in the sight of the God of Abraham, from the cruelty of her
jealous tormentor, but, by the decree of the Most High, she
was recognised as the lawful property of her mistress, and com-
manded to return and submit herself to her authority. . Such,
then, was the character of this institution for nearly a thousand
years, during the ages of the patriarchal government of the
Jews, sanctified, upheld, and justified, by the direct interference
of Jehovah. It subjected both their Hebrew and heathen
slaves to the absolute ownership, power and control of the
master. By the Mosaic constitution and laws, enacted about
one thousand years after the flood, some improvements were
made in favor of the slaves, and some of the ancient rigors
essentially modified. The four hundred years of bondage
which the Israelites had suffered in Egypt, had so elevated
their condition, and so well prepared them for the enjoyment
of freedom, that directly after their delivery, the blessings of
the Mosaic code were given them for their government and
laws. This provided a system of gradual emancipation in
favor of Hebrew men-servants, by establishing an apprentice-
ship of six years, at the expiration of which all Hebrew men-
servants should be declared free. ‘‘If thou buy a Hebrew
servant, six years shall he serve thee; and in the seventh shall
he go out free for nothing,’’! &c.

This code of laws, let it be remembered, was not given by
Moses for the regulation and government of the slaves already
owned and possessed by the children of Israel, but to regulate
the manner in which they should supply themselves with servants,
of which they were now entirely destitute. They were but a
band of emancipated servants themselves, who had been for
four hundred years the subjects of a rigorous bondage. It
cannot be supposed that in that condition the relation of master
and servant had been preserved among them, or any distinctive
rights of property recognized for that length of time. They
went out of Egypt a poor, wandering multitude of about six
hundred thousand persons, destined to wander for forty years
as pilgrims in the wilderness, and to subsist upon the nutritious
dews of heaven. We read of no possessions which they had,
except the trinkets of gold and silver and the raiment that
the women borrowed of their Egyptian neighbors: ‘‘ and it
shall come to pass that ye shall not go out empty, but every
woman shall borrow.’ In the third month after the departure
out of Egypt they came into the wilderness of Sinai, and there

1 Ex, 21 : 2-27. 2 Ex. 8: 22.

HEBREW SLAVERY. 37

they received the law from Him whose word is forever settled
in Heaven. <A code destined to rear them up as his peculiar
people and render them a “kingdom of priests and a holy
nation.’’ Here now was a mighty nation in embryo, purified
from the sin of slavery, if such it was. They had atoned for
the iniquity of their fathers by four hundred years of servile
bondage. The question might well occur to their deliverer and
law-giver, Moses, whether the ancient institutions of their
fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, should be revived amongst
them. If the relation of master and servant were a sin, they
were the very people who could best appreciate the evil, having
so long suffered the wrong, and it would seem that they would
have been the last people to have peaceably submitted to its
revival among them. Yet in the Mosaic enactments made at
this time, the relation seems to be recognized, and the right to
purchase and hold slaves, to be spoken of as firmly established,
and as natural and necessary as the relation of parent and
child, or of husband and wife. ‘‘If thou buy a Hebrew ser-
vant (as though the right to do so was unquestionable) six
years shall he serve thee.’’?* Now whence arose this right to
buy a Hebrew servant, unless it was founded on the ancient
custom that existed among the patriarchs? Here the right of
property, as also its ownership, is distinctly recognized, though
the power of life and death seems to be, in a measure, modified
and taken away. ‘‘If a man smite his servant or his maid
with a rod, and he die under his hand, he shall surely be pun-
ished; notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall
not be punished, for he is his money.’’?

This passage, doubtless, has reference to other slaves than
of Hebrew origin: as all those were by law free on the coming
in of the Jubilee, they could not be said to be the absolute
property of the master, or to be “his money.”*® But we shall
see that there was another class of slaves of foreign origin, to
whom this law of gradual emancipation did not apply. Asa
general thing, all captives taken in war were regarded as slaves
by all the ancient world of which we have any authentic
account.* But Abraham had a household of sixteen hundred
servants which the Lord had given him, some born in his
house, and others bought with his money, before we read of
any wars in which they could have been taken captive.

Under the Mosaic statute, slaves of Hebrew origin could

1 Gen. 21: 2-27. 2 Exod. 21: 20-21.
3 Tpid. *Num. 31:18; 32: 35-40.
4

88 HEBREW SLAVERY.

become such only — 1st, by debt ;' 2d, by theft (for if the thief
was poor he was sold to pay for the property he had stolen) ;
3d, by birth, when the mother was a slave ;* and 4th, by sale
and purchase, as a man might sell himself,’ which, however,
was not common. But the seventh year, and particularly the
Jubilee, put an end to all this slavery, as regarded the men-
servants of Hebrew origin. Such is the picture of the slavery
of Hebrews among Hebrews. But why this provision of the
Jewish law that set the men free at the end of the sixth year
did not apply to the female slaves, does not appear. When
Moses enacted on Mount Sinai that the Hebrew men-servants
should be free after the sixth year, he did not say a word about
the female slaves. But, after forty years, when on the borders
of the promised land, he made the law, which before was
applicable only to males, equally applicable to females. What
was the reason of this?* Evidently such was the state of
feeling among the Israelites, in favor of the ancient and time-
honored institutions of their fathers, at the time Moses first
began to legislate upon the subject, that he would have excited
open rebellion among them had he at that time attempted to
have freed both males and females alike, after six years’ service.
But it took him forty years to mould the manners, customs,
and feelings of the nation to permit this to be done. Here we
have the example of the great Jewish legislator acting under
the direct inspiration of heaven, of the moral rectitude and
expediency of temporizing with the feelings and prejudices of
the people. Moses had the wisdom and foresight to see that
no precipitate action could change the established internal
structure of a nation or commonwealth in a day ; that the public
mind and public feelings must be prepared for the event before
they could be enforced. Would not many of the rabid fanatics
of the present day do well to profit by their example?

‘Thou shalt not deliver unto the master the servant that has
escaped from his master unto thee. He shall dwell with thee,
even among you,’’® &c. Here occurs another direction for the
treatment of runaway slaves; the law says they shall not be
given up. But it is evident, from the language of the context,
and the wording of the law itself, that it has reference only to
such slaves as escape from heathen masters unto Israel. Moses
was here giving laws for the government and discipline of the
army, and the regulations of the camp, when they were at war.

1Kings4:1. Is. 50:1. Matt. 18: 25,

2Gen, 14: 14;°16: 3; 17: 29; 21:10. Ps. 86:16; 1163 16.
3 Lev. 14: 47. 4 Gen. 15: 12-15. 5 Deut. 23: 15-16.

HEBREW SLAVERY. 39

The ninth verse of the same chapter, and the sixth one pre-
ceding the text, says: ‘‘When the host [an army] goeth forth
against thine enemies, then keep thou from every wicked thing.”
Through the tenth, eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth
verses, follow a series of rules and disciplinary regulations for
the camp ; then follows the passage of law just quoted: “Thou
shalt not deliver to his master the servant,’? &c. This has im-
mediate reference to deserters who came over from the enemy
to the camp of Israel. ‘‘ They shall not be delivered up, but
they shall dwell with thee, even among you, in one of thy gates.”
Such language could not be ascribed to an Hebrew slave, who
escaped from one tribe to another, for he would already be a
resident of Israel, and circumcised and dwelling among them.
It could apply only to the stranger, who had come among them
from a foreign land. And they were commanded to suffer him
to remain with them when he pleased, and not to oppress him.
This law was dictated by the policy of war, as well as by the
policy of humanity; it was a kind of proclamation of liberty
to the slaves of the enemy who would come over to their side.
It is precisely the course adopted by Great Britain towards the
United States during the revolutionary war. This provision
was also undoubtedly favored by Moses for the reason that it
would induce desertion, and bring many of the heathen to a
knowledge of the worship of the one living and true God. He
knew that the treatment of heathen masters was much more
rigorous than that tolerated by his own laws; for the heathen
master possessed power over his slave, even to that of life and
death, and could whip, scourge and maltreat him with impu-
nity. But not so among the Hebrews. Humanity and religion
both pleaded for the protection of the fugitive; and Moses,
therefore, would not suffer him to be forced back into the dark-
ness of heathenism. But let it not be supposed for a moment
that this rule could apply to a Hebrew slave, who had escaped
from the tribe of Levi to that of Benjamin, or from one Hebrew
master to another. For such an one to harbor and withhold
his neighbor’s servant, would be a violation of the tenth com-
mandment; he could claim his property, which the Mosaic law
gave him aright to hold.' But the law, so far, has reference

1 «And Nabal answered David’s servants, and said, Who is David? and
who is the son of Jesse? there are many servants now-a-days that break
away every man from his master.” The Greek text of the Septuagint is:
onpepov mexAnOvyuevor eraly. de dovdroe avaxwpovvres exacrog 2x mpocwnov rod Kvpiov avrov;
literally, slaves running away from the vigilance of their own masters
are multiplying all the time. Nabal was disposed to treat them as runa-

40 . HEBREW SLAVERY.

only to the government of slaves of Hebrew origen; we have
thus far shown the many modifications which Moses inscribed
in his code of laws, to modify the rigors and hardships of their
ancient condition.

We will next pass to another class of slaves known among
the Jews, who were of heathen origin. For these there was
no jubilee, nor any limitation to the time of service; they were
doomed by the law to be bondmen for ever. ‘‘ Both thy bond-
men and bondmaids which thou shalt have, shall be of the hea-
then round about you; of them shall ye buy your bondmen and
bondmaids. And they shall be your possession [or property ] ;
and ye shall take them for an inheritance for your children
after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your
bondmen for eyer: but over your brethren, the children of
Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigor.’’' The
whole tendency of the legislation of Moses upon this subject
seems to be to extinguish the slavery of the Hebrews, and to
give them bondmen and bondmaids of the heathen round about
them; and the last relic of it seems to have been where the
poor depressed Hebrew was compelled to sell himself into
slavery for debt, and the law could not permit him to be ruled
over as a bondservant, but as an hired servant;* but he might
be redeemed by his friends.* But it seems that it took many
years to exempt a people, whom God had delivered from the
yoke of Egyptian bondage, and conducted by a pillar of fire
through the wilderness to the borders of the promised land,
from this liability to become slaves. They had been delivered
by a miracle, and chosen to be keepers of the oracles of the
Most High, and to be raised up as a holy nation, a nation of
kings and priests and prophets unto God. It would, then,
seem incompatible with heavenly wisdom to suffer them to be
held as slaves. But even this could not be dispensed with,
without substituting in their stead a race of foreigners, who
should be procured from heathen nations, and be a perpetual
possession. And hence the command just quoted—‘‘ Thy bond-~
men and thy bondmaids shall be of the heathen round about
you,’’? &c. This shows to every unprejudiced mind the neces-

ways, and give them nothing, as though it would be a sin to harbor them.
1 Sam. 25:10. ‘And it came to pass, at the end of three years, that
two of the servants of Shimei ran away unto Achish, son of Maachah,
king of Gath. And they told Shimei, saying, Behold, thy servants be in
Gath.” Shimei saddled his ass and went down to Gath, and got his ser-
vants, and no one harbored them from him. 1 Kings, 2 : 39-41.

1 Lev. 25: 44-46. 2 Lev. 25? 40. $ Lev. 25: 48.

HEBREW SLAVERY. 41

sity, arising from the prejudices and deep-seated feelings in the
Hebrew nation, of retaining and preserving to them the time-
honored customs and institutions of their ancestors. This
edict is one of the most remarkable to be found in the Jewish
statutes. It established three distinct principles to be the per-
petual law of that nation; first, that Hebrews themselves
should no longer be regularly bought and sold as slaves (except
in particular instances, and then in a qualified condition) ;
second, that subjects of heathen princes were lawful articles of
commerce; and third, that they should be heritable property,
and descend to the posterity of the Jews to the latest genera-
tion. Here is the great culminating point of the institution in
the laws of antiquity. Hitherto it had rested upon no better
authority than the manners and customs of the patriarchs, under
the implied sanction of their God. But now it was clothed
with the potency of positive legislation. It came to them in a
high edict from the Almighty, enacted amid the thunderings
and the lightnings of Mount Sinai, and proclaimed by the
flaming garments of Jehovah. Hence arose the high precedent
and example, that has branched off into every nation of the
earth, of trafficking in the subjects of heathen princes, and con-
tinued down through different channels to the present time.
Here were two great principles of law established by the word
of God, which we read is a truth for ever settled in Heaven;
the one of the commercial, and the other of the law of inherit-
ance, founded upon a moral and fundamental relation of man-
kind to one another, and to their God. Its effects were not to
be limited to the Jewish nation alone, but it affected alike both
Jew and Gentile, and has its influence upon all nations in the
subsequent ages of the world. The right in the Jewish pur-
chaser to buy implies, necessarily, a right in the heathen master
to sell, and thus rendered the traffic a lawful commerce, as we
shall see, nearly all over the world.

The direct and necessary consequence of this law was to open and
keep open slave markets in the Gentile nations round about them.’

1«:There ye shall be sold for bondmen and for bondwomen, and no
man shall buy you.” Deut. 28: 68—i.e., in Egypt. ‘Ye have sold
yourselves for nought,” &c. Is. 52:3. ‘Thou sellest thy people for
nought,” &c. Ps. 44:12. ‘Twill sell your sons and your daughters
into the hands of the children of Juda, and they shall sell them to the
Sabeans, to a people afar off.” Joel, 3: 8; 3:38, ‘And they have cast
lots for my people, and have given a boy for a harlot, and sold a girl for
wine,” &c. ‘‘Yea, and what have ye to do with me, O Tyre and Zidon,
and all the cost of Palestine.” . . . ‘Because ye have taken my silver
and my gold, and have carried it into your temples.” ‘The children also

4 *

42 HEBREW SLAVERY.

Becoming a lucrative branch of trade, it could not be confined to
Palestine ; but it would naturally, as it did actually, find its
way into all other nations. And if it is a sin in itself, Moses,
was as much to blame for entailing it upon the nations of the
earth, as Adam was for entailing sin upon the human race.
Many and varied have been the commentaries upon this statute
of the Jewish lawgiver—many and varied the apologies offered
for Moses, and for God himself, for enacting this law; but there
it stands, as imperishable as the word of God, an everlasting
monument in testimony of the truths which it proclaimed ! —
There are some peculiarities in the circumstances under which
this law was passed, that were well deserving the consideration
of the philosopher, the jurist, and the moralist, to enable them
fully to appreciate its bearing and effect. It was given to be
the perpetual law of a people that had just been delivered from
a bondage of four hundred years, and who were destined to
become the light of the world, and to be separated by a middle
wall of partition from the darkness of the heathen round about
them. The history of their delivery from Egypt and of God’s
providences towards them, showed that they were destined to
be the keepers of his holy oracles, to be his peculiar people,
and to become a holy nation, to bask in the sunlight of the
worship of the one living and true God!

It was given to them at a time, too, when they had but
recently thrown off the yoke of bondage themselves ; when they
were too poor and depressed to profit by it; when they were
far removed from the customs and institutions of their ancestors,
and when it might be well supposed that the recollections of
their sins (if such they were) were fast dying out from their
memories. Under these circumstances, coming from the source
whence it did, it seems to have come with an overwhelming
weight of testimony in favor of its necessity, rectityde, and
moral power. If this time-honored institution, in the days of
the ancient Patriarchs of Israel, was a sin— if this custom of
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, is to be classed with the faults of
polygamy, concubinage, and the like, and justified only upon
the same grounds, (as is often asserted by modern theologians, )
of Juda and the children of Jerusalem have ye sold unto the Grecians,
that ye might remove them far from their border.” Joel, 8: 3-7. And
he said, I am a young man of Egypt, (dovdos) servant or slave to an Ama-
lekite. 1 Sam. 30: 18.—From this it would appear, that there were
slave markets open in all countries round about Palestine, as well as in .
that country, and that a foreign and domestic slave-trade was extensively

carried on. — ‘I got me servants and maids, and had servants and maids
born in my house: I also had great possessions.” Eccl. 2: 7.

HEBREW SLAVERY. 43

why was it re-instated by the permission of High Heaven among
their descendants, after their delivery from Egypt? Do we find
the other vices mentioned sanctioned in the same manner, and
to the same extent ? And why did Moses, under these circum-
stances, permit them to buy and to hold a Hebrew male slave
or servant for six years? And’ why did he limit this term of
service to men servants, and for forty years, leaving the females
even of the Hebrews to serve indefinitely ? These are questions
easier asked than legitimately answered. But how easily are
they disposed of by some, by drawing the veil of mystery over
the scene, and pleading ignorance of the ways aud dealings of
the Almighty; then seal the sacred volume, extinguish the light
of divine truth, as a lamp to our feet and a guide to our lives.
It is often asserted that this example of Hebrew slavery fur-
nishes no authority in justification of the slavery of modern
times; that it was a peculiar institution, permitted to a peculiar
people, to make the world tributary to them, as a punishment
for the wickedness of heathenism, and for other reasons known
only to its divine author; that it has been repealed, abolished,
and done away with, by the advent of the Messiah and the Gos-
pel Dispensation. It is not necessary here to discuss the
mooted question among theologians, how far the doctrines of
the Christian religion went to abolish the rights, ceremonies,
and laws, of the Jewish nation. It is conceded by all, that
the great principles of the moral law remained unchanged ;
neither can it be denied that the principles of the commercial
law, and of the law of inheritance, remained the same, as we are
expressly told that the founder of the Christian religion came
not to abolish or destroy the law, that ‘‘his kingdom was not
of this world,’’ and not designed to interfere with the civil or
political institutions any further than they were incompatible
with its precepts. But do we find one word in the New Testa-
ment that directly or indirectly militates against this? Not
one word. It would have overthrown the civil law of Israel.
What, then, was the condition of the Mosaic statute in the days
of the Apostles, and as long as the Jews were a nation or a
province? To determine this, we must consider the nature of
the government under which this ordinance was passed, and its
influence upon the character and perpetuity of its laws. <Ac-
cording to the scripture of the Old Testament, the government
of the Hebrew nation was in the nature of a theocracy, or under
the immediate supervision of God. It wasat first administered
by judges of divine appointment, who held the supreme rule
until the days of the kings; hence, they were literally governed

44 HEBREW SLAVERY.

by the laws of God. These laws were essentially perpetual,
and could not be repealed or modified, except that it was done
by the same authority that had at first given them sanction.

This state of things could not be interrupted, without an
entire change of government, effected by a revolution.

Hence, the statutes of Moses, the great founder of the Jewish
constitution and laws, necessarily continued in force, except
such as were modified and repealed by the New Testament, as
long as the Jewish nation existed. Neither the prevalence of
the Roman dominion, nor the subsequent conquest of Titus and
Vespasian over Palestine, had any effect upon the provisions
of the commercial and of the civil law previously in force in
that province. It is a well-established principle of the law of
nations, as well as civilization, that the acquisition of one na-
tion by another, by conquest or other ways, leaves the muni-
cipal laws and institutions unchanged, except so far as they
are wholly incompatible with the government of the reigning
sovereign.

But Hebrew slavery was not incompatible with the govern-
ment of the Roman emperor, for the same existed in Rome.
‘So that the Mosaic statute was still the law upon this subject
in Palestine, even to the days of the Apostles, and as long as
the nations of the Israelites existed. Having never been re-
pealed, it still continues in all its moral force, although there is
no nation now to which it is politically applicable. The laws
of God were at first adopted by resolutions of the Plymouth
colony. They were thus politically applicable to that people,
and they, under their permission, purchased slaves, sold cap-
tives, &e.

Founded upon the fundamental relations of mankind to one
another, and to their God, it rests upon the basis of moral
principle, and stands unrepealed and unrepealable. And at
the ingathering of the ancient Israelites to resume their ancient
nationality, this law, though it may have slumbered for thou-
sands of years as a political dead letter upon the dusty alcoves
of the libraries, yet will it then, like the Pheenix spirit, from its
own ashes, spring into newness of life.

The late Professor Moses Stuart, of Andover Theological
Seminary, in a pamphlet entitled ‘‘Remarks on the Recent
Speech of the Hon. Daniel Webster’’ (referring to his great
speech of 1850, on the subject of slavery), said (page 36):
‘‘The whole tenor of the Mosaic legislation on the subject
seems to show that the permission to purchase heathen slaves,
was one of the means employed by Moses to render heathenism

HEBREW SLAVERY. 45

contemptible in the eyes of the Hebrews,’? “No one can
reason from the case of the Jews—the favored, pre-eminent,
secluded nation—to the case of men who lived after the coming
of Him ‘who broke down the middle wall of partition between
Jews and Gentiles,’ proclaimed one common God and Father
of all; one common Redeemer and Sanctifier; that this God
is no respecter of persons, and that he has ‘ made of one blood
all the nations that dwell on the face of the earth.’ I say no
one can now crave liberty to purchase slaves of either Jews or
Gentiles on the ground of Mosaic permission. He might as
well insist on the liberty of polygamy and concubinage, both of
which Moses allowed.’ Where did Abram get his sixteen
hundred slaves which God had given him, some of which were
bought with his money, and some born in his house? And
where did Sarah, his wife, get the Egyptian servant Hagar,
before the covenant with Abram, by which Israel was chosen
as the peculiar people of God’s blessings? Upon what prin-
ciple was this permission given to the Patriarchs to buy slaves,
to hold them as heritable property, to do unto them as they
pleased and transmit them to their children ? Professor Stuart
seems to have entirely lost sight of the force of this ancient
custom of Patriarchal law, and the imperious necessity that
compelled Moses to revive and reinstate it among their descend-
ants when they should dwell in the promised land.

When they came near to the borders of Canaan, a thousand
endearing associations connected with the history of their
fathers sprang upon them. They grappled their time-honored
customs and institutions to their hearts with locks of steel.
They acquired this by association with the Egyptians who
were a most tenacious people of their customs. But, if it was
the object of Moses to degrade the heathen in the estimation
of the Jews (as it only would), why did he permit the Hebrew
women to linger in an indefinite servitude for forty years after
the law of Jubilee, before he allowed them to partake of its
benefits? And why did he allow them to purchase their
brethren as slaves for six years ?

The only rational conclusion is that the force of this custom

1 But were polygamy and concubinage generally allowed? was there any
general permission given to them by statute? I trow not. The sophistry
of this argument consists in placing the historical narrative of the private
vices of jndividuals on a par with the statute laws of Moses. ‘The first
and great command upon the subject, ‘‘ Thou shalt not commit adultery,”
covers the whole ground; if there be any exception to this provided for

by law, it is strictly limited and for a specific purpose. (See Note, post,
page 46.)

46 HEBREW SLAVERY.

was so inwrought into the policy, of their national existence,
so time-honored and reverenced in the sacred memories of their
fathers, that it could not be eradicated from their feelings ; and
even their own brethren could not be wholly exempt from its
effects.

But because some of the Patriarchs and men of Israel fell .
into the evil practices of polygamy, concubinage, &c. (which
are nowhere allowed or permitted by any law, ordinance, or
decree of that nation, and which can only be imputed to them
as the private vices of individuals), are they to be placed upon
a footing with the customs and institutions sanctioned and
upheld by the potent arm of divine legislation? Had Moses
ever given general permission or sanction to polygamy and con-
cubinage by any edict, law or ordinance, then, and not till then
can the cases be considered parallel. The sophistry of an
argument that quotes the private vices of individuals to con-
demn the laws and institutions of a nation, is too apparent to
need refutation.’

Another class of anti-slavery writers array the prophets and
followers of Moses against his holy enactments, and quote their
language as in open opposition to the established laws and
institutions of the nation.

Here again it is necessary to recur to the position which
Moses and his ordinances occupy with regard to the prophets
and later writers of the Jewish nation. He was the chosen

1 «Thou shalt not commit adultery ;” what thus becomes of polygamy ?
‘Do not prostitute thy daughter to cause her to be a whore,” &c., Ley.
19:29. ‘And he shall take a wife in her virginity,” Ley. 21:18. If
there is any passage in the Mosaic statutes that gives a general permis-
sion to take a plurality of wives, or to keep any number of concubines,
it has escaped my observation. The whole spirit of the Mosaic code
(with a single exception, and that for a specific purpose), from the seventh
commandment to the end of the law, is against it. ‘And they say unto
him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now
Moses in the law commanded us that such should be stoned,” &c., John
8: 4-5. ‘Then shall they bring out the damsel to the door of her
father’s house, and the men of the city shall stone her with stones that
she die,” Deut. 22: 21. Compare Deut. 22 : 28-29; also 24: 1-6. “For
this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife ;
and they twain shall be one flesh,” &c., Mark 10: 2-9. Compare 1 Cor.
6: 15-19, and 10: 8. ‘Neither shall he multiply wives to himself,” &c.,
Deut. 17: 17. Compare Mal. 2: 15, ‘*And did he not make one,” &e.
‘¢ Neither shalt thou take a wife to her sister,” &c., Ley. 18:18. ‘*My
dove, my undefiled is but one,” &c., 8. Sol. 6: 9. “Give not thy strength
unto women,” &c., Prov. 31:3. ‘The seed of the adulterer and the
whore,” Is. 57: 2-5. See Numb. 25: 1-9. ‘‘For they be the children
of whoredom,” &c., Hos. 2: 4-8. See Ezek. 16: 27-39; 23: 35-38.

HEBREW SLAVERY. AT

instrument in the hand of God to deliver the Israelites from the
cruel hands of Pharaoh, to be their counsellor and guide during
their weary pilgrimage through the wilderness, to resuscitate
the exhausted energies of the ancient Hebrew nation, and
finally plant them safely within the borders of the promised
land. He established a government and laws, to be their
government and laws forever; not liable to be gainsayed nor
subject to repeal and modification by any earthly ruler that
should come after him. When did the subsequent prophets
and teachers undertake to amend, gainsay, or abolish these laws ?
The universal answer must be, At no time whatever. Repeal
them they could not, for their commission and business was to
explain and enforce them. Amend them they could not, for
they were already perfect in the sight of Heaven, and what
they were designed to be under the whole Jewish dispensation.!
Gainsay them they could not, for they held their offices by
divine appointment, and this would have introduced confusion
into the Mosaic jurisprudence. All they could do was to ex-
plain them, to rectify mistaken constructions, correct popular
errors and enforce a rigid observance of all the requirements
of Mosaic law. Yeta multitude of quotations from the prophets
and later writers are pressed into the service of these abolition
writers, who would fain place the prophets in the same hostile
attitude towards the constitution and laws of Moses, that they
themselves occupy towards the constitution and laws under
which they live.

The principal one of these texts, and the one most frequently
referred to, is that of Is. 58:6. ‘‘ Loose the bonds of wick-
edness; undo the heavy burdens; let the oppressed go free;
break away every yoke.’’? The prophet further enjoins that
they shall give bread to the hungry, shelter to the poor wan-
derers, and clothing to the naked. He then adds (by way of a
general duty to their brethren, including all the foregoing in-
junctions): ‘‘ Hide not thyself from thine own flesh !’? Surely
it does not include heathen slaves. The prophet could not
have commanded the Jews in defiance of the Mosaic statute,
by virtue of which they held them as heritable property to be
their bondsmen forever; to break their yoke and let them go
free. The term, “thine own flesh’? means their kindred by
blood, fellow countrymen, citizens of the same commonwealth.’

The passages referred to above have no special relation to
slaves, either heathen or Jewish, unless, perchance, it might

1 « Whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to
it, nor any thing taken from it.” Eccles. 3: 14.

2Gen. 29:14. 2d Sam. 5:1; 19: 13,14. Judges, 9: 2.

s

48 HEBREW SLAVERY.

include a certain class of poor oppressed Hebrew slaves whe
were wrongfully held by their masters, and not liberated when
their term of service had expired.’ Another passage is often
cited as a denunciation against slavery, which reads thus: -
‘Woe unto him that buildeth his house by unrighteousness and
his chambers by wrong; that useth his neighbor’s services with-
out wages and giveth him not for his work.’ To preserve a
due consistency between the law and the prophets, through the
ecclesiastical jurisprudence of the Jewish nation, some other
interpretation must be sought to this passage than a denuncia-
tion against the laws and institutions of Moses. In view of
this law, it would be a strange idea to hear the prophet speak of
defrauding slaves of their wages, and hence we find that the whole
matter is explained by the language of the context (vs. 11),
which shows that the oppressive and tyrannical Shallam, the
degenerate son of Josiah, and heir of his throne, is the sole
object of this denunciation. ‘‘ He built large chambers, wide
houses ceiled with cedar and painted with vermilion,’’ by exac-
tions upon his subjects. Another passage is also often cited:
it reads thus: “Open thy mouth for the dumb, in the cause of
all such as are appointed to destruction; open thy mouth;
judge righteously and plead the cause of the poor and needy.’”
It seems that the dumb, here spoken of by the prophet, were
those who had cases pending before some judicial tribunal, who
were poor and needy and about to be ruined or appointed to
destruction by some privation of their rights, whose pleadings
could not be heard in consequence of their want of influence
and power, and thus by some bribed, corrupt, and unjust judge
who refused to hear their pleas or redress their wrongs, they
were forced to be dumb. But would this language apply to
heathen slaves? had they any causes to be heard in the Hebrew
courts of justice which could then be pleaded and righteously
adjudicated? No one will so pretend. By the law of Moses
they were the property or money of their master, and had no
rights independent of their interest or their will. Another
passage: ‘‘ Do justice to the afflicted and needy; rid them out
of the hand of the wicked.”* The Psalmist is not here preach-
ing treason against the government and laws of his country, by
commanding the people to wrest the slaves from the power and
authority of their masters, in open defiance of the Mosaic sta-
tute. This language is also addressed to the judges who act
unjustly: ‘‘ How long will ye judge unjustly and accept the
124; 10. 2 Jer. 22: 18.
8 Prov. 81: 8, 9. 4 Psalms, 82: 3, 4.

HEBREW SLAVERY. 49

persons of the wicked ?’’ ‘‘ Defend the poor and the father-
less, dc. ;’’' then follows the above quotation.

The wicked here spoken of must mean those who dragged
the poor people into courts, to force exactions from them through
the injustice of the judges. But the question again recurs,
had the judges, as such, anything to do with the slaves? Were
they ever brought into courts by their masters? The answer .
is at hand; the masters needed no court but their own, and
had a summary process within their own power.’

Another quotation is often cited: ‘‘ Ye have not hearkened
unto me in proclaiming liberty, every one to his brother, and
every man to his neighbor.’” In this passage, also, we cannot
apply the terms brother and neighbor to the heathen slaves that
were lawful articles of property. But the context shows us
- that the prophet is here threatening the Jews with Divine judg-
ments on account of their disobedience and perfidy to the law
of Moses, in not liberating their brethren when their time of
service had legally expired, or when the jubilee year had come.‘
We read that, in many instances, they paid no regard to this
provision of the law, but continued to hold them in bondage.
Another passage is also cited for the same purpose: ‘‘ Hide
the outcast, bewray not him that wandereth.’’? But who are
the outcasts and the wanderers here spoken of? Are they run-
away slaves? <A glance at the context shows us that they were
the fugitive daughters of Moab who fled from their sanguinary
invaders and sought safety in the land of Israel. The prophet
presents them as addressing the Hebrew people, beseeching
them (in the words quoted) to conceal them in a place of safety
and not to tell the pursuing enemy where they are; that is, not
to bewraythem. What application, then, has this language to
the case of a slave escaping from one tribe of Israel to another ?
Many other quotations that are often made by abolition writers
might be explained in a similar way; but these are sufficient to
illustrate the truth that the consciences of the prophets and
later rulers of the Jewish nation could never come in conflict
with the constitution and laws of Moses.

It cannot be denied by any candid person, that the traffic in

1Ps, 82: 2.

2 «¢ A servant will not be corrected by words, for though he understand
he will not answer.” Prov. 29: 19. The Greek text of the Septuagint has
“owxerns oxAnpos an unruly or turbulent slave cannot be corrected by words,
plainly indicating that he must be whipped. ‘And that servant that
knew his master’s will and did it not, shall be beaten with many stripes,”

&c. Luke, 12 : 45-47.
3 Jer. 34: 17. 4 Idem. vs. 12-16. 5 Isa. 16: 3.

5 D

50 GREEK SLAVERY.

heathen slaves was sanctioned by the laws of the Jewish nation ;
that it was held by them to be a principle of common law, ac-
knowledged by common consent as a universal custom or prin-
ciple of commercial law, and that such slaves were property,
transmissible and heritable. Now, we ask, if that institution
is a great moral evil, a malum in se, a high-handed sin against
God, to be classed with polygamy, adultery, theft, perjury, and
the like, why was it thus sanctioned by the law of Moses? Is
there any instance, in the Mosaic statutes, where permission is
given to steal, to commit adultery, perjury, and the like, for
any purpose, or under any circumstances? (an it be supposed
that. this illustrious example would have been set, and this high
precedent been established before the world by Him who cannot
err, had it been in itself a sin against God? These are ques-
tions which we suggest to anti-slavery theologians to read and
ponder.

HSSAY III.
GREEK SLAVERY.

BrEForE proceeding to consider the position of Christ and
his Apostles with regard to the constitution and laws of Moses,
and to discuss the principles and doctrines of the New Testa-
ment in relation to the institution of slavery, we propose to
present some of the leading features of that institution, as it
existed in those countries where they dwelt, and where they
travelled, and spent their labors, and with which they must
have been familiar.’ ,

It is sometimes asserted that the word slave does not occur
in the Bible; therefore, we call the attention of the reader to
the words that are used by certain profane writers in treating

1 At the commencement of the Christian era, the Roman empire ex-
tended over the ancient Greek nation, and those States were held subject
to the dominion of Rome, with which Christianity had to contend. Yet
each State retained its own peculiar laws, institutions, and municipal
regulations. Hence, it becomes necessary, in showing the proper relation
of Christianity to the institutions of civil government in this particular,
and the true position of Jesus Christ and his Apostles with regard to the
slavery of the Roman empire at that time, to give an analysis of the
laws and government of that institution in ancient Greece, as well as
Rome.

GREEK SLAVERY. 51

upon this subject, which we will show to be the same that are
used in the Scriptures of the New Testament, and that they
mean what we understand by the word slave. The reason why
that word is not used in the New Testament we will explain
hereafter.

Greece, like other nations in their infancy, was, in its early
ages, in a state of piratical warfare. The Pelasgic tribes seem
to have led somewhat of a nomadic life; and cattle, as the great
means of subsistence, were the first objects of plunder. Here,
the same law of necessity gave rise to the custom of reducing
captives to bondage. To turn their slaves, so acquired, to
some profitable source of revenue, necessity again induced the
inhabitants, by degrees, to engage in agricultural pursuits ;
finding them thus profitable, men, women and children were
- eagerly sought after as slaves. A sea that had innumerable
islands, coasts and ports, would naturally offer powerful incen-
tives to the kidnapper. Hostilities would naturally ensue, and
hence might first arise the estimation of Greek piracy, which
Jaid the foundation of Greek commerce, and became such a
fruitful source of slavery.

One of the fundamental principles in the early organization
of Grecian society, was, that freemen should be all equal, and
that they should be served by slaves. The soil was cultivated
by slaves on the public account, the freemen eat together at the
public tables, and their families were provided for from the
public stock.’ There is a time referred to, by the historians of
Greece, when the Hellenes are said to have possessed no slaves.’
In the Homeric period, however, we find that it prevailed
throughout the Grecian States. These are the evils, we are
told in the Iliad, that follow the capture of a town: the men
are killed; the city is burned to the ground; the women and
children of all ranks are carried off into slay ery.®

The complaint of old Priam, of the slaying of his sons, and
the dragging of his daughters into slavery, is another allusion
to the slavery of captives.! The command that Penelope’s
housekeeper gives to her attendants, shows that she had quite
a number at her command.® We read that no less than twenty

1 See Laws of Minos, by Plato and Aristotle. Sicyon, Corinth, and
Argos, were thus divided.

2Thus Herodotus, speaking of the Athenians, Says, vi. 187 :, ‘0d yap
elvat rovrov rov xXpovoy opiat kw oddé rots dAdois EdAnoiotkeras.”” ‘* They say there
was a time when they were not slaves to the other Greeks.”

3 ¢Texva dé 7’ ayovot Gddot Babfwvorvg te yvvaixas.” Ill. ix. 594. ‘¢ And
others carry away the children and women of high rank.”

*Til. xxii. 62. 5 Odyss. xx. 149.

52 GREEK SLAVERY.

were required to execute her orders; the whole number of
maid-servants were fifty. These and many other instances that
might be cited, show that slaves were quite common and nu-
merous during this heroic period. But at this time the slaves
were mostly captives taken in war; though this was not uni-
versally the case, for captives are made articles of sale in
Homer.’

As in all other nations, in the march of civilization, when
predatory excursions. had grown less frequent, and the States
had become more powerful, better able to defend themselves,
and life, liberty, and property had become more secure; there
was, at length, no method by which slaves could be obtained
except by purchase. Hence the dopcanwzor (the captured slaves),
and the apyvpwryro (the purchased slaves), were always distin-
guished.*

In the progress of civilization it became a custom for the
Hellenes to set the captive Greeks free for a certain ransom,
feeling ashamed of enslaving their own countrymen. But just
in proportion as this source of supply failed, the traffic in bar-
barians, at the same time, increased to supply their places.®

Although the idea, that Greek could not justly enslave Greek,
put an end to the subjugation and slavery of their own coun-
trymen, yet we nowhere find a dissenting opinion to the legality
of the traffic in barbarian slaves.

This, as we have seen, was admitted by universal consent to
be a lawfulcommerce. Plato, just and humane as he was, never
dreamt of excluding the slave elements, in this form, from his
ideal state, which was to include nothing inconsistent with na-
ture and reason,

He says, in his sixth book of laws, ‘‘ there is nothing sound
in the feelings of a slave (Sovaos); nor ought a prudent man to
trust them in anything of importance,” as the wisest of all
poets says :—

‘¢ Jove fixed it certain, that whatever day
Makes man a (dovdos) slave, takes half his sense away.”

1 << gopiadwroi.” Odyss. xv. 483. 2 Isocr. Platz, 9, p. 406.

3 <*Ovk iv marptov rots "EdAnow tro apyvporvnrwy 76 wada6y dcaxovercOa.”’ It was
not yet a national custom with the Greeks to be waited upon by purchased
slaves. Timeous apud Athen. vi. p. 264: ‘‘Xcoi mpwrof rwv Ednvwy pera
Oerradovs Kai Aaxedatpoviorg Exphoavro dovAots, THY pévroe KTnoW avTav ov TOV avrov
rponov exeivois. Xcoe dé BapBapovs Kéxrnvratl rovs olkéras Kal tiunv abr@v karaBdh-
Novres.”’? The Chians were the first Greeks after the Thessalians and Lace-
dgmonians who purchased slaves with money. This mode of acquiring
them was not yet customary with these people. But the Chians obtained
only barbarian slaves, overcoming their valor.

GREEK SLAVERY. 53

He says in the same passage: ‘‘ Two remedies now are left
us, either never to allow for the future any person’s (dovA0s)
slave to be one another’s fellow countryman, or, as far as pos-
sible, to prevent him even speaking the same language.”’

‘¢ But he would, else, treat them all well, not only for their
own sake, but still more for their owners. The master should
behave towards them with as little insolence as possible. But
it is right to chastise them with justice; not punishing them as
if they were freemen, so as to make them arrogant; and every
word he addresses to them should be, in some sense, a com-
mand. A master ought never to play or jest with his (Sovac)
slaves, whether they be male or female. And as to the very
foolish manner in which some people treat their (Sovac) slaves,
allowing them great license and indulgence, they only make it
the more difficult for both parties; the harder for the one to
command, and for the other to obey.’”’

/ Aristotle, in his Politics, discusses the subject as follows:
‘* A (Sova0s) slave is simply the property of his master; but the
master stands in many other relations besides that of proprietor
to his (Sovac) slaves.

Such is the nature of slavery. We proceed to examine whe-
ther the institution be wise and just.

To determine this question, it will be sufficient to contem-
plate the ordinary course of nature, and to deduce from our
observations clear inferences of reason. ;

Government and subjection are things useful and necessary ;
they prevail everywhere in animated, as well as brute matter.
From their first origin, some natures are formed to command
and others to obey; the kinds of government varying with the
difference of their subjects; but: all equally useful and proper
for their respective ends; and those kinds the most excellent
from which the most excellent consequences ensue. In compo-
sitions endowed with life, it is the province of mind to com-
mand and of matter to obey.

Man consists of both soul and body; and in all men rightly
constituted the soul commands the body ; though some men are
so grossly formed or constituted, that the body seems to rule
the soul. But here the order of nature is perverted. Those
men, therefore, whose powers are chiefly confined to the body,
and whose principal excellence consists in rendering bodily
service, those, I say, are naturally (Sova0.) slaves, because it is
for their interest to be so; they can obey reason, though they
cannot exercise it, and though different from tame animals

; 1 Athen. Diep. p. 412. The Athenians passed a law against those who
meee peer slaves, called the ‘ ypagn vBpéws.”? Plato De Leg. vi.
*

54 GREEK. SLAVERY.

which are actuated merely by their sensual appetites, they stand
in avery similar relation, and become the property of other men
because their interests and safety require it.’

In conformity with these observations, nature, we see, has
variously moulded the human frame. Some men are large,
compact, and firmly built, while others are erect and graceful,
unsuited in their constitutions to severe labor, but capable of
sustaining, honorably, the more responsible offices of the State.
This rule, however, is not universal, for a servile mind is some-
times lodged in a graceful person, and we have often found
bodies formed for service animated by the souls of freemen.
Yet the distinction is not frivolous, for were a part of mankind
arranged in that splendor of beauty that beams from the statue
of the gods, universal consent would acknowledge the balance
of the race formed to be their (Sovacr) slaves. The difference
of minds, though less obvious, is far more characteristic ;
whence we may conclude that (6ov221a) slavery is founded both
in utility and justice.’ 7

The (covatca) slavery may be taken in two senses; in one of
which he is a (Sova05) slave who submits to the laws of war,
commanding the vanquished to become the property of the
victors.

1... . ‘*morepov eortv aper) ris dovAov mapa ras opyavikds kai dtaxovixas GAXAn
tipiwrepa rovrwy, olov owppoovvn Kat avdpia xai dixaioown... etré yap fort ri dioi-
covot ray édevbipwr ; éiré ph Eoriv, 6vrwy avOpwrwy xat Aoyou Kolvwyourrwy, aromov.”
De Republ. I. 18, p. 1259. He asks the question, whether any slave is
not benefited by being engaged in offices and ministerial duties more
exalted than he otherwise would be, as to his intelligence, his manners,
and moral principles; for that this is true, what freeman will deny?
Since, to hold the contrary, is derogatory to the wisdom of those men
who associated with them. Again: ‘‘Zoré yap dvoet dovdos 6 dvvapevos GAXNov
wai di addov xai cor.” ‘For a slave is by nature the subject of another
(to whom he belongs).”’ “kat & dovAos xrnua ri eutpoxov.”” De. Rep. 1, 4.
‘¢*And a slave is a certain living piece of property.” ‘*"O yap dovios
Eppuxov opyavov, ro 6’ opyavoy atpuxos dovdos.” Eth. Nicom. viii. 18, p. 1161.
Again: a slave is a living machine; but a machine is a dead slave.

2 In the days of Aristotle, it should be observed, the world had but a
limited knowledge of the entire human race. The numberless human
beings classed under the Malay, the Polynesian, African and American,
were almost entirely unknown to the Greek naturalists of his day. Yet,
what Aristotle has here advanced as speculative theory, founded upon a
limited observation, the late celebrated Dr. Morton has demonstrated from
the most extensive observation and experiments. He has demonstrated
the intellectual inferiority of certain races, from the size and conformation
of the brain. He has, perhaps, examined more skulls, measured more
heads, and tested more accurately the size, weight, and formation of the
brain of the different races, than any other man that ever lived. (Crania
Egypt., and Crania Amer.) |

GREEK SLAVERY. i

This is acknowledged to be law, but the law itself is said to
be unjust; on this subject, the wise hold different opinions.
To avoid this difficulty, it is proposed to limit the law to the
case of barbarians vanquished by Greeks. ‘Thus, there are
two kinds of'slavery, the one founded in nature, the other esta-
blished by law."

Posidonius, the stoic philosopher, in his eleventh book of
history, says that many men, unable to govern themselves, by
reason of the weakness of their intellects, give themselves up
to the guidance of wiser men than themselves, in order that they
may receive from them such care, advice and assistance as they
need; and, in their turn, requite their benefactors with such
services as they are able to render. In this manner the Mary-
andyni became subject to the people of Heraclea, promising by
contract to act.as their subjects for ever, if they would supply
them with the necessaries of life. And Archamachus, in the
second book of his history, says when the Beotians had founded
Armaea, those of them who did not return to Beotia, but took
a fancy to their new country, gave themselves up by agreement
to the Thessalians, to be their slaves. And these people are
now called the Penestz.*

At an early period, the Greeks obtained most of their slaves
from Asia. ‘The chief emporia for slaves and the slave trade,
were from the extensive Scythian regions, Ponticapeum, Dias-
curias and Phanagoria, all on the Euxine, or Black Sea.
Scythians, Lydians, Carians, Mysians, Cappadocians, were all
laid under contribution by the kidnappers and traders; preda-
tory excursions were also made by the Greek pirates into. Cilicia
and Pamphylia, and great numbers were carried off to the
market-places of Tyre, Sidon, and even Delos.?

At Athens and Corinth, as well as elsewhere, there were
regular slave-markets, where the slaves stood for selection.

1 A similar provision to the law of Moses, which forbid Jews to enslave
Jews. It was the general opinion that Greeks could not enslave Greeks;
the institution was maintained only on the right of the Greeks to enslave
the barbarians, and thus bring them within the pale of civilization. See
Aristotle’s Eth. and Polit., translated by Gillies, 8d Lond. ed., 18138, vol.
ii., p. 29, et seq.

2 Athen. Deip., p. 411-12. Here are two instances of a sensible ex-
ercise of the glorious privileges of liberty, about which we hear so much;
they enjoyed the liberty to choose between slavery or starvation and
death; they chose the former; and how many thousands of poor wretches
are there in the world that would fain follow their example!

8 Gell’s Greece, Art. Slavery; Smith’s Greek and Reman Antiq., Art.
Slaves.

/

56 GREEK SLAVERY.

The slaves, when exposed in market for sale, were naked, or
had to strip themselves as it pleased the purchasers.’ The law
also made the seller responsible for any defect. The market-
places were called the xvxaov.? They were also named the
npatnp 260s, which is analogous to the Latin phrase, Lapis de
lapide emptus, referring to the rock on which they stood when
exposed to sale. The prices, as elsewhere, varied according to
their quality. The most usual prices were from one to ten
mine,® though trustworthy men, who could act as overseers,
brought far higher sums. The story goes, that when somebody
asked Aristipus what he would ask for instructing his son, he
answered he would demand one thousand drachme; on which
the father replied that he could purchase a slave for that money
(about eighty dollars of our money).* Of course, slaves who
were artisans by trade (as many were), varied much in their
skill, and the difficulty of their occupation.® Next to the pur-
chased slaves (called by Plato avaugioByryzws Sovacr), came those
born in the house, called ovyorpiBes or oxorpiy, OF Sovace ovxoyerns.
The ovxorpiBis were the offspring of the master and a female
slave, or of two slaves, and in the latter case, they were called
the aupidovarcr, or the descendants of two slaves.

There were no learned slaves, as at Rome, nor any who were
kept to minister to pleasure—such as dancers, actors, or musi-
cians. This, however, was not the case at a later period,
when the influence of Roman manners began to be felt.6 The

1... . SOF pév nliovv axodvoavras avrov wonep rovs apyupwynrovs éEmioxonéiv,”’

Lucian Eunuch, 12. They made them strip naked at the pleasure of the
purchaser.

2 . Kuxdol Exadovvro of romol, &v dis EwAovvro rives wropacOncay, dé ano
Tov Xvxhw meciecravdi rovg mwdovpevors.” Poll. 8, 78. The places in which
some kinds were sold, were called ‘the circles.’”” They were named from
the fact that the slaves stand around the [bidders] in a circle.

3 Tuy yap dixérav 6 pev mov dvo plvwy aftos eoriv 6 dé ovd’ vpipvaiov, 6 dd mévre
pivav, 6 dé Kat dexa, Nikias d’ o’ Nixyparov deyeral exicrarny els rapyvpta rpalobat
radavrov.”” Xenoph. Memor. ii. 5, 2. Some slaves are worth two mine
or thereabouts ($16), others less; others, again, are worth five and six
mine. Nacias, the son of Niceratus, is said to have given a talent
($480) for an overseer for the mines.

4 Plutarch, De Educ. 7.

5... *‘paxaiprotous (xaredimev o' marnp) rpiaxovra Kal duo f rpeis, ros pev ava
révre pivas i) Kal ef rovs 5D bux eXarrovos fH} rpidv pivwy aflovs . . . KAivoroiovs 0 eixooi
rov apiOpov rerpaxovra pivwy vroxsipevovs.”? | Demosth. in Aphob. i. p. 816. A
certain father left by will thirty sword-makers, some worth two, and over
three; some worth more than five or six; and some, on the other hand,
worth not more than three mine; also twenty upholsterers, appraised
at the sum of forty min for these alone.

6“ Xapixdel yé piv modus Opxeorpidwy kai povoovpywv enero.” Lucian, Amor.

GREEK SLAVERY. 5T

position of the Greek slave was far preferable to that of the
Roman, in reference to his master, and this is principally to be
attributed to the character of the Athenian, which led him to
establish a confidential relation between himself and his domestic.
Hence the mute obedience of the Roman, and the familiar
garrulity of the Greek slave.’ With regard to the difference
between the punishment imposed upon the slave and the free-
man, the leading distinction appears to be, that in every instance
a corporal penalty is inflicted on the former, while in the case
of the latter this is the last resort.’

10. Kariclis employed a number of stage-players and musicians. The
rich kept negroes and eunuchs, the former for mere vanity and love of
show — “‘ pxpopidortyov exipednBivat dnds avrg 6 axddovdos Aifiop eorai.” “* Any
vain lover of display has a negro body-servant to wait upon him.”
Theophr. Char. 21. But eunuchs were prized for their fidelity ; hence
they were employed as treasurers. In the retinue of the Lady of Smyrna,
mentioned by Lucian, there was rAn9os evvovxwy, the full accompaniment
of eunuchs, Herod. viii. 105; Holidor. Ethiop. viii. 17. The porter in the
house of Callias, was a eunuch, Plato Protag. p. 314. There is no ground
for the supposition that they were kept as protectors to the women.

1 There is an amusing anecdote illustrative of this fact related by Plu-
tarch (D. Garrul. 18). P. Piso had ordered his slaves never to speak about
anything unless when asked. On one occasion he invited Clodius to a
banquet. The guests arrived, all but Clodius; Piso repeatedly sent the
slave who had carried the invitation, to look if he were coming. At last
he asked him whether he was sure that he had invited Clodius; quite
sure, replied the slave. Why does he not come then? inquired Piso.
Because (massa) he declined, answered the slave. And why did you not
tell me that before? <‘‘Because you did not ask me,” replied the slave.
Plutarch adds: ‘‘ Odrws pév, Pwpdixos dixérng 6.4 Arrixos épei.ra dsonorn oxdrrov,
ap’ bis yeyovaciv dt dtadvonis odrws péya npds mavra 6 eBiopos cori.” Unlike the
Roman slave, the Grecian, while delving, conversed familiarly with his
master, thus becoming reconciled to one another; the custom is greatly
preferable to all other kinds of treatment. Though Plato requires the
master always to observe a grave deportment towards his slaves, Leg. vi.
p. 777.

2... “Kai piv ci Oedoire oxéVacbai map‘ vyiv avrots & avdpés dixacral, re dovdov
# eevOepov ecvac diagepel, rovro peylarov av ebpoite, dri Tvis pev dovdois 76 cwpa Tw
a diknpatwv aravrwy vrevOuvoy ori, rots’ O° tAevOepols voTarov Touro mooayKel KoAacELY.”
“‘Oh! ye administrators of justice, if any one is compelled to lean upon
you for protection, there is a great difference between being a freeman
and a slave; since with a slave it is found most expedient to hold the
body accountable for all offences. Whereas, to chastise, is the last pun-
ishment that pertains to freemen.”” Demosth. in Tim. p. 752. ‘,.. xaé

skein pév Tous eevOspous bpxois kal mloreclv avayxagely & Tol edevOepots paylora Kal
wei mrelstov eorty, ekein O& rods (Sovdovs Erepats avayxats, id Ov, kal Hw peAwow
axoBavecbai), Kkaréinovres’, duws’ avayxatovral radnOn dXeyeiv.” Antippo De
Chocut, p. 778. It is lawful to condemn freemen upon creditable state-
ments under oaths; this is by far the most binding consideration with

58 GREEK SLAVERY.

It was forbidden to strike a slave at Athens, for fear of hitting
a freeman by mistake, as there were those in dress and appear-
ance not superior to the slaves and the meteoci ; but this regula-
tion applied only to strange slaves, and not to one’s own.

It was permitted to institute the action founded on the ypagy
vGpews, for injury done to a slave. But this law was not enacted
for the benefit of the slave; but for the benefit of freemen.
The slave had no source of redress for wrong except through
his master. The only defence the slave had against his owner’s
ill treatment, was to take refuge under the Theseion, or at
some other altar, whereupon the master might be forced to sell
him.!

There was, also, a custom of beating and driving a slave out
of doors on a certain day in the year, as a personification of
want and worthlessness.?

The method of using slaves for witnesses is illustrative of
their general treatment. Their simple statements passed for
nothing, unless extorted by the rack; except, perhaps, when
they came forward as (uy»vrov) informers in cases of heavy
crimes, such as murder.* The punishment inflicted on slaves
was, almost invariably, corporal. We find no instances of
marks of ignominy, or of having been degraded, like the brand-
ing and furca of the Romans. Beating with rods, thongs, or
whips, was the usual mode.‘ Fetters (~édac) were often fastened
on the feet, not only as a punishment, but to prevent the escape
of the slaves, especially those that worked in the fields or mines.*

them; but it is customary to condemn slaves upon other sources of evi-
dence, from which the accusers must be under the penalty of death, and
thus be compelled to speak the truth. But the slave was not allowed to
defend himself in a court of:justice. Plato, Gorg. p. 483. But his master
might take up for him. It was forbidden to strike a slave at Athens, for
fear of hitting a freeman by mistake. Xenoph. De Rep. Athen. 1-10.

1 See Petit. Leg. Att. p. 258.

*,.. “Kadetrai dé Bovdiyov efsdaals, kai twv olxerdv va trimovtes ayviats paBdols

Oia Ovpiv €edadrvovoly enideyovres. “Ew Bovdipov tow dé xdovrov Kai vyiciav.”
Plutarch Symp. vi. p. 851. It was called the expulsion of Boulimus, or
starvation, and beating the slaves with tender willows, they drove them
out of doors, saying; ‘‘ Starvation without, but riches and plenty within.”

8 This was called ex rov coparoc, or év rw deppari rov sdeyxov didévac to testify
with the body, or in the skin. Demosth. adv. Thimoth., p. 1200.

4 Plutarch de Cohib. Ira. 11.

5... ‘Kai ai moddai de avrat Arrixat pupiades rwv bixerwy dédepevai sipyazovro
ra peradda.” Athens, vi. p. 272. As many as ten thousand Grecian slaves,
being fettered, worked in the mines. The rodoxaxn was # cumbrous fetter,
used as a punishment for runaways. Demosth. in Timocr. p. 783. The fvdor .
was an elaborate apparatus, in which the culprit was fixed, with his neck,
hands, and feet, in five different holes. Aristoph. Equites, 1049,

GREEK SLAVERY. 59

The penalty of death could only be inflicted with the sanction
of the law, and not merely at the will of the master, as among
the Romans.’

Branding was common for running away, and other light
offences, within the jurisdiction of the master.”

Captives taken in war were sometimes thus dealt with, in
eases of peculiar animosity.* It is difficult to determine to
what extent the character of the slaves themselves might render
such harsh treatment necessary; for it is from their masters
that we derive these accounts and get all our information.

It would be absurd to deny, that there were not, among the
great multitude of slaves in Greece, many intelligent, worthy,
and noble-minded persons. *

On the other hand, it is, no doubt, true, that there were many
who, by the degradation of their nature, their want of fidelity
to their masters, and their vices of all kinds, might well deserve
their lot. Runaway slaves were not uncommon, even when
there was no war to encourage their desertion.°®

Slaves were sometimes manumitted by the state, as a reward

1 Antipho de coede Herod. p. 727.

2 A mark of some kind was branded upon the forehead, and many strove
to conceal it under their hair; hence the poet says,

“ Kounv rpepwv pév mpwrov ispav rod Oeov,
ws paciv, dv dia rovro y’, adda eoriypevos

mp6 TOV péETw TOV Tapaneracp avrnv exel.”

Combing the hair forward, they call a religious rite; but it is not for that

purpose — any one being branded, has this for a veil upon the forehead.

Dephilos, apud Athen. vi. p. 225.
8 Plutarch, Pericl. 26.

4 Plato says, ‘‘ro\dot yap adshpwv %d% covdot Kai viewv rict xpsirrovg mpos apernv
macav yevoutvot céowxaci deonoras kai xrnuard ras re bixnosis avrwy ddas.”’ Plato,
Leg. vi. p. 776. ‘‘For many, becoming slaves, are superior to certain
persons, brethren and their descendants, in all that is virtuous, and pro-
tect their masters in a more faithful manner, and also their household
possessions.” But here is no intimation of an intellectual inferiority or
distinct physical organization. The ro: adekgwy means, to some of their
own type or countrymen, and their descendants, who were superior only
in wealth, or some civil rank, or condition, conferred upon them by the
existing state of society.

5 Plato, Protag. p. 310. On this account the slave preceded the master
when going out, instead of going behind, lest he should escape. Theophr.
Char. 18. ‘‘Kai roy ratéa dé axoAovOovvra xedevely avtov onicbev unv Badiveiy add*
eunpoobev tvd gvdarrnoai avd py &v ty 66warodpacn.” ‘*He commanded the
lad accompanying him, not to go behind, but before, that he might watch
him, lest he should escape.” Slave rebellions were frequent. Athen. vi.
p. 272; Plato, Leg. vi. p. 777.

.

60 GREEK SLAVERY.

for certain services; such as informing against criminals, or
good conduct in war; but the master was always indemnified.’

At other times, they obtained their freedom by paying their
master the amount he had paid for them. But these freedmen
(anerevdepot) always remained in a sort of dependence upon their
master, and the neglect of their duties gave rise to the (dcx
anocraciov) action of separation.’

Besides the slaves, there were many of the poorer classes,
especially among the (uezor zor) foreigners, who performed the
same services for hire, who were called ptoOwror (from profos
wages).°

Men frequently lived with female slaves as (waaraxy) concu-
bines; and in all such instances, as well as in case of free
women with slaves, the children resulting from this intercourse
were free only by exception.‘

1 Plato, Leg. xi. p. 914.

2 This explains the law proposed by the orator Lycurgus — “‘yndevi &Ket-
vat AOnvaiwy, pydé Twv vikovvTav ABnvnacy, edsdPepov oHpa moracBat Ene dovderg ex
r&v adtakopévwy dvev rijs Tov TpoTépov deororov yvwyns.” §$It is permitted to no
Athenian, nor to any one dwelling in Athens, to purchase an emancipated
slave, again into slavery, from the kidnappers, without the consent of his
former master.” Plutarch, de Orat. Vit. p. 267.

3 Plato, de Republ. ii. p. 371.

4 Demosth. in Aristocr. p. 6387 — ‘‘unré rexvorowwvrat b¢ bixeroe dvev tg nue-
repas yyw.” Xen. Cicon. 9. 5. ‘*Slaves are not begotten without our
knowledge.” . . . ‘Aovdn pev fav ouppttn, dovrw H edevdépw, 1) améhevdepw, mavrwe
rov dsonorov éorw tng dovdns To yevvwpevov. “Edy dé ris edevOepa, dovw ovyyryynrat
rov deomoroy éoTw TO ytyvouevov Tov dovrov. “Eady 0 é avrod dovAns i} ék dovAov eaurns
kal mepipaves rour 1, TO Mev THS YvVALKOS at yuvaLKEs cis GAAnv X@pav exrepwovra@y ocvv
TH warpt, ro dé rov avdpos ot vopopiAakes oy ti yevvnoacy.”” Plato, Lex. xi. p. 950.
‘¢ Whether a female slave may have connection with a slave, or a freeman,
or an emancipated slave, let the offspring belong to the master, following
the condition of the mother (or female slave) in every instance. And, on
the other hand, if a free woman should cohabit with a.slave, let the off-
spring also belong to the master, following the condition of the father (or
male slave).* Whether the offspring descend from a freeman and a female
slave, or from a male slave and a free woman, it is manifestly the same.
Since, on the one hand, the female descendants succeed with the father
to a different condition from the mother; so, on the other hand, the male
descendants (or guardians of the state) succeed with the mother to a
different condition from the father.”

* "Eady 0 é avrod, &c. This clause of the passage may be rendered thus:
But if a free woman is with child from her own slave, as a freeman has a
child by his own female slave, and the same is discovered, let the guar-
dians of the law banish the offspring of the freeman, with its mother; and
in the other instance, let the mother send away her child, together with
its father, to another region.

GREEK SLAVERY. 61

The number of slaves was considerable, not only at Athens,
but throughout Greece. According to Ctesicles, at a census
of the population of Attica, taken under Demetrius Phalereus,
the number of free burghers was found to be twenty-one thou-
sand, of residents; aliens, ten thousand; and of slaves, four
hundred thousand." ; |

According to Timaeus, Corinth possessed four hundred and
sixty thousand slaves; and Hgina, as we learn from Aristotle,
four hundred and seventy thousand. But the number at Chios
appears to have been the greatest.? In what manner this popu-
lation of four hundred and thirty thousand souls in Attica was
distributed, cannot now be accurately known.

Athens itself is said to have contained ten thousand houses.
There were besides, lodging-houses inhabited by several fami-
lies; and workshops and manufactories contained many hun-
dreds of slaves. If one hundred and eighty thousand are
reckoned for the city and its harbors, and twenty thousand for
the mines, there then remain two hundred and sixty thousand
for the other six hundred and eight square miles in the rest of
Attica; which gives less than four hundred and twenty-seven
to the mile; which, with the number of small market-places,
villages, and farms, that were inhabited in Attica, is not ex-
cessive.°

1 Ctesicles, apud Athen. vi. p. 272. 2 Thucyd. viii. 40.

8 Bockh. Public. Econ. Athens, pp. 30-39. The following were some
of the legal enactments respecting slavery which were in force, at various
times, at Athens: — Let no person who is a slave by birth be made free
of the city. They only shall be recognized as citizens, both of whose pa-
rents were so. He shall be looked upon as an illegitimate, whose mother
is not free. No slave, or woman, other than free-born, shall study or prac-
tice physic. No slave shall caress a free-born youth; he who does s0 shall
receive fifty stripes. He that beats another man’s slave may have an
action of battery brought against him. No one may sell a captive freed-
man into slavery, without the consent of his former master. Slaves may
buy themselves out of bondage. All emancipated slaves shall pay certain
services to the masters who gave them liberty, choosing them only for
their patrons; and they shall.not be wanting in the performance of those
duties to which they are under obligation bylaw. Patrons may by action
reduce them again to slavery for legal cause, such as remissness of duty.
He that redeems a prisoner of war may claim him as his own property,
unless the prisoner himself be able to pay his ransom. See Potter’s Greek
Antiqs., vol. i. p. 144; also, Smith’s Greek and Roman Antiqs. (Slaves).
The law governing the condition of the slave derived from birth, was very
different, in Greece, from that of Rome, and all later nations: ‘‘purtus
sequitur ventrum,” is the maxim of the Roman law, which now universally
prevails, upon this subject. If the mother is free, the child is free, and
vice versa. But the whole policy of the Greek statute was in favor of

6

62 GREEK SLAVERY.

Although the number of private slaves possessed by indi-
vidual burghers was sometimes very considerable, yet the Greeks
seem to have fallen far behind the Romans in this respect. The
father of Demosthenes possessed fifty slaves.’ In other in-
stances the number was far greater. Necias let out one thou-
sand to the Thracian mines, and Hipponicas six hundred.’
Aristotle’s friend Mnason, also, had a thousand.*® In early
times, few were retained in the house, most of them being em-
ployed at various handicrafts. At a later period, domestic
slaves became much more numerous.* There is no regular
account of the number of domestics in large establishments,
though free hints may be gathered. Xenophanes complained
to Hiero (‘‘moacs otxeras Svo tpeperv’’) that he was scarcely able
to keep two household servants, which, certainly, is a mark of
great poverty for a literary man like him.° Again, the family
of Aischines, consisting of himself, his wife, mother and three
children, was waited on by only seven attendants, and this he
brought forward as a sign of straitened circumstances.° To go
out without a single attendant was considered a mark of great
indigence.’ When Phocion’s wife allowed herself to be at-
tended by only one female slave, it was considered so unusual
that it even came to be mentioned in the theatre.* Men often
had three or more slaves to attend them when from home.’

In later times, the escort was much more numerous.” But

slavery, and the servile condition of either parent tainted that of the
child. See translation of passage from Plato, de Leg. xi. p. 930, supra.
Again, the right to reduce the emancipated slave again to bondage by a
civil action, is peculiar to the Greek system. The maxim of the Roman
law, and the law generally, upon this subject, is, semel liber, semper sic,
once free, always so; though there are some statutory exceptions, apply-
ing to vagrants and like offenders.

1Some say fifty-three, besides females in his house. Demosth. in
Aphob., 1, p. 823.

* Xenoph. De Vectigal, 4, 14. Plutarch, Nic. 4.

3 Timez apud Athens, vi. 264. Saidus, on the word azepngicaro, men-
tioned that the slaves employed in the silver-mines alone, and in country
labor, amounted to 150,000.

* Aristot., De Rep., ii. 8. Dio Chrysost. orat., xiii. p. 484.

5 Plutarch, Apopth. Reg., i. p. 696. 6 Esch. Epist. 12, p. 698.

7 Aristoph. Eccl. 593. Also Lysias, in Dioget., p. 908.

8 Plutarch, Phoe, 19.

9... ‘Kai rpeis dkodovbovs i} rerapas avrog exwv dea trys ayopas oobi.” De-
mosth. in Mid., p. 565. ‘And he having three or four attendants, flaunts
through the public square or forum.”

10 ““Gepameia dé wodAH Kai addy mEpt avtny napackevs appa, Kai evvovxwy ri TriOo¢,
kai aBpat wavy moddai,” (She had) ‘a numerous retinue of attendants, a

GREEK SLAVERY. 63

of the numerous slaves owned by single individuals, the most
of them were employed as artisans, either for their master, or
on their own account, paying him wages. In this respect the
Greeks differed widely from the Romans; while the former
looked upon their slaves as a capital, yielding interest, and a
lucrative source of investment and trade, the latter more nobly
looked upon them only as a means to subserve the ease and
comfort, and to administer to the luxury and pride of their
masters.' It is true, the Roman slave also worked in the
familia urbana and the familia rustica, or on the plantation, as
a mechanic or otherwise, but only to supply the immediate
wants of his master; while the Greek slave was an operative,
yielding a revenue, and his master trafficked and speculated
upon the wares and proceeds of his labors.’

If the master cultivated his lands himself, as Ichoneas did,
he employed numerous slaves under an overseer, éxirporos, who
was himself a slave, and on whom the entire management fre-
quently devolved; the master devoting himself to public duties
or other employments.’

The chief steward of the house was called (couas). He su-
perintended all the domestic arrangements and kept the house-
hold stores under lock and seal, giving out daily what was

certain number of eunuchs, quite a large number of ladies’ maids, and
otherwise splendid equipage around her.” Lucian, Imag. 2, speaking of
a distinguished lady of Smyrna, uses this language.

1 Athen. vi. p. 272. ‘‘AdXd Popaiwy exacros . . . mAdicrous boovs Kexrnusvos
Oixeras, kai yap pupiovs Kal dioprpiovs Kat ert mdelous de mapmoddoi Kexrnvaal, ob Ent
mpoobdols dé wonep 6 rwv ’EdAnvwy Samdovros Nikias, G&AXG Of mrElovs Twv Pwpaiwy
ovumpotovras éxovol revs mdsicrovs.” ‘But each one of the Roman citizens
possessed as many slaves as possible; very many owned ten, and even
twenty thousand, and some more; but not as a source of revenue, like a
certain Nicias, a very wealthy citizen of Greece; though the Romans had
a great number, yet they were mostly personal attendants.” Nicias, the
rich Greek, hired out a thousand slaves to Sosias, the Thracian, for an
oblus (34 cents) a day, yielding him a revenue of $334 a day, for which
he could have purchased two slaves. Xenoph., De Vect. 4,14. Here is
a sarcastic allusion of Atheneus to the penurious custom of the Greeks,
of working their slaves only for pecuniary profit, while the proud and
haughty Roman was born above it, bred above it, and lived above it; to
him his slaves, though he owned twenty thousand or more, were only to
administer to his ease and comfort.

2The Greek slaves frequently hired their time, but the master took
good care to reserve a large portion of the profits to himself. Aristotle,
De Repub., 3, 4, p. 1277. Aschines mentions the daily sum that each
had to pay. Shoemakers made nine and ten obli a day—27 to 334 cents;
out of which each had to pay six cents to his master. Timarch, p. 118.

8 Plato, Leg. vii. p. 806. Xenoph. con. 12, 2.

64 GREEK SLAVERY.

required.!. He received from his master for this purpose, a
signet ring.” The rimos was distinct from the exzpomos, whose
duties were confined to outdoor arrangements. Of the other
domestic slaves each had his peculiar duties.*

The number of females was less than that of male slaves.
Some of them were employed in manufacturing articles for sale.*

The number, however, engaged in the articles of merchandize
must have been small, as most of the feminine labors, as weav-
ing, embroidering, and the like, were performed by men. In
wealthy families, a considerable number must have been em-
ployed in personal services; and most of the ready-made arti-
cles which may now be obtained, then took up the time and
employment of domestic slaves. Besides, several must have
been employed at the mill and in the kitchen, as well as washers,
ironers, cooks, and the like; besides the spinners, nurses, cham-
bermaids, and ladies’ maids (youmorpioc).° Of these last, one
often held a more confidential position near her mistress, and
was called (a8pa).

Female slaves born in the house were sometimes called
(onxvdes).

The general term for female slaves is (Sovaapia).°

In entering into an analysis of the laws and institution of
slavery in ancient Greece, the student at once finds himself upon
the confines of a boundless chasm that exists between the he-
roes, philosophers, and wealthy citizens of those States, and
the lower and laboring classes. Their history is, in a degree,
a hidden mystery, impervious to the light that has come down
tous. No historian has lifted the veil and shown us the true
condition of the myriads of slaves and indigent laborers devoted
to the various trades and servile occupations among that re-
markable people. Occasionally he finds the fragment of a law,
a deduction of the philosopher, the moralist, and statesman, in
relation to them; and, here and there, a scene of the heroic,

1 Xenoph. Gicon. 9-11. 2 Aristoph. Equites, 947.
3 Plutarch, Apoph. Reg. i. p. 723.

4...‘ yuvh dpopywa eniorapysvn épyatecOat Kar Epya Aerra ets rhv ayopav éxde-
povca.”” /Mschines in Timarch p. 118. <‘‘'The women were accustomed to
manufacture fine goods, and to carry fancy articles to the markets.”
Another evidence that the slaves of Greece were of a high order of intel-
lectual character, equal in that respect to their masters and mistresses.

5 Beck’s Charac. p. 364.

6 Lucian, Lexiph. 25. This would, however, seem to depend upon the
peculiar style of each author. In Homer, Sophocles, as well as Thucy-
dides, Xenophon, Herodotus, Plato, Aristotle, and others, together with
the Scriptures, the word dovdyj is used.

GREEK SLAVERY. 65

comedian and tragic poet scattered through the ponderous
volumes of Greek literature.

To collect and digest sufficient of these to present, briefly,
some of the leading features and fundamental principles of the
institution, and to show the meaning and use of certain terms,
is the most that we have attempted in the foregoing pages.

The origin of this institution, in the ancient Grecian States,
dates back to the celebrated laws and regulations of Minos;
the fabulous annual tribute of seven lads and seven virgins,
levied by him upon the vanquished Athenians, was but the figu-
rative idea of the law, making the conquered the property of
the victors. It was undoubtedly imported from Egypt, through
Pheenicia into the Island of Crete, and was nearly cotemporary
with the law of the patriarchs of Israel upon that subject,
which was, doubtless, derived from the same source. And in
Greece, as in the Hebrew nation, in the progress of civilization,
and as governments became better organized, more powerful,
and gave safer guarantees to life, liberty, and property, the force
and necessity of this law was gradually, and, in a measure,
done away with; till, at length, the legislators of Greece, like
Moses, boldly advocated the doctrine that it ought to apply
only to barbarous nations, and as Hebrew could not enslave
Hebrew, so, on a similar principle, Greek could not enslave
Greek. But, in both nations alike, the application of the law
was limited to ‘‘the heathen round about them.’’’

There are many other instances of similarity in the laws of
these two nations upon this subject. By neither could the slave
be put to death without the sanction of the law.’

1 Levit. 25 ; 44: ‘*Mndé E\Anva dpa dovdov éxrnoOal pire abrods, trols re addois
EdAnoiv otrw ovpBovdrsveiv.”” Plato de Republ. p. 469. ‘Therefore, as they
cannot own a Greek as a slave themselves, shall they not recommend the
same to other Greeks?’ The meaning of which is, let every Greek set
the example, not to enslave his own countrymen. This was a favorite
idea of Plato. In his sixth book of Laws, he says: ‘‘ We ought, there-
fore, for the future, never to allow any person’s slaves to be of one an-
other’s countrymen.” So of Aristotle, he says: ‘: Therefore, it is pro-
posed to limit this law to barbarians, conquered by Greeks.” (Vid. supra,
p- 60.)

2 Exod. 21: 20: ‘If a man smite his servant with a rod, &c.”...
‘¢xai of ovdé ot rovs deonbras anoxrsivavres, Edy en’ avrogwpy AnpOworv ovd ovrot
Ovnokovely Ir avrwv rwv mpoonxovrwy, addAd mapadidéaciv avrovs TH dpxXii Kara vopous
vuerepous marpiovs.”” ‘* Indeed, the masters cannot kill their slaves, if caught
in the yery act of theft (or offence), nor could they be put to death by
persons selected for the purpose, but they must give them up to the civil
authority, according to the laws of the country.” Antipho. de Cede
Herod. p. 727. Hence Euripides says :—

6* E

66 GREEK SLAVERY.

In either nation, the poor debtor was liable to be sold into
slavery ; but in neither could he be ruled over with rigor.' In
both nations heathen slaves were lawful articles of commerce
and heritable property. In neither could they possess the
rights of citizens, nor could they be heard in the courts of jus-
tice in their own defence, or to give testimony for others.’

In both nations there were large numbers, not only of foreign-
ers of the same type, and equally exalted and capable in their
physical and intellectual organization with themselves, but of
their own countrymen in slavery.®

In neither nation was it maintained on the ground of the
general intellectual inferiority of the race, and a general incapa-
city to attain to any better condition when left to themselves ;
but in the one, as in the other, the right to foreign slaves was
predicated upon the right of the victor over the vanquished,
and to others upon their extreme poverty and indigence, which
forced them to lead such vicious and degraded lives as to re-
duce them to a condition but little above the brute, unfit for all
intellectual culture and refinement. Slaves to their own appe-
tites and passions, they were better off under the care and pro-
tection of a kind master.‘

Hence, some, as we have seen, voluntarily went into slavery.

It is evident, from various facts, that Greece, like some of
the nations of the present day, in her large cities particularly,

‘6 youos O’év vpiv rots r'e\evOepov iaros
Kai roiat dovdois aiprog Ketrai mept.”’

‘¢The freeman’s laws are just and good;
The slave’s are written in letters of blood.”

1 Levit. 25: 39. See action ypedn vBpews or for injury done a slave.
Mschin. in Tim. p. 41; also Demosth. in Mid. p. 529.

2 Levit. 25: 44. Terence’s Phorm., scene 4, laidin Athens. ‘‘Servum
hominem causam ovare leges non sinunt. Neque testimoni diotio est.”
The testimony of slaves went for nothing unless exacted by the rack.
Plato, Leg. xi. p. 987. But Demosthenes says, in Onet. 1, p. 874: ‘‘éov-
Awy 6 Bacaviabévrwy ovdéves mwnor" eXnreyxXOncav, ws odK adnOii ra ex ths Bacavov
einov.”’ **None of the tortured slaves should ever be permitted to prove,
or substantiate a fact, as the saying is, truth is not from the rack.” By
this it would seem that their testimony needed corroborating.

3 Abraham had 1500; and every wealthy Hebrew had great numbers of
men-servants and maid-servants. Gen. 14: 12-16. (For numbers pos-
sessed by the Greeks, see notes above, and preceding remarks generally. )

4 The poor debtor and his children were liable to be sold as slaves for
debt. 2d Kings, 4: 1. Isa. 50:1. Matt. 25. Isocrates speaks (Plateeus,
19, p. 414). (jixpav Evexa ovpBoraiwy dovdreteiv) of those bargaining to be-
come slaves on account of their insolvency, or straitened circumstances.

At Athens, the captive, not able to pay his ransom, was the slave of
him who paid it. Demosth. Ado. Nicaoter, p. 1250.

GREEK SLAVERY. 67

was thronged by hordes of foreign population in the lowest
state of poverty and wretchedness, who were ever at the service
of the wealthy citizens, in all kinds of employments, to obtain
the means of subsistence.

This was also true to agreat extent among the Jews. They
had many hired servants as well as slaves ;* and that this insti-
tution, in both these nations, was derived from the same source
admits of no doubt.

1 Deut. 15: 3, 4,11. Exod. 23: 11, ‘‘ Because they sold the righteous
for silver, and the poor for a pair of shoes.” Amos 2:16; also 8: 6.
“‘For the poor ye have always with you,” John 12: 8. This class was
also numerous in Greece; they were known under various names, as fevor,
perotxor, Or foreigners; when hired they were called picOwro. Plato de
Rep. ii. p. 371. They were employed more or less by all—Id. Polit.
p. 290 (vide Note supra, p. 63) —and were similar to slaves. Hence the
law at Athens, to forbid striking a slave, for fear of hitting a free man by
mistake. In a fragment of Philemon we find the following lines:

“ Qs xpevrov ort dearorov ypnorov TuXEY,
h Sv ramelvws Kal kaxis, ededOepov.”

*¢ A freeman is better off to have a kind master than to live a low debased
life.” Besides these, there was another class known as the ameAevepir, or
freed-men, though they still remained in the service of their masters, as
we have seen, no one could purchase them without the consent of their
former masters.

It has been said by some, that these freedmen were the real Jdovdor,
because they still remained in bond service to their masters, hence
(“ Acadepsty d& gnot Xpvowrros dovdov oikerov... dia ro Tous amedevOepovs pév
dovdovs Ert etval, oixeras 5é rods pr) THs KTHCEWS adetpEvous.” Chrysippus says
there is a distinction between the dovdos and the oxxerns, because the freed-
men are still dovdo., whereas the oixerns belong to the class that are never
discharged from ownership. Athen. vi. p. 267.

But according to Clitarchus, in his treatise on dialects, all the following
classes are called dov\of promiscuously—the aga, or servants connected
with the temples; the Oeparovres, or the servants of humble service; the
axohovdor, followers or footmen; the diaxova, or body-servant, and many
others.

Ion of Chios, in his Laertes, uses the word dovdos in the same sense as
oerns. Athen. vi. p. 269.

Plato, Aristotle, Xenophon, and all the most approved writers in the
Greek literature, use these words indiscriminately in the same sense. If
there could be any distinction between them, it must be derived, not from
the character of the slavery, but from the different avocations which they
followed; the dovdox. would seem to be a generic term comprehending all
classes of slaves, and the o«erns confined to the household, or family slaves,
might denote but a single species or class coming under it.

In like manner there were the Helots of Greece, who, because they
were subject to a peculiar kind of servitude and belonged to the State, were
never designated by any other term, though helot and dovdx are synony-
mous terms in Sparta. See Essay on Slavery in New Testament, post, p.
127, et seq.

68 GREEK SLAVERY.

But all free men, and even freed-men, were designated by different
terms, hence... “ofd} mwovvres THY THs toxvos ypeiav THv Tiuny Tavtny ploBos
kadovutes KexAnral ws eywpat, plcOwrot.” Plato de Republ. ii. p. 3871. ** Labor-
ing for the means of support, demanding wages as a reward, they are
called hirelings, or picfwroi, as they labor for wages.”

. 2. « $665 ye opGpev picBwrovs Kai Onras raclv utnperovvras.” Plato Polit.
p, 290. <‘*We speak of the hired servants and the hireling domestics
employed as waiters by all. The same word is used by the Evangelist, in
Acts 15: 17—*‘ Mosot pict rov marpos pov.” ** How many hired servants
hath my father,” &c.

This word is from the same theme, picos, and has the same meaning as
the one used by Plato above; it is only varied in its termination. And
here, it may be observed, that the terms dovdos and éixerns, as we have shown
by the specific definition of Plato, Aristotle, and others, of the most ap-
proved Greek classics, are never used by Greek scholars, sacred or profane,
literally, in any other sense than that of a slave, a piece of property, a
living machine, a person subject by law or by nature to the ownership
and power of another. They are always used in contrast with é\evBepos, a
freeman as we have seen: ‘‘ AovAos éxAn Ons ¢ ph cot perérw add‘ ef Kat dvvacat
sdevOepos yeveobai,” &c, 1 Corinth. 7: 21. ‘Art thou called, being a ser-
vant (slave), care not for it; but if thou mayest be made free,” &c.

Also the same terms are used in the succeeding verse and in the same
sense. There is, however, a slight error in the translation of verse 22.
The language is ‘¢’O yap tv Kupip xAOels dovdos, ateAcvOepos Kplov eorty,” which
should read, ‘‘ For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant (slave),
is the Lord’s freed-man;” not free man, as in the English text, and it
refers to ‘‘the liberty in which Christ has made him free.”

I submit it to Greek scholars to say whether aredevepos ever means any-
thing, in Greek literature, but a freed-man, one who has been set free
from bondage. Would it not be preposterous in any one to say that
dovdos, in this instance, did not mean what we understand by slave? What
sense would there be in the contéxt, ‘‘ but if thou mayest be made free,”
&c., if he was already so, or if he was a hired servant, as many contend?
We will quote another instance from Aristotle, where these terms are used
in precisely the same sense as by Saint Paul, . . . ‘¢ orxia dé rédslos ex dovAwy
xal shevOepov.” Aristot. De Rep. i. 38. ‘* A family is composed of freemen
and slaves.”

We might multiply like quotations to show that these words, by all
Greek writers, are always used as antitheses to one another, just as we
use freeman and slave; but we refer the reader to the numerous instances
that may be found in our quotations above, upon this subject. In con-
clusion we remark that free servants are universally designated by other
terms as epyarns, picOwros, or picbos. See Acts 15: 17, above quoted, and
Acts 10: 7; alos yap epyarns rou picOov avrov cori.” ‘The laborer is worthy
of his hire.” Again, James 5: 4, ‘tdou 3 uicOos rv epyar&v.” ** Behold
the hire of the laborers,” &c. Again, John 10: 12, ‘*’O picOwros.” <‘*He
that is a hireling,” &c. Id. vrs. 18, ‘*’O 62 pisOwros gevyé, dre pioOwros cori.”
‘‘The hireling fleeth because he is a hireling.” These same words are
here used in the exact sense in which they are used by Plato, Aristotle,
and classical writers; then why except dovdos and derns? See Essay on
Slavery in New Testament, post, p. 127, et seq.

-

*

ROMAN SLAVERY. 69

ESSAY IV.
ROMAN SLAVERY.

AFTER the learned and lengthy dissertations upon its justice
and moral character, by the great masters of the schools of an-
tiquity, the fathers of law, logic, and philosophy, Plato and
Aristotle, and the conclusions to which they arrived, establish-
ing the institution upon the basis of law, justice, and truth, we
should not expect to find any schools of opposite tenets, in any
more modern nations, as long as their philosophy ruled the in-
tellectual world. And we find the truth verified in the subse-
quent history of nations. It is at no remote period from the
present, that their views upon this subject have met with oppo-
sition from any considerable weight or collective mass of public
Opinion, as we shall endeavor to show in our subsequent re-
marks.

Neither Cicero nor Seneca, just and humane as they both
were, have ever, either in their moral or political codes, called
the moral rectitude and justice of these opinions of their great
predecessors in question.’ At Rome, in all ages of that na-
tion, there was much less opposition of sentiment to the doc-
trines of Plato and Aristotle upon this subject than among the
Greek sophists; for here we find a few traces of repugnant
notions.” The arrogant spirit of domination among the ancient
Romans gave to this institution certain characteristics among
them peculiar to that nation.’

1 Their writings abound with strictures upon the extravagancies and
cruelties of certain masters. But these do not serve to condemn the re-
lation in itself, any more than the ill-treatment of husbands to their wives,
or parents to their children, condemns those relations. A Roman citizen
had the same power over his child that he had over his slave,’ and could
put either to death with impunity.

2 «¢ All come free from the hand of their Creator; nature has made no
man a slave,” &c. Schol. on Aristot. Rhet. Gill. Greece, vol. 2d, p. 337.
Kay dovdos fj rig capka rhv avrnv exer gvoer yup ovders dovdos eyernOn more i 6 ab
T3xn TO cwya KxarédovAwoaro. Frag. of Philemon and Menander, p. 410.
‘Though any one may be a slave, yet he has the same flesh and blood
with ourselves, for by nature no one is born a slave, though his body may,
by misfortune, be enslaved.” Kay dovyos nrts ovdey frrov deonora, avOpwrog odros
coriv av avOwnos fj. Id. p. 864. ‘Though any one may be a slave, yet he is
a@ man no less than his master, who is but a man.”

8 The power of life and death which the Romans held over their slaves
and children was known to no other civilized nation. ‘‘ Portentosus

70 ROMAN SLAVERY.

They procured most of their slaves, like the Greeks, from
Asiatic nations. Historians give us the same nations, the
public marts, and the same great thoroughfares as the source of
the slave traffic to both Greece and Rome, and undoubtedly
the Greek and Roman slave dealers both met in the same mar-
kets as rival bidders for the same lots of slaves—as the British,
Spanish, French, American, and other traders have met upon
the coast of Africa in competition with one another.

There is one view of Roman life, manners, and customs, that
the history and laws of this institution serve, in a degree, to
illustrate, though no modern can form any distinct and satis-
factory idea of the reality. We can scarcely conceive it possi-
ble that the almost incredible numbers of servants and attend-
ants kept in the houses of the more wealthy Roman lords, could
be governed and employed, or how there could be so many
divisions and subdivisions of labor, and not clog, confuse, and
impede the progress of one another. But we shall endeavor to
illustrate this by a succinct analysis of the Roman family while
treating upon this subject. As to the mode of acquiring slaves
there is no material difference between Hebrew, Greek, or Ro-
man slavery. At Rome, as elsewhere, slaves were the servi
aut nascuntur aut fiunt. The law of captivity was in full
force (captivi, jure belli capto) ;' and they could be bought sub
corona as prisoners of war. They were generally sold in mar-
ket overt by the dealers.?

foetus extinguimus liberos quoque, si debiles monstrosique editi sunt, mer-
guimus.” Sen. de Ira. lib. 1, chap. 15. ‘* Ex nepte Julia, post damna-
tionem, editum infantum agnosci alique vetuit.” Suet. vit. octay. lxy.
Juvenal alludes to this practice in Sat. vi. 595:—-

‘‘Tantum artes hujus, tantum medicamina possunt,
Que steriles facit, a.que homines in ventre necados conducit.”

See also Sen. Consol ad Helviam 16, who speaks of the custom as not
uncommon. See also Inst. Just. lib. 1, t. 8, 1. 1.

re Just., lib. 1, t. 3d, sects. 3 and 4. Cato in Gallias, vii. 4, lib.
v. 22.

2 These slave-dealers were termed mango, or venalitius. Plaut., tom. ii.
2.51. They exposed them openly in the slave markets where they were
sold by the preco. They were first stripped and placed on a scaffold ca-
tasta, their feet being whitened with chalk. (Lib. ii. 2. 59, quem scepe
cegit Barbara gypsastos feme catasta pedes.) They were sometimes put
upon an elevation of stone (hence the lapede emptus. Cicero in Pis. 15.
Plaut. Bach. iv. 7. 17), so that every one could see and touch them, nu-
dare, contrectare. Martin, vi. 66, describes a scene when the preco, or
auctioneer, as an incentive to purchasers to bid, ‘bis, terque, qua, terque,
basiavit,” the girl who was offered for sale. Those offered for sale wore
a tablet hanging from their collars called the détwlus, upon which their

ROMAN SLAVERY. 71

Although the Romans never looked upon their slaves as a
source of revenue, but only as waiters to administer to their
immediate ease and comfort, yet the price of slaves was much
higher at Rome than in Greece; the price of some is almost
incredible.’

The prices varied much, however, according to their quality
and nations. Syrians, Lydians, Carians, Mysleians, Cappa-
docians, also Beotians, Celts, Gauls, and Africans, were offered
in market with their édfulus, indicating their nation, qualities,
defects, etc., hanging from the collars.?

The slaves of Celtic or Germanic origin were usually devoted
to agriculture. Negroes were, like the court dwarfs, deformed
slaves and idiots, kept only as articles of fancy, luxury, display,
&c.; they were, under the emperors, used as out-riders, parti-
cularly the Numidians.? The principle that no Roman could
be the slave of another Roman, was more strictly observed
among them than the like rule in either Hebrew or Greek
slavery. An insolvent debtor might be made over to his cre-
ditors (addicere) ; but he could not become his slave at Rome,
but must, as was said, be sold abroad (trans Tiberem). This
was also the case where a Roman citizen was sold by the State. *

The rich Roman citizens were extensive owners of slaves as
domestics, or artisans in the city, and as laborers or field-hands
on their vast estates in the provinces.°®

name, nation, capabilities, faults, and defects were inscribed. Hence
Cicero De Off. iii. 17: ‘*Sed etiam in mancipiorum venditione fraus ven-
ditoris omnis excluditur, qui enim scire debuit de sanite, de fuga, de fur-
tis, prestat edicto edilium.” And Hor., Ep. ii. 2,14: ‘‘Quorum titulus
per barbara colla pependit cretati medio quum saliere foro.” Which
shows that they were trotted out to show their movement as horses’ are
with us.

1 The price of slaves was sometimes immense. In Hor. Ep. ii. 25, a
favorite is put up at six hundred and forty pounds. While Martial, i. 59,
et xi. 10, mentions, ‘‘ Pueros centenis millibus emptos.” (Hight hundred
oh ea or about four thousand dollars.) Comp. Sen. Ep. 27; Gall,
xv. 19.

2 Ulp. Dig., xxi. 31.

$ Galli appositissimi ad jumenta. Fruitur Canius Ethiope. Varro R.
R.1,1. Mart. vii. 87.

4 Gell. xx. 1,45. ‘‘Trans Tiberem venum ibant.” See, also, Val. Max.
vi. 8,4. Cic. de Or., 1, 40. Plaut. Trin., ii. 4, 144.

5 The simplicity of the more ancient Roman customs was unacquainted
with such a concourse of slaves; even Consuls took the field accompanied
by few. Sen. de Trang. 8. ‘In servis jam interdicit illud genus, quod
ducibatur a domino, unde Marcipores Publiporesque.” Quinct. Inst., i.
4,7. Plin., xxiii. 1, 6, when talking of ceiling up the cells, says: ‘‘ Hoc
profecere mancipionum legiones et in domo turba externa ac servorum

72 ROMAN SLAVERY.

Some rich planters are said to have possessed as many as
ten, and even twenty thousand. Seneca says that Demetrius,
the libertus or freedman of Pompey, was richer than his master.’

quoque causa nomenclator adhibendos. Aliter apud antiquos singuli
Marcipores Luciporesve dominorum gentiles omnem yictum in promiscuo
habebant.” The old-fashioned manner of attendance at meals is drawn
in lively colors by Juvenal, xi. 145:

‘¢Plebeios calices et paucis assibus er ptos
Porrigit incultus puer atque a frigore tutus;
Non Phryx, aut Licius non a mangone petitus
Quixquam erit in magno cum poscis Latine,
Idem habitus cunctis, tonsi rectique cappilli,
Atque hodie tantum propter convivia pexi.”

‘‘The clownish waiter, clad only to protect him from the rigor of the
climate, will hand you the plebeian cups, bought for a few pence. He is
no Phrygian or Lycian, or one purchased from the slave-dealer at a great
price. When you ask for anything, ask in Latin. They have all the
same style of dress; their hair is close-cropped and straight, and only
combed to-day on account of company.” He goes on further to say —
“One is a son of a hardy shepherd; another of a neat herdsman; he
sighs and pines for his mother, whom he has not seen fora long time, and
for his native hovel and playmates, the kids—a lad of ingenuous modesty,
such as those ought to be who are clothed in brilliant purple. He shall
hand you wine, made on the very hills from which he himself came, and
under whose summits he has often played.” It may be remarked that
the Romans enslaved nations and people in no manner inferior to them-
selves, except that they were enabled by their superior numbers to over-
power them; nations which have since attained to the highest degrees of
civilization and refinement. They were taken from nearly every nation
of Europe and Western Asia or Asia Minor; over these they held the
power of life and death, and, as we shall see, wantonly sacrificed them
to the gratification of their idle amusements, in the most brutal manner ;
of which the conflicts with wild animals, and the horrid butcheries of the
amphitheatres, are sufficient proofs.

1 Cicero says, in his description of the loose household arrangements
of Piso, ‘‘idem coquus, idem atriensis.”” It was held disreputable not to
have a slave for every sort of work; and Horace, Sat. i. 3, 12, appears to
consider ten slaves the least number for one of restricted means. In Sat.
i. 6, he speaks of the ridicule thrown upon Tullius the przetor, because
he had no more than five slaves to accompany him from the Tribune villa
to Rome. But Cicero considers this an extraordinary expense in slaves.
De Leg. Arg. ii. 28. In later times, the numbers mentioned are incredible.
C. Cecilius Claudius Isidorus, although he had lost great numbers in the
civil wars, yet left by his will four thousand one hundred and sixteen
slaves. Plin. xxxiii. 10. Tac. Ann. iii. 58; xiv. 48. But see account
of Petron (37), who says ‘‘familia vero, babse! non me Hercules puto
decimam partem esse, qua horum suum novit.” Trimalchio (47) asks a
slave: ‘¢ex quota decuria es?” He answers, ‘‘e quadragissima;” (53) an
actuarius reads aloud what has happened during the last twelve days on
the estate of Trimalchio; and, among other things, vii. Kal Sextilis, ‘*in
predio cumano, quod est Trimulchionis, nati sunt pueri xxx. puellee xl.”

ROMAN SLAVERY. 3

The slaves of Crassus formed a large part of his fortune ; his
architects and masons alone exceeded five hundred. Scaurus
possessed four thousand domestics, and as many rural slaves.
In the reign of Augustus, a freed-man who had sustained great
losses during the civil wars, left four thousand one hundred and
sixteen slaves. On one occasion the family of Pedonius
Secundus, prefect of Rome under Nero, was found to consist
of four hundred slaves.’

A law, passed by Augustus, against manumitting too many
slaves by testament, forbidding any one to bequeath liberty to
more than one-fifth of his slaves, contains the following words :
‘‘Plures autem quam centum ex majore numero servorum
manumitti non licet.”* We may thus ‘infer that five hundred
was not an unusual number of slaves to be held by one owner.
It was, in the latter ages of the Republic, fashionable to go
abroad attended by large numbers of slaves.* Augustus pro-
hibited exiles from carrying with them more than twenty slaves. *

We may also form some idea of the vast numbers owned by
private individuals, from the fact that Augustus forbid magis-
trates to give shows of gladiators above twice in one year, or
more than sixty pairs at a time.

Julius Cesar exhibited at once three hundred and twenty
pairs. Trajan exhibited them for one hundred and twenty-
three days, in the course of which ten thousand gladiators fought.

The State and corporate bodies possessed large numbers of
slaves ; six hundred belonged to the public fire department at

The birth of thirty male and forty female children upon one estate in one
day is undoubtedly an exaggeration, but it gives us some idea of the
enormous numbers that were sometimes possessed by a single owner.
This immense number rendered it necessary that they should be classed
according to the divisions and subdivisions of labor; and each class
ranked higher or lower, according to the functions assigned them to per-
form, of which we shall speak more particularly in our analysis of the
Roman family. The origin of the term Servi, according to Justinian,
Inst. lib. 1, t. 2, c. 3, is as follows: “Servi autem ex eo appallati sunt
quod imperatores captivas vendere, ac per hoc servare nec occidere
solent; qui etiam mancipia dicti sunt; eo quod ad hostibus manu capi-
antur.” Slaves are denominated Servi from the practice of our generals
to sell their captives, and thus preserve (servare) and not slay them.
Slaves are also called mancipia, in that they are taken from the enemy
by hand (manucapti).

1 Tac. Ann. iii. 53.

2 Hugo jus civile Antejustianeum, vol. i. p. 15. 7.

8 Cicero pro Mil. 10, ‘“‘magno ancillarum puerorumque comitata.”
Vedius also travels with a great number of slaves, as Atti. vi. 1. Horace
Sat. 1. iii. 11, says “‘ Habebat saepe ducentos, saepe decem servos,”

# See Plin. Nat. Hist. xxxiii. 47-52, et seq.

14 ROMAN SLAVERY.

Rome.’ Chrysostom says, that under Theodosius the Great,
- and Arcadias, some persons had two and some three thousand
slaves. From the time of Augustus to Justinian, we may
allow three slaves to one freeman; and of the twenty-eight
millions of population in Italy, upwards of twenty millions were
slaves. “ After weighing every circumstance which could influ-
ence the balance,’’ says Gibbon, ‘‘it seems probable that there
existed in the time of Claudius about twice as many provincials
as there were citizens of either sex and of every age, and that
the slaves were equal in number to the free inhabitants of the
Roman world.’’ The total sum of this rough calculation
would rise to the amount of one hundred and twenty millions
of persons, one half of whom were slaves.’

This will not seem so surprising when we consider the vast
numbers that accumulated upon the government by the endless
conquests that extended the dominions of the Roman Empire.
The very term that indicates slave in the Latin language shows
that they are the living monuments of the mercy of their con-
querors who have spared their lives, and to whose mercy they
and all their posterity are indebted for their existence upon the
face of the earth.? The law of captivity was enforced to its
most rigid extent, though it was sometimes modified by subse-
quent treaties between the vanquished and the victors.*

After the fall of the Samnites at Aquilonia, two million and
thirty-three thousand pieces of brass were realized by the sale
of prisoners, who amounted to about thirty-six thousand.°

Lucretius brought from the Volscian war, one thousand two
hundred and fifty captives; and by the capture of one incon-
siderable town, no less than four thousand slaves were obtained.
On the descent of the Roman armies upon Africa in the first
Punic war, twenty thousand prisoners were taken. Gelon,
pretor of Syracuse, having routed a Carthaginian army, took
such a number of captives that he gave five hundred to each
of the citizens of Agrigentum.®

On the great victory of Marius and Catullus, over the Cimbri,
sixty thousand were captured. When Pindenissus was taken

1 Publicos Servat. liv. ix. 29.

2See Essay of Hume on popl. of Ancient Nations. Gibbon, Dec. and
Fall of the Roman Empire, ch. ii. Blair’s Inquiry into State of Roman
Slavery, ch. 1.

3 Inst. Just. liv. i. t. 2, c. 8. See note (1), supra, p. 72.

4 Liv. xlii. 8. See Hist of Ligurians.

5 Liv. x. 46, ‘“‘Id aes reductum ex captivis dicebatur.”

6 Idem et seq.

ROMAN SLAVERY. 75

by Cicero, the inhabitants were sold for more than one hundred
thousand pounds. Augustus having overcome the Salassi, sold
thirty-six thousand as slaves, eight thousand of whom were
capable of bearing arms.

Cesar, in his Gallic wars, according to the moderate estimate
of Velleius Paterculus, took more than four hundred thousand
prisoners. '

In addition to these vast numbers that were constantly accu-
mulating upon Roman territory during the Augustan ages of
her empire, there were multitudes imported from foreign nations
into the Roman markets as lawful articles of commerce.’

Besides the Asiatic resources of the Roman slave trade, of
which we have made mention, the trade in Africa is as old as
history reaches back. Among the ruling nations of the north
of that continent, Egyptians, Cyrenians and Carthaginians,
slavery was not only established (as we have before said), but
they imported whole armies of slaves, partly for home use, and
partly, at least, among the Carthaginians, to be shipped to
foreign markets. They were chiefly drawn from towards the
interior, where kidnapping was then carried on as extensively
as in more modern times. The Troglodyte Ethiopians seem to
have been a wild negro race dwelling in caves in the neighbor-
ing mountains,® who were kidnapped by the Garamantes to be
sold as slaves.

The slave trade in Africa was directed mainly to females,
who, in the Balearian Islands, were sold for three times as
much as men.*

The Island of Delos became an extensive mart for slaves, for
both Greek and Roman traders. In this opulent emporium it
is said that as many as ten thousand could be bought and sold
in a single day. We are told that for a long time great uum-
bers were drawn from the interior of Asia Minor, particularly

1 Patere. Hist. Rom. vol. i. p. 58.

2 See Heynes’ Opuscula Academica, vol. iv. p. 187.

8 Heeren’s Hist. Researches, vol. i. pp. 181, 223, 289. Liv. xxxii. 26.
Juvenal speaks of the negro slaves, v. 51:

‘‘Tibi pocula cursor,
Goetulus dubit, aut nigri manus ossea Mauri,
Et cui per mediam nobis occurrere noctem,
Clivosee veheris dum per monumenta Latina.”

«The Getulian footman, or the bony hand of a black Moor, will hand
you the drinking cups, one whom you would not be willing to meet at
midnight while among the Latin tombs upon the steep way.”

* Heeren’s Hist. Researches, vol. i. p. 289.

76 ROMAN SLAVERY.

from Phrygia and Cappadocia. There were six thousand slaves
belonging to the temple of a goddess in Cappadocia. Slaves
appear to have reached the markets of Rome, under the Cesars,
in separate bands, composed of the natives of their several
countries. The Getx, probably, came from a country to the
east of the Pontus. The Davi were an oriental race. Alex-
andria was a considerable place for the sale of slaves of a pecu-
liar kind: slaves possessing certain accomplishments were pro-
cured at Cadiz. Corsica, Sardinia, and even Britain, were the
birth-places of slaves.

The profits of the traders who bought slaves captured in dis-
tant nations were sometimes enormous. In the camp of Lu-
cullus, in Pontus, we are told that a slave might be purchased
for three shillings, while the lowest price they ever brought at
Rome was fifteen pounds.’

The almost incredible numbers of human beings subjected to
bondage and the dominion of the masters, by the conquests and
commerce of the Roman people, accounts for the inexhaustible
resources of their labor for public works; the impregnable
ramparts of their national fortifications, and the brilliant prowess
of their army. Vast numbers were devoted to the construction
of those superb piers, porticos, aqueducts, of which we read.
How many must have been doomed to years of toil to complete
the gigantic work of the Appian Way! The Coliseum, the
Mausoleum of Adrian, and other like works, whose magnificent
ruins are now the admiration of the world — these were reared
by the toil and blood of foreign slaves.

But though we have seen, to some extent, the vast numbers
of Roman slaves, the sources whence they were derived, the
mode in which they were acquired, and the works, to some
extent, upon which they were employed, yet we have not as
yet come to any knowledge of their real condition.

We find abundance of historical evidence, in the form of
edicts, constitutions, codes, digests, and institutes, to show

1 Plutarch’s Vit. Lucullus. In trafficking with comparatively barbarous
nations, traders also procured their slaves very cheap by barter. Salt,
for instance, in ancient times, was much taken by the Thracians and other
nations, for slaves. It was also customary for parents, anciently, to sell
their children into slavery; a custom which is still tolerated by modern
and Christian nations, as to all its effects and deleterious consequences,
as we shall see hereafter, in an examination of the condition of operatives
in different nations.—Man-stealing was also prevalent among the ancients.
St. Paul denounces man-stealers, 1 Tim. 1: 10, as among the worst of
sinners. But he alludes to the frequent practice of stealing and carrying
away men into illegal bondage. Even Romans themselves were sometimes
thus stolen and sold.

ROMAN SLAVERY. ad

their true condition in law; but we find but an occasional
rebuke of the Satire, and a sly and silent tear dropped here
and there, by the tragic poet, for their sufferings, to determine
accurately their true condition.

Roman slavery, in law, was the worst and most Rexrannes
form that has ever existed, except among barbarous nations —
this a few quotations will serve to show:

Slavery is defined, by the Roman law, to be the subjecting
of one man to the power of another, according to the law of
nations, though contra naturam.'

Again: all slaves are in the power of their masters, which is
derived from the law of nations; for it is equally observable
among all nations, that masters have the power of life and death

over their slaves, and that whatsoever is acquired by the slave
is acquired by the master. No injury is reputed to be done
to a slave, but to the master, through the body of the slave.
Servilé relations are an impediment to matrimony. No slave
is allowed to testify, or to have any kind of civil right or con-
dition: they were held pro nullis, or pro quadrupedibus. A
more perfect and absolute ownership was originally given to
the master over his slave, and they were sunk to a lower grade
of chattels, by the laws of Rome, than any other civilized nation.?

1 Inst. Just. lib. i, t. 38, c. 2. ‘‘Servus autem est constitutio juris gen-
tium, qua quis domino alieno contra naturam subjicitur.” It is argued
that because this takes contra naturam, it is unjust; but the same argu-
ment would apply to all penal statutes; because all men are by nature
born free, it does not follow that circumstances may not justly deprive
them of liberty.

2 Inst. Just. lib. i. t. 8,c. 1. The power of life and death here given
to the master over his slave, i is peculiar to the Roman law, unless it may
exist in some barbarous nations who have no written law, or among the
different tribes and nations of Africa. This feature of law implies an
absolute ownership on the part of the master over his slave, as much as
over a stick of timber or a block of granite, and substitutes a relation
between them that has no just existence in natural, human, or divine law.
it is not the just, humane, and divine relation of master and servant, as
of parent and child, husband and wife, &c., but of lord and brute, man
and beast. But this law was subsequently repealed by the constitution
of Antonius, in the second century of the Christian era. Dig. lib. i. t. 6;
Just. lib. i. t. 8, c. 2. The heartless barbarity of this law, and its effect
upon the sensibilities of some (particularly the ladies), is strikingly set
forth by Juvenal, in a dispute between the master and mistress of some
unfortunate slave: —

**Pone crucem servo. — Meruit quo crimine servus
Supplicium? quis testis adest? quis detulis? audi,
Nulla unquam de morte hominis cunctatio longa est.
Oh demens! ita servus homo est? nil fecerit, esto:
Hoc volo; sic jubeo: sit pro ratione voluntas.”

7 *

"8 ROMAN SLAVERY.

This feature of Roman slavery bore more severely upon the
familia rustica, or country laborers, who were far removed

Juvenal, vi. 218. Which may be translated as follows — ‘*Crucify that
slave! — But, my dear, what is the crime, to call for such punishment?
Can you produce any witness? Who informed against him ? Remember,
no investigation can be too deliberate and cautious, where a man’s life is
at stake. —Oh, you fool! so a slave is a man, is he? Suppose he has
done nothing: I will it; I command it. Is ‘not my will a sufficient
reason ?”’

Again, he says (Sat. xiv. 21):—

‘“‘Tum felix, quoties aliquis tortare vocato

Uritur ardenti duo propter lintea fereo,

Quid suadet juveni leetus stridaro cutene,

Quem mire afficiunt inscripta ergastula cacer

Rusticus.”
‘‘Then is he happy, indeed, when the torturer is summoned, and some
poor wretch is branded with the burning iron, for stealing a pair of
towels. What example does he set his son, who revels in the clank of
chains, and whom the brands of wretched slaves and the rustic dungeon
fill with delight.”

6 Quidquid dominus indebite, iracunde, libens, nolens, oblitus, cogitans,
sciens, nescius, circa servum fecerit, judicium, justitia, lex est.’”’ Petrus,
Chrys. Serm. 141. The severity of this rule was undoubtedly mitigated,
in many instances, by the compassion of conscientious and humane mas-
ters; yet the stern old Roman feeling prevailed, and most masters availed
themselves of the latitude of the laws to its fullest extent; cruel masters
and mistresses hired torturers by profession, or had such persons whose
business it was to punish their slaves, to exact confessions from them, &c.,
and many horrible torments were employed for this purpose. Juvenal
alludes to this custom, and the cruelty of the women. See Sat. vi. 475.
“If her husband has gone to sleep with his back towards her, the house-
keeper is half killed; the tirewomen are stripped to be whipped. The
Liburnian slave is accused of having come behind his time, and is forced
to pay the penalty of another’s sleep; one has rods broken about him;
another bleeds from whips, another from the raw hide. Some women pay
a regular salary to their torturers: while he lashes, she is employed in
enamelling her face. She listens to her friend’s chat, or examines the
broad gold of an embroidered robe. Still he lashes. She pores over
the items of her long diary. Still he lashes; till at length, when the tor-
turers are exhausted, ‘Begone!’ she thunders out, in an awful voice —
the inquisition being now complete.” — The refined cruelty of the Roman
ladies was proverbial. The toilet of one was a terrible ordeal for a
dressing-maid; a stray curl was an inexorable offence; and the poor
girl’s back was punished for the faults of the mirror. ‘Et ne fortuita
quidem verberibus excepta sunt, tussis, sternutamentum singultus.”
Sen. Ep. xlvii. An accidental cough, sneeze, or hiccup, at forbidden
times, was severely punished. See Ovid, Am. i. 14. 18; Art. iii. 235;
Mart. ii. 66. Juvenal, vi. 491:—

‘‘Disponet crinem laceratis ipsa capillis,
Nuda humero Precas inflex, nudesque mamillis,
Altive hic quare cincimus? Taurea punit
Continuo flexi crimen facimusque capilli.”

ROMAN SLAVERY. 19

from all intercourse with Roman civilization and society: they
saw and knew little else besides their field of labor, their villicus
(overseer), and the dismal abodes of the Ergastulum.

Here is a dark chasm in Roman history that we cannot
unveil. The accounts that have come down to us relate mostly
to the condition of the varne familia urbania, or household
servants. Like the Greek slaves who toiled for years in the
mines of Laconia, in chains, or spent their lives upon the
country estates of Attica, we hear little of the miseries and
-groans of the Roman Ergastulum; we cannot now gather up
the tears and blood that were shed upon the Appian Way,
around the mausoleum and public works of Augustus, nor upon
the countless farms of the provinces; these are tales of woe
- that will not be revealed till the day of doom.

It is contended by modern anti-slavery writers that slavery in
the abstract is wrong. But what, except the bewildered idea
they form of all such institutions from this barbarous feature of
Roman slavery, leads them to any such conclusion? It is upon
the relation that follows from this most absolute form of the
institution, that all their reasoning is founded, and from which
all their conclusions are drawn.

That the rule that gives the master the absolute ownership
of his slave, so as to place the power of life and death over him
in his hands, is at war with the laws of humanity and the prin-
ciples of human nature, no one will deny. It is subversive of
the laws of creation that one man should thus own another.
But does the relation of master and slave, rendered just and
humane by good and wholesome laws, such as secure protection
to the life and person, and kind treatment to the slave, imply
any such a power ? or is it in itself liable to any such objections ?
We trow not.

Some laws have existed against the cruel treatment of slaves,
in all civilized nations, since the days of Moses down to the
present time, except during the age of the Republic of Rome,
in which this custom prevailed. But while it existed it was
severely animadverted upon by all the most celebrated philoso-
phers and poets of that nation, as their writings abundantly
testify."

“Poor Precas, with naked shoulders and breast, dresses her hair. But
why is this curl too high?” Instantly the cowhide avenges the heinous
crime of misplacing a hair. ‘But what has poor Precas done? what
crime is it of the poor girl’s, if your own nose displeases you?”

1 The writings of Seneca are full of tender sympathy for the slave. He
says, ‘‘Servis imperare moderate laus est; et in mancipio cogitandum

80 ROMAN SLAVERY.

Although many of the Roman poets and_ philosophers
abounded with passages of commiseration and reproof for the
unfortunate condition and treatment of the slaves, they at the
same time furnish abundant proof that they were but little
heeded. Slaves seem to have been valued by some only so far
as they represented money. Hortensius is said to have cared
less for the health of his slaves than that of his fish. It was a
question of ingenious disputation, whether, in order to lighten
a vessel in a storm, one should sacrifice a valuable horse or a
worthless slave. '

It was the law at Rome, till long after the Christian Era,
that when a master was put to death by any one of his slaves,
the whole household of slaves, including the freedmen under the
roof, had to suffer the penalty of the law.’

The power of life and death which the Roman master had
over his slaves, was first sought to be abolished by Adrian and
Antonius Pius, in the second century. As their numbers
multiplied great severity was necessary to keep them in subjec-
tion; at times their oppression became so intolerable that they
revolted in various provinces and in vast numbers.‘

Some idea may be formed of the rigid discipline to which
they were subjected from the numerous classes into which they
were divided, and the distinct offices which they were called to
fulfil. A brief analysis also of the Roman family, including

est, non quantum illud impune pati passit. Sed quantum tibi pumittat
aequi bonique natura.” In the same place the conduct of Vadius Pollio
who fed his fish with the flesh of his slaves, is severely reprobated. De
Clem. i. 18.

Again, he says, ‘‘ Erat si quis existemat servitutum in totum hominem
decendere; par melior ejus excepta est.” His 47th Epistle is taken up
in describing what the treatment of slaves ought to be.

The younger Pliny was a humane master, and many instances are
recorded by historians of the magnanimity and grateful conduct of slaves.
Dio Cassius, Hist. Rom. i. 47, mentions three slaves in the time of
Antony’s proscription, who saved their masters at the loss of their own
lives. This feature of the institution was discountenanced and done away
with by the prevalence of Christianity, wherever it was encountered.
_ (See Essay on Slavery in the New Testament.) This feature of the Roman
system never existed in India, as the provinces were left to their own
municipal regulations.

1 Writings of B. B. Edwards, vol. ii. p. 98, from which essay we have
derived great assistance in the investigation of this subject. Also Blair’s
Inq. Rom. Slavery.

2Tac. Ann. xiv. 41.

3 Inst. Just. liv. i. t. 8. ¢. 2.

4 Liv. iv. 45; do. xxii. 83; also xxxiii. 86. Diodorus mentions an in-
surrection in Sicily, A. C. 185, the most dreadful that ever occurred.

«

— em.
ae

ROMAN SLAVERY. 81

the slaves will serve, to some extent, to show the endless
formality and vast display of a princely household."

Unlike most of the Grecian States, where the women were
little esteemed, and treated as children all their lives, confined
to their own separate apartments, shut out from all social life
and intercourse with public amusements, we find the Roman
matron, though naturally subordinate to her husband, yet
treated with open attention and regard; she always appears as
mistress of the whole household economy, instructress of the
children, and guardian of the honor of the family, equally
esteemed with the pater familias, both in doors and out. The
husband at the death of his father and grandfather, or by
emancipation from their authority, became himself the pater
familias, which constituted him lord of all the vast routine of
his possessions. The children were but a part of the ‘family
patrimony, and remained during the life of the grandfather
subject to his arbitrary power and control, and at his death
they fell under the same authority of the father.

Though the Roman custom in relation to marriage and the
position of woman was decidedly preferable to that of the
Greeks, yet directly the reverse is true with regard to the rela-
tion of parent and child. The Roman custom upon this subject
is one of the most remarkable instances of arrogance, arbitrari-
ness and injustice to be found in the laws of any nation. It
extended the right of protecting and directing the child during
infancy over his entire life and liberty, and continued the same,
including the power of life and death over his person as long
as he lived.’

The patria potestas of the Romans differed only from absolute
ownership (dominium) in that the latter related to things, while
the former extended over persons; but when applied to their
slaves it is difficult to see any distinction between them.

1 The Roman family in the sense in which it is used signifies, first, the
whole collected society of the house, freemen and slaves, at the head of
which stands the pater familias. Cic. de Invent. ii. 50. It has various
other meanings which are here unnecessary to be mentioned, as we design
to treat principally of the slaves.

2 See Just. Inst. liv. i. ts. 9-10. The patria potestas ceased, if the son
became a flamen dialis—a priest of the sacred order. Tac. Ann. iv. 16.
Gai. iii. 119. Other dignities made no difference. See Val. Max. v. 4, 5.
In case of a daughter it ceased when she entered into marriage with
manus, or became a vestal virgin. Gell. i. 12., ‘‘Eo statim tempore sine
emancipatione ac sine capitis minutione a patris potestas exit,” Ulp. x. 5.
**In potestas parentum esse desinunt at hi, qui Flamines inaugurantur,
et que Virginis Veste capiuntur.” Gal. i. 130.

F

82 ROMAN SLAVERY.

The authority of the father, extending in a direct descending
line to the latest generation born in his lifetime, would naturally
extend the limits of the family circle to large numbers of rela-
tives, and give him dominion not inferior to the patriarchal rule
of old. Sometimes the members of the family were increased
by adoption of other children.'

In later times this unnatural custom was somewhat modified
in that the power of life and death came to be considered in
the right of discipline and punishment, which was given to the
pater familias; and as the father would naturally decline to sit
in judgment upon the life of his son for a public offence, he
would convoke a family council for that purpose. *

But if the Roman father was so devoid, not only of paternal
affection, but of the common sympathies of humanity, as to sit
and coolly deliberate upon the passing of the sentence of death
upon his own legitimate son, what mercy can we hope for
towards the poor delinquent slave, who trembles at ‘‘vox domini
furit instantis virgamque teneretis.’?*? The period fixed for the
majority of males was, by the Roman law, twenty-five years;
at this age the son passed from under the authority of the
curator, and if his father and grandfather were both dead, he
became sut juris, or independent; but if either of them were
alive, he still remained under their power as long as they lived,
unless he was emancipated ‘‘ de jure,’’ or ‘‘ de facto.’’*

1 In the legal form of adoption, this barbarous power of the father is
expressly specified as though it was one of the essential requisites to con-
stitute one the child of the adopted father.” Velitis jubeatis, ut L.
Valerius, L. Titio, tum jure legique filius siet, quam si ex eo patre matrique
familias ejus natus esset, utique ei vite nescisque in eum potestas siet,
uti patri endo filio est.” Gill. v. 19.

2 « Cassius filiam—adhibito propinquorum et amicorum concilio affectati
regni crimine domi damnavit verberibusque affectum nicari fossit.” Val.
Max. v. 8. 2. On the killing of Cassius Viellinus by his father, see liv. ii.
41, Diony. viii. 79. Plin. H. M. xxxiy..4. This judgment is mentioned
by Val. Max. v. 8. 3, where he says of T. Manlius Torquatus, ‘‘ne consilio
quidem necessariorum indigere se credibit,”’ as his son had been accused
by the Macedonians on account of extortion. The father sat in judgment
for three days, hearing witnesses and so on, and finally banished his son
from his presence; whereupon he killed himself. The same author
(vy. 9. 1.) relates another instance, when L. Gellius held judgment on his
son, ‘‘peene universo senatu adhibito in consolium,” and after a careful
inquiry, ‘‘absolvit eum tum consilii tum etiam sententia sua.”

Other examples are related of sentences being passed by fathers upon
their sons without the intervention of a family meeting.

§ Juven. xiv. 63. ‘‘As the voice of his master thundered, brandishing
his whip over his head.”

4 Just. Inst. lib. i. t. 9. The Grecian law, as well as that of all other

ROMAN SLAVERY. 83

This custom, however, was peculiar to Roman citizens, and
though nearly related to that of exposing and destroying new-
born children, must not be wholly confounded with the same.!
But, though the political reasons on which they are said to have
been respectively founded, are somewhat different; yet they
both seem to have sprung from that same arrogant spirit of
domination so strikingly peculiar to the Roman character in
ancient times.

The right of the father, also, to sell his children was unques-
tionably recognized by the Twelve Tables, though few instances
of the like can now be found; it seems, therefore, to have been

early modified into a legal form of emancipation.’

The father could not renounce his authority over his son ex-
cept by suffering him to be adopted in the power of another,
or by this formality of emancipation.

But this unnatural dependence in which the son was held by
the father applied also to the daughter; the most beautiful and
accomplished young lady was liable to be sold or put to death
at the will of an arbitrary and tyrannical father.* As long as
the daughter remained single, she was under the power of her
natural father. Neither the son nor daughter could, at any
age, contract marriage without the consent of their father.
Therefore, by marriage the daughter was emancipated from the
power of her natural father, and, as it were, by adoption came
under that of her father-in-law.

There was a kind of marriage practised among the slaves,

civilized nations, upon this subject differed from the Roman in two
respects: — First, that the father’s power over his son ceased at his
arriving at majority, or at his marriage, or on his being entered on the
list of citizens. Secondly, by the father having a right to terminate the
relation of parent and child, by banishing him from his house, or disin-
heriting him, without daring to injure his life or liberty. Beck’s Gall. p.
178. Dion. ii. 26. ‘*'O rdv Pwpaiwy vopobirns,” &c.

1 At Rome, it seems to have been commanded that the deformed should
be put to death. Cic. de Leg. iii. 8. Liv. xxvii. 37. Sen. de Ira., i. 18.
And the exposure and murder of new-born children was not unfrequent
even in the first families, as many instances show. Dio. Cass. xiv.; and
the Lex. Gentilica of Fabii Dioys. ix. 22. See also Plaut. Cas. Prol. 41,
79. Cist. 18, 17, 31. Ter. Heant, iv. t. 37.

2 A fragment of the Twelve Tables decreed: ‘Si pater filium ter venum
duit, filius a pater liber esto.” Ulp. xi. Again (Idem.): ‘‘Liberi paren-
tum potestate liberantur emancipatione, ie si posteaquam mancipati fue-
rint manumissi sint. Sed filius quidem ter mancipatus ter manumissus
sui juris fit. Id enim lex xii. tabularum jubet his verbis:” Si pater filium
ter venum duit, filius a pater liber esto.”

8 «Se filiam jure caesam judicare, ni ita esset, patrio jure in filium ani-
madversurum fuisse.” Liv. 1: 26.

84 ROMAN SLAVERY:

but it was only as a natural right, and wholly distinct from the
marriage of free persons; hence the term applied to it was,
contubernium, instead of matrimonium, and the married pair
were called contubernals. The master, in case of the slave, as
with his own children, decided upon the propriety of the
match.

The slaves born in the master’s household were called the
verne; the possessions of the master were divided, first, into
the familia urbana and familia rustica, and we read that most
of the vast numbers possessed were employed in the familia
rustica, or upon the country estates; but hundreds were in the
familia urbana, or immediate households of the master. It is
to this family that we shall chiefly confine our analysis.* These
families of slaves, of which only we shall speak, were again
divided, first, into decuria, or divisions of ten in each; and
again into ranks or classes, according to the occupations which
they followed.

Pignorius, who has treated this subject, perhaps more ex-
tensively than any other author, has enumerated forty-eight
classes of rustic slaves; forty of rustic or urban; sixty of urban;
sixty-six of personal attendants; fifteen of upper slaves; thir-
teen of nursery; one hundred and thirty of luxury, and five of
military slaves; in all, three hundred and twenty-five classes.*
We cannot pursue all these classes in detail, and shall, there-
fore, treat only of the six primary divisions: the ordinarii, the
medict, literati; anagnoste, librarw, and vulgares. Under
-these several heads, innumerable subdivisions were included.

The ordinarii seem to have been a division of the highest
rank of slaves; they were placed above the others (ceteris pro-
fecti erant), and had their own slaves (vicarii) as a part of their
own estate, or peculium, acquired by their own economy.

Sometimes the master gave the ordinarii assistant slaves, who
acted under him, and for whose conduct he was responsible to
his master.*

1 Dio. Cass. xlviii. 44; lix. 18 (and), ‘‘ qualicunque vilico contubernalis

mulier assignanda est.” Col. 1:8. ‘To each (meaning male slaves) his
espoused woman must be assigned by the overseer.”

2 «‘ Urbana familia et rustica, non loco sed genere distinguitur.” Fest.
166.

8 The slave family considered in this point has been treated by Pigno-
rius: ‘‘De servis et eorum apud veteres ministeriis.” By Titus Papma,
De operis servorum, and Goci in tbe explanation of the Columbarium Li-
bertorum et servorum Livie Auguste, referred to in Blair’s Enquiry into
the state of slavery among the Romans.

4 Vicarius est qui servo furet.” Hor. Sat. ii. 7: 79.
The vicarii existed at an early period.

ROMAN SLAVERY. 85

The ordinarii were the special confidants of the master, and
entrusted by him with the management of his income and out-
lays; they appointed and controlled the other ranks of slaves,
both in the house and at the villa.

In this class of slaves are mentioned the procurator, the
actor, and dispensator.'

The actor seems to have belonged, chiefly, to the family rus-
tica, and to have acted in about the same capacity as the vil-
licus, which answers nearly to the outdoor duties of the modern
overseer.”

The dispensator was a kind of book-keeper and cashier in
the family urbana.* Another of the principals at the head of
domestic arrangements was the atriensis, who originally shared
the duties of the dispensator and procurator. The procurator
was the general supervisor, whose duties were quite analogous
to those of a modern general agent, or of a supercargo. In
later times there were, doubtless, special atrienses, whose duties
were confined to the several departments of the house, as the
atrium, department of statuary, &c.

There was, also, in this division, the celurius, or promus,
who had charge of the cella penaria and vinaria, and furnished
the daily supplies, and took charge of what remained.*

We read also of the negotiatores, who attended to certain
outdoor business-transactions for their masters, such as finan-
ciering and moneyed arrangements.°

The multitude of slaves that thronged the premises of the
family urbana were sometimes mischievous and noisy; this gave
rise to the silentarii, who were a kind of patrol, that kept
watch over the quiet of the household.°® |

‘¢ Esse sat est servum; quam nolo vicarius esse.”
‘‘ Scio mihi vicarum esse.” Plaut. Asin. ii. 4, 28.

And Cicero, when he wishes to mark the velitas (contempt) of Diogno-
tus, a public slave, says: ‘‘ Vicarum nullum habet, nihil omnino peculii.”
Verr. iii. 28.

1 Suet. Gall. 12. This procurator must not be confounded with the
like term occurring so often in legal matters; the latter could only be a
freedman. Dig. lib. 18, t. 8. Cic. p. Cl. 20. But domestic procuratores
were slaves or freedmen. Cic. de Crat. i. 58. Ad. Attic. xiv. 16.

2 Colum, i. 7; ib. 8. In Scev. Dis. xxxiii. 7-20,

8 Cic. ad Attic. xi. 1. ‘Nihil scire potui de nostris domesticis rebus,
de quibus acerbissime afflictor quod qui eas dispensavit, neque adest iste
neque ubi terrarum sit scio.”

* Plaut. Asin. ii. 4.

5 Plaut. Pseud. ii. 2; and hence, also, the Condus Promus. Plaut.
cap. iv. 2. 115.

6 Sen. Epist. 47.

§

86 ROMAN SLAVERY.

Of the numberless subdivisions under this head we shall
mention but few. The terms by which they are designated
indicate their occupation. Of these were the architecti, fabri,
tectores, statuarii, pictores, cclatores (engravers), plumarii
(ornamental weavers), topiarii (fancy gardeners), viridarii,
aquarii; also, the symphianiaci (or band of household musi-
cians), ludiones (puppet-dancers), mimi (buffoons), funambuli
(rope-dancers), petauriste (mountebanks or jumpers), salta-
trices (women dancers), and gladiatores. Besides these, they
had the moriones, or clowns, fatui, or idiots, and nani, or
dwarfs.’

The second primary division of the higher order of the slaves
which we shall mention, is the medici.

It was at a late period that the study of medicine attained
to any distinction at Rome, and then it was almost exclusively
practised by foreigners. Pliny says that the first Grecian phy-
sician, Archaguthus, arrived at Rome, from the Peloponnesus,
in the year of the city five hundred and thirty-five.?

The astonishment which the art first excited was soon turned
into distrust, and sometimes into aversion. Cato earnestly
warned his son against the Greek physicians and the study of
medicine.* Even in the time of Pliny, the Romans themselves
attended but little to the art, though it was, as he says, very
profitable; but it was, perhaps, for that reason lowered in the
estimation of the old Romans.‘

Pliny gives an interesting account of the relation in which
the patient stood to the physician, which may well be applied
to our own times. After remarking that the Romans: did not
pursue the science with much devotion, he says, ‘‘Imo vero
auctoritas aliter quam Greece eum tractantibus, etiam apud
imperitas experiesque lingue non est. Ac minus credunt,
que ad salutem suum pertinent, si intelligunt.. Itaque in hee
artium sola evenit, ut cuicunque medicum se professo statim
credatur. Nulla proeterea lex est, que puniat inscitiam,

1 See Beck’s Gall., p. 206, translated by Metcalf, to which we are very
much indebted for the investigation of this subject,

2 Plin. xxix. 1. 6.

8 We cannot wonder that Plautus scourges them with jokes, Monach.
y. 8.5. Even Athenzeus says (xv. 666), ‘‘e pn farpot noav, ovdev fv rav ypap-
yarix@v poporepov.” ‘If they cannot be doctors, there is no one of the
learned professions more simple.”’

*<««Non rem antique dumnabant, sed artem. Maxime vero queestum
esse immani pretio vite, recusabant.” ‘The ancients pursued nothing

but art. They denied the grand desideratum to consist in the immense
value of human life.”

— — —_——

ROMAN SLAVERY. ST

capitale nullum exemplum vindicte. Discunt periculis nos-
tris et experimenta per mortes agunt, medicoque tantum homi-
nem occidisse impunitas summa est.’”!

As the professional physician, therefore, was not looked upon
in the most favorable light, the Romans were accustomed to
employ trustworthy slaves as their family physicians, and care-
ful fathers of families collected recipes or prescriptions for par-
ticular cases. Thus, Cato had a receipt-book, commentarium,
quo mederetur filio servis familiaribus. These slaves were
called the medici. Surgery, as well as physic, was practised
by the medici; but, it is possible that there were separate ones
for this branch of the profession, known as the vulnerum me-
dici. In the time of Tiberius regular chirurgi occur. About
this time physic began to be divided into distinct branches,
and there were doctors for the eye (medici ab oculis), as well
as dentists, &c.?

Another class of well-educated slaves, were the literati; a
class of whose literary acquirements and knowledge the master
made use of for his own convenience. They were principally
employed as lectores, or readers.

Men of letters were accustomed, when at their meals, or not
other ways mentally employed, and even while in the baths, to
have these lectores to read to them. At the banquet, it was
customary for the guests to be entertained a while by the lec-
tores.* Martial alludes to this practice, and says that some of
his friends invited him to their tables only to read to him their
bad comedies. Augustus, when unable to sleep, used to send
for his lectores.*

1 «« Moreover, the importance of this profession to those who did pursue
it, was far less than among the Greeks; even among the ignorant and
illiterate, it was held in disrepute. They attached less importance to
those things pertaining to the health, than to the mind (literally, than if
they acquired knowledge). Therefore it occurred to this alone, of all the
arts, that to whomsoever a diploma might be given (or the profession
might be entrusted), he became at once u doctor. Besides, there was no
law to punish his malpractice, nor any capital example of vindication.
They prescribe and experiment upon diseases at our peril, and however
illustrious a man may die from his treatment, it is with the utmost
impunity.”

2 Mart. x. 56.

8 Plin. Ep. iii. 5. Cornelius Nepos says of Atticus, ‘Nemo in convivio
ejus aliud axpoaya audivit, quam anagnostem (or lectorem). Neque unquam
sine aliqua lectione apud cum culnatium est.’”” Cor. Nep. 1. 16. ‘*No one
at his dinner-table heard any exhibition, other than the lector or reader.
Nor did supper ever pass without some readiug to him.”

* Mart. iii. 50; Suet. Aug. 78; Cic. ad Att. 1-12.

88 ROMAN SLAVERY.

There was also another class of educated slaves, called the
librarii; these were slaves used for writing, hence also called
scribe. These seem to have been a distinct class, who were
trained to serve as amanuenses, private secretaries, and the
like, but were wholly distinct from the public scribes or nota-
ries, who were liberi, or freedmen, and formed a separate order.

There were also the pedagogi, who served as private tutors
to the children, or accompanied them when they went abroad
to school; and the matrices, the girls.’

The slaves of luxury were numerous; and their several avo-
cations serve to illustrate the means with which the Roman
families of notoriety provided themselves with private amuse-
ments after meals, when the business of the day was at an end,
and everything was brought forward that could serve for recre-
ation. It was not until after the war with Antiochus, that the
early simplicity of Roman manners was corrupted by Asiatic
luxury; then their banquets began to be more elegant and
sumptuous, by their imported refinements in cookery; and their
leisure hours were whiled away by all kinds of shows (axpouara),
by artists hired for the occasion, or kept among the regular
family slaves.”

Among these were the symphoniaci, the corps of household
musicians ; the frequent mention of which shows their general
use.2 To these were added, the ludiones, a kind of stage-
dancers ; the mzmz, clowns or buffoons; the funambuli, rope-
dancers; the petawriste, a kind of mountebanks, or such as
performed wonderful feats of muscular power and agility ;* and
lastly, the gladiatores, such as wielded the sword in mortal
combat for the idle amusement of the beholders.

The deformed and idiotic (moriones et fatui) seem to have
been in great demand, as sources of entertainment and amuse-
ment. The moriones were, perhaps, regular Cretins, as the
term implies not only uncomeliness, but stupidity and deformity.®

1 Cato the elder taught his son himself (Kairot xapevra dovdov eixe ypappa-
Tuariv ovonpa XNiwva, moddovs didackovra matdas — Plaut. lat. Mag. 20), although
he had a slave, called Clion, a most elegant teacher, who taught many
other boys.

2 Livy, xxxix. 6.

$ Cic. Mil. 21; Petron. c. 38. 47; Sen. Ep. 54. Seneca says, that in
their evening amusements there were more singers than formerly in the
public theatres. ‘In commissationibus nostris plus cantorum est, quam
in theatris olim spectatorum fuit.”

4 Petron. 53.

5 Mart. vi. 89, describes one, ‘‘acuto capite et auribus longis, qua sic
moventur, ut solunt asellorum.”

ROMAN SLAVERY. 89

But their stupidity was their chief point of excellence, as the
more stupid they were, the more valuable; thus affording the
greater means of exciting laughter, by appearing the more
ludicrous... Even in the moral and humane Seneca’s house
there was no lack of them.?

Of a similar kind to these were the dwarfs (nani), who were
the special favorites of the ladies.* Suetonius said of Augustus,
‘“‘pumilias (dwarfs) atque distortas ut ludibria nature malique
omnis aborrebat”; but still, it is said that he kept a court-
dwarf, Canopas, the pet of his niece Julia.‘

It will, doubtless, seem not a little surprising to the refined
sympathies and moral sensibilities of the present day, that
human nature could ever have been so depraved as to make
sport of its own grievances and misfortunes, or as to eagerly
seek the most glaring instances of the imperfections of the
species, as sources of pastime and amusement. The above
sentiment of Augustus would seem to be more consonant with
reason and humanity. His feelings revolted at such freaks of
nature and worst of misfortunes.

Another division of the Roman slaves was the vulgares, of a
lower grade than the ordinarii; this division included all those
who followed the more degraded avocations, and were confined
to menial services, in doors and out. The first of this class
may be mentioned as the Janitor, or ostarius, who constantly
kept watch over the entrance to the house. In ancient times,
and often later, their attendance was secured by fastening them
with a chain to the door-post.°®

The dog was the only companion of the Janitor, and helped
him to guard the court and entrance to the house. He some-

1 Mart. xiv. 210, et viii. 13.

2 Sen. Ep. 50. ‘‘ Harpasten, uxoris mez fatuam scis hereditarium onus
in domo mea remanisse; ipse enim aversissimus ab istis prodigiis; sum
si quando fatuo delectari volo, non est mihi longe querendum me rideo.”

8 Gell. xix. 13, explains vavovs, ‘‘brevi atque humili corpore homines
paulum supra terram extantes.” Stat. Silv. i. 6. 57.

“Hic audax subit ordo pumilionum
Quos natura brevi statu peractos
Nodosum semel in globum ligavit.”

4Plin. Hist. Nat. v. 16; Suet. Aug. 83, also lib. 61. The nani differed
from the distorti. Quinct. Decl. 278; Inst. ii. 5. These monsters used
to learn to dance and play the castanets. They used also to enact fights.
Dio. Cass. Ixvii. 8. Brass statues of these abortions are still extant.

5 L. Octacilius, ‘‘serviisse dicitur; atque etiam ostarius veteri more in
catena fuisse ;” ‘‘and even to have been a doorkeeper in a chain.” ‘‘Jani-
tor, indignum, dura religati catena.” Ov. Am. 1, 161.

8 *

90 ROMAN SLAVERY.

times bore his staff to repel an intruder, like the doorkeepers
at the principal hotels in modern times.’ Next came the lubi-
cuiarii, who had the supervision of the sitting and sleeping
rooms ; and, probably, when the master was at home, waited
in the ante- chamber ; they also announced visitors.’

When any one of rank went abroad without any particular
necessity for display, but in a private manner, one or more
slaves usually attended him; hence there was a class called the
pedisequi, though every slave that followed his master was not
called by that name.

The Roman custom required the attendance of slaves in every
situation, and under all circumstances to exempt the master
from the most trifling exertions.* Hence, every species of
labor, or pursuit of any description, except ‘the military offices,
legal acquirements and practice, senatorial duties, and those
pertaining to matters of State, scientific and literary pursuits,
became disreputable in the estimation of Roman citizens. Any
deviation from the established custom by any of the elite, was
sure to be visited by public notice, and, perhaps, bring the
offender into public ridicule.*

Besides these, many of the first families at Rome used a no-
menclator. It was with the Romans, in this respect, as with
the people of the present day; every ambitious man who was
electioneering for office, was obliged to condescend, at times
particularly, to treat not only men of distinction, but even the

1 Sen. de Const. sup. 14, Petron. c. 134, ‘‘arundinem ab ostio rapuit.”

2 «« Hune vestri janitores, hunc cubicularii diligunt; hune liberi vestri,
hune servi ancille que amant; hic cum venit, extra: ordinem vocatur ;
hic solus introducitur, cseteri sepe frugalissimi homines excluduntur.”
Cic. Verr. iii. 4. From this it would seem that the slaves had their pre-
ference, and would favor men of rank, while it was their duty to admit
visitors in the order of their arrival. Cic. ad Att. 2. This complaint
might well apply to some ill-bred slaves of the present day; they often
take it upon themselves to distinguish those of rank as they fancy them.

® «<Nihil scire potui de nostris domesticis rebus de quibus acerbissime
aflictor ; , quod qui eas dispensavit, neque adest istic, neque ubi terrarum
sit scio.”” Cic. ad Att. xi. 1. ‘Non rem antiqui damnabant, sed artem.”
Martial (ix. 60, 22) speaks of one, ‘‘qui asse duos calices emit et ipse
tulit ;” ‘‘who purchased two cups and carried them home himself.”

4 Thus Cicero, in his strictures upon the common household arrange-
ments of Piso, says, ‘‘idem coquus, idem atriensis.” This looks a little
like the law feminine, backbiting of families, so common between bick-
ering neighbors. Horace (Sat. 1, 3, 12) speaks of the public ridicule
thrown upon Tullius the preetor, because he had no more than five slaves
to accompany him from the Tiburtine villa to Rome. Against all the
derelictions of custom, fashion and duty, Juvenal, above all, aimed the
poisoned shafts of satire.

ROMAN SLAVERY. 91

common people, with many little notices of politeness and
marked attention. Their houses were kept open to every one,
and when they were abroad all were hale fellows well met. But
so far were the haughty patricians removed from the names,
interests, and social condition of the plebeians, that it was im-
possible for them to recollect, at a moment, the names and cir-
cumstances of those they might meet, who claimed the right,
particularly in electioneering seasons, to be recognised, and to
have a few words of agreeable chat with the candidate, that
they kept slaves for this purpose, whose duty it was to remember
the names, condition and circumstances of all they met, and
inform their master.’

In the place of the hacks and pleasure-carriages of modern
times, the Romans used the lectica; these were vehicles borne
by slaves, which was a very common mode of travelling in the
city, particularly for the ladies. The strongest and most im-
posing slaves in appearance were chosen for this purpose, and
they consisted of Syrians, Celts, Germans, and especially Cap-
padocians. Sometimes there were six, sometimes eight in
number. These were a very numerous class of slaves, as may
well be supposed, in so populous a city as ancient Rome; they
were called the lecticarii. Before the lecticarii, proceeded the
ante-ambulones, in order to clear the road of the crowd. They
did not always confine themselves to the customary words,
‘date locum domino meo,’’ but occasionally getting a little
impatient, began to jostle with their elbows and to thrust aside
with their hands. This led sometimes to disagreeable colli-
sions. ‘‘Eques Romanus a servo ejus (Surgii Macedonis), ut
transitum daret, manu leviter admonitus convertit se, nec ser-
yum, a quo erat tactus sed ipsum Macedonem tam graviter
palma percussit, ut peene consideret.’’®

The use of postilions, runners, and outriders, is not of mo-
dern origin; the Romans, in the time of the emperors, were
particularly fond of this kind of display, and frequent men-

1 «Ad urbem ita veni, ut nemo alius ordinis homo nomenclatori non
notus,” became a proverb. Sometimes, when their memory failed them,
they would play a trick and substitute a name. ‘‘ Vetulus nomenclator,
qui nomina non reddit, sed imponit.” Sen. Ep. 27. Perhaps Jack
Downing may have borrowed the idea from this custom, when he volun-
teered his services to shake hands for Gen. Jackson.

2 Mart. iii. 46.

8 A Roman knight being touched lightly by the hand of Surgius Ma-
cedo’s slave, that he might give room to pass, turned not upon the slave
who had touched him, but upon Macedo himself, and gave him such a
blow that he almost fell. Plin. Ep. iii. 14.

92 ROMAN SLAVERY.

tion is made of the Cursores and Numide who ran or rode in
advance of the rheda or carruca. Thus, Seneca says: ‘‘O
quam cuperem illi (Catoni) nunc occurrere aliquem ex his Tros-
sulis in via divitibus cursores et Numidas et multum ante de
pulveris agentem !””

It is a peculiar feature of Roman discipline, that all labor
was so minutely divided, the operatives so minutely classed,
and the lines of duty for each so distinctly marked out, that we
can find no analogous system in modern times except in some
of the extensive workshops in large manufacturing districts
where the labor is, perhaps, in some instances, similarly divided.
This is evident from the fact, that a classification of more than
three hundred different classes, with specific duties, are men-
tioned.

We will next speak of the position and treatment of slaves.
We have seen that some of the higher order of slaves were well
educated, and accomplished artisans. Indeed, every descrip-
tion of employment, as a source of revenue, seems to have been
followed by slaves; the system of hired or free labor, so com-
mon among the Grecian States, was almost wholly unknown to
the Romans. |

The primary division of persons with respect to liberty was,
by the Roman law, into freemen and slaves.” And to every
freeman (being a Roman citizen) all kinds of labor for profit
was considered servile and dishonorable, and even slave labor
not looked upon as a source of profit, but only as a means to
promote their luxury and happiness.* The immense fortunes
sometimes accumulated by wealthy Roman citizens, must have
fallen to them either by inheritance, or by the spoils of war.
In Greece, there was the extensive mining interests and other
vast resources of productive industry. But, as to Rome, we
read of no means of developing the resources of national
wealth and power, but their agriculture and arms. A large
portion of the property acquired by conquest consisted in
captives, which they regarded as their absolute property, and
could appropriate to any use they thought proper. Through-

1<«¢Qh, how I wish some one from the rich Trassulians could meet him
(Cato) in the road driving his runner Numidians and huge cloud of dust
before him!” Sen. Ep. 87. Seneca probably envied Cato his display,
and would like to have seen him outdone.

2 Just. Inst., lib. 1, t. 2: ‘*Non rem antiqui damnabant sed artem.”
Beck’s Gall., p. 207.

8 Beck’s Gall., p. 199. Smith’s Greek and Roman Antiquities. Art.
Slaves.

\-

ROMAN SLAVERY. 93

out the republic, and even up to the times of the Antonies, the
master held absolute control over his slave; he could practise
the most cruel barbarities on him, or even kill him with perfect
impunity.’

But, as we have said, this custom of all ancient civilized na-
tions was peculiar to Rome; in Greek and Hebrew slavery, as
we have seen, the case was different. At Athens, as in modern
times, if a master was excessively cruel to his slave, he could
be compelled to sell him.” Altogether, the position of the Ro-
man slave was far harder than that of the Greek. For their
food, the Roman slaves received a monthly allowance of the
most necessary articles (menstrua), or daily (diaria cibaria) ;
this allowance was called the demensum.’ Cato fixes the allow-
ance according to the slave’s labor, at from four to five modii
of wheat per month; wine, according to the time of the year;
oil, one sext; salt, one modus per month, besides figs, olives,
halec, and vinegar.‘

The slave likewise received his tunica and saguan ; for shoes
he received sculponee, a kind of sandal made of wood. If he
could manage to save anything out of his allowance by his
economy, he might thus acquire a little property to which his
master could lay no claim. Indeed, as in modern times, the
principle ‘‘quodcungne per servum acquiritur id domino ac-
quiritur,’’ was not strictly adhered to, and the slave could thus
earn a ‘‘ peculium,’’ by means of which he often purchased his
freedom.°

1 See Juvenal, vi. 218: ‘*Pone crucem servo,” &c. ‘*Apud omnes
preque gentes animadvertere possumus, dominis in servos vite necisque
potestatem esse, et quodcunque per servum acquiritur id domino acquiri-
tur.” Gai’s Inst., i. 52.

2 But this is not true of Greek and Hebrew slavery, generally. Antiph.
de Cede Herod., p. 727. ‘If a man smite his servant with a rod, and
he die under his hand, he shall be punished.” Ex. xxi. 20.

8 «Servi quaternos modios accipiebant frumenti in mensem et id de-
mensem dicebatur.”” Domet. ad Terren. Phoreni, i. 1, 9.

4 Cato R. R. 56: We learn from Plautus that the allowance was given
out monthly. Plaut. Stich. i. 2, 2.

‘¢ Vos meministis quot calendis petere demensem cibum;
Qui minus meministis, quod opus sit facto facere in edibus.”
. **Rogabat
Denique cur unquam fugisset, cui satis una
Farris libra foret, gracili sic tamque pusillo.”
Hor. Sat. i. 5, 67.

Thus we see that bad diet, or scanty food, caused slaves to run away.

5 Sen. Ep. 80: ‘‘ Peculium suum, quod comperaverant ventre fraudato,
pro capite numerant.” See also, Terent, Pho. i. 1, 9.

94. ROMAN SLAVERY,

The slave might also acquire property by other means; the
master, usually, laid no claim to what the slave had found;
hence there were often very rich slaves.". As they had no civil
position, or right as men in society, their names were a kind
of nicknames, adopted at hap-hazard, as we adopt the names
of dogs, horses, and the like.

There was no difference between the dress of the slave and that
of the humble freeman.” The punishments of the slaves, which
is the principal alleged sin against the institution of the present
day, were numerous, and even rendered more severe by the
increase of their numbers, the greater difficulty of keeping them
in subjection, and their greater turbulence and viciousness. In
treating upon this part of the subject, we must not overlook
the fact that the multitude of Roman slaves had so increased
as to greatly outnumber the freemen, and had become systemati-
cally demoralized and vitiated for a course of several centuries,
so that they were, as a class, of equal intellectual capacity with
the generality of freemen, of excessive cunning and audacity,
and could only be kept under by extreme severity.

The milder punishments were, degrading out of the family
urbana into the family rustica and into the ergastulum, where
they often had to work —catenati et compediti,* There was a
class called the ‘‘ Vincti compode fossores,’? who are often
mentioned ; this was the class that inhabited the ergastulum ;
their crime was mostly that of running away, hence they were
sentenced to this kind of ball and chain-gang who inhabited
the dungeon.* The compes was, either a block of wood fastened
to the leg by a chain, or, more commonly, regular leg-irons.
Hence the proverb, ‘‘ Compedes, ipse fecit, tpsus ut gestet

1 Sen. de Benef., iii. 28, and Plin. xxx. 10.

2 Sen. de Clem. i. 24. ‘‘Dicta est aliquando in senatu sententia, ut
servos a liberis cultus distingueret; deinde apparuit, quantum periculum
immineret, si servi nostri numerare nos cepissent.” Lampr. Serv.
Alex. 27. Tac. Arm. xiii. 24.

3 Plaut. Mart. i. 1, 17.

4 Ovid, Trest. iv. 1, 5. Tib. ii. 6. 25. Col. i. 8, 16. Juvenal viii. 180.
‘‘Ergastulum mancipia vincta compedibus.” The Ergastulum was the
abode of the rustic slaves. They must have been immense establishments
to afford each slave a separate cell; something upon the plan of a modern
penitentiary. There was a dungeon attached to it, a vast excavation
under ground, something like a modern cistern, with no entrance, except
through a small aperture at the top, by a rope let down like a bucket into
a well. Here there were separate cells for the convicts in the walls, like
receiving tombs for the dead. Colum. i. 6, 8. See also Plaut. Poenullus,
Translation in Bohn’s Library, vol. ii. p. 404, note.

ROMAN SLAVERY. 95

faber. An iron collar (collare) like the Greek («aoi0s), and
manacles (manic) were often used.!

Whipping was also common with canes or cudgels (fustes),
or whips (virgee ulmez) ; hence for whipping they said, ‘‘ facere
aliquam ulmeum.”* Plautus in his comedies makes one
thoroughly acquainted with slave life on every side. Another
severe punishment was to be hung up by the hands with weights
attached to the feet while they were chastised.’

The more grievous penalties were branding, executed upon
the fugitive or runaways, and upon the fures, or thieves. Letters
were burnt in the forehead, to mark the crime; and those thus
lettered were called the literati.‘ The stigma remained visible
for life; and many who afterwards became free and rich tried

1 Lucil. in Non. i. 62. Plaut. cap. ii, 2, 107; see also Translation in
Bohn’s Library, vol. ii. p. 404, note.

2 Plaut. Asin. ii. 2, 96. Pers. ii. 4. 7. Also with straps. Hor. Epist.
ii. 2.15. There was also the pistrinum, where slaves, for punishment,
had to perform hard labor on a bridewell, called by some a treadmill.
Plaut. Asin, i. 1. 21.

3 Plaut. Asin. ii. 2: 31. Hence, frequently, ‘‘ pendere et ferire penden-
tum.” Plaut. Terin. ii.c.19. ‘‘ By the powers your legs shall be broken if
you do not proclaim this shameless fellow.” See Plaut. Asinaria, or Ass
dealer, vol. ii. Translation, Bohn’s Library. One of the most cruel pun-
ishments for slaves was breaking their legs; this was done by stretching
the leg upon an anvil and striking it with a sledge: see preceding note.
Again, ‘‘ When you are tied up with a full hundred pounds weight at your
feet, when the manacles are fastened to your hands and fastened to the
beams,” &c. Plaut. Transl. vol. ii. p. 492. The slaves were hung up,
to be whipped, with their hands fastened over their heads, and heavy
weights to their feet to prevent them from kicking those who punished
them. (See note.) Again, ‘‘Where you have been detected in theft;
where you have full oft pleaded your cause as you were hung up, against
eight clever hardened fellows.” Plaut. Trans. vol. ii. p. 505. The eight
clever hardened fellows here spoken of, were the lictors who attended the
Trumviri who had especial jurisprudence over slaves, &c. (See Note.)
‘¢ Within a short time, i’ faith, Trunio, you’ll full soon be adding to the
iron-bound race in the country.” Mostelluria, or the Haunted House,
Plaut. Trans. vol. ii. 462. This has reference to the ball and chain-gang
above spoken of. Again, ‘*... . unless, indeed, she wishes that we,
her fellows, should all be given up to the tortures of the cross.” The
cross was an instrument of punishment among the Romans alone: it was
designed especially for slaves; the convicts were first stripped, and either
nailed or bound to it, and often left to die of starvation. Plaut. Trans.
vol. i. p. 77. Again, ‘‘In that self-same position you will have to die
outside the gates, when with your hands outstretched you will be carrying
your cross.” The gates here referred to mean the well-known gates at
Rome, through which the slaves went to the place of punishment.

* Plaut. Cas. ii. 6, 49. Also Natati. Inscripti. Mart. viii. 75, 2. Plin.
Xviii. 3, 4.

96 ROMAN SLAVERY.

to hide them with plasters.’ Martial mentions a doctor Eras
who knew how to efface the traces of a former branding.”

The thievish propensities of the Roman slaves are more fre-
quently alluded to, and perhaps more severely censured than
any other vicious habit; which is frequently mentioned by
Plautus, and from which we may gather something of their
vicious and depraved character generally.®

A very frequent kind of punishment was wearing the furca..
It was much in the form of a V, and was placed over the back
of the neck upon the shoulders, somewhat in the modern fashion
of yoking a hog, while the hands were bound fast to the thighs.

Corporeal punishment in chains, however, was far more
severe.‘ The furca was applied to slaves about to be crucified.
Patibulum often means the same as furca, though literally it
was the transverse beam of the cross.°®

The words extra portum, used in Plautus, refer to the cus-
tomary way of inflicting all supplicia outside of the city. It
was not the legendary porta Metia, as some contend, from the
reading in other places ;° but the porta Hsquelina, outside of
which, on the Campus Esquelinus, was the place of execution
and general burial-ground.” It is also recorded that slaves
were thrown into the vivaria to be devoured by wild beasts,
and their conflicts with these animals are well known. A

1 Spluniis Mart. ii. 29. 3x: 567 G:

3 «Unless I manage this one thing to cook the dinner down in the
dungeon, then when cooked, we bring it up in small baskets,” &c. Here
is another allusion to the dungeon; he means to say that such a place will
alone prevent the thievish cooks from stealing everything that comes in
their way. Plaut. Transl., Stylus or Parasite Rebuked, vol. i. p. 247.
Again, ‘‘Is it among such men that you expect to find your ring? Chiur-
chus, Circonicus, Crimnus, Crisobalus, Calabus, were there; whipped-
neck, whipped-legs, iron-rubbed knaves. By faith, any one of these could
eee the sole from the shoe of a running foot-man.” Plaut. Tim. vol. i.
p. 56.

4 Plaut. Cas. ii. 6, 67. ‘*Tu quidem hodie canem et furcam feras.”
Plaut. Mort. i. 1, 58. Liv. ii. 86: “sub furca cesum.”

5 Sen. Ep. 101. ‘*Patibulo pendere destrictum.” Plaut. Miles Gro-
riose, or the Braggart Captain, ii. 4, 7. ‘‘Credo tibi esse eundum actu-
tum extra portam despissis manibus patibulum eum habebis.” Mart. i.
1,52. ‘‘Ita te forabunt patibulum per vivas stimulis.” Connifices went
behind and beat and goaded the culprit.

6 Plaut. Cas. li. 6, 2.

7 Tacit. Ann. ii. 82. Suet. Claud. 25. Tacit. Ann. xv. 60. Death by
crucifixion was not uncommon. It was the Romans that introduced this
mode of punishment into Judea, by which the Saviour of the world was

put to death. He was crucified between two thieves, doubtless slaves, as _

this kind of punishment was peculiar to them.

~ —_ it SL

ROMAN SLAVERY. 97

dreadful case occurs in the writings of Cicero." When the
master was murdered by one of his slaves, the law enjoined that
all should be put to death; a dreadful case of this kind occurs
in Tacitus, where four hundred slaves, in one family, were put
to death under this law.’’?

Sometimes extra cruel punishments were resorted to, as
hacking off the hand, especially for theft;* or throwing the
culprit to be devoured by the Murenee.*

One of the greatest hardships the slaves had to endure, was
that, very frequently, for the most trivial offence, or from the
mere caprice of some petulant master or mistress, they were
subjected to the most refined cruelties and maltreatment. The
Roman ladies, as we have seen, were particularly distinguished
for this kind of treatment and fashionable accomplishment ; and,
indeed, their maids, who dressed them, seldom escaped with-
out being beaten, scratched and torn, or pricked with needles.°

From the extreme hardship of the condition of the slave,
resulting, in a great measure, from cruel treatment, the master
had everything to fear from their vindictive feelings, which
sometimes glutted themselves, either in sanguinary deeds of
hidden vengeance, or in secret outrages upon the most sacred
rights and privileges of the master, which strikingly exemplified
the truth of Ovid’s maxim, ‘‘ Sors ubi pessima rerum, sub pedi-
bus timor est.’’®

Whips, thongs, &c., are not the most dreadful means of
punishment; burning alive is mentioned in the Pandects and
elsewhere.”

Scourges (flagella or flagra), sometimes loaded with lead,
plumbate ; and also chain scourges, with weights at the end,
all of bronze or tin, were used.

The Equuleus was a terrible instrument of torture; disloca-
tion was one of its effects. There were, also, the fidicule,
lyre strings, the ungula and forceps. The nose, ears, teeth, or
even eyes, were in great danger from an enraged master.®

1 Cic. p. Clu. 2 Tac. Ann. xiv. 41.

3 Plaut. Epid. i. 1, 11. 4 Sen. de Ira. iii. 40.

5 Ovid. Amor. i. 14,13. Art. iii, 235. Mart. ii. 66. Juvenal, vi. 491.
6 Sen. Ep. 47. Cic. p. Mil. 22. ‘De servis nulla questio in dommas,

nisi de incestu.” Val. Max. vi. 8,1. Plin. Ep. iii. 14, relates an in-
stance of such revenge.

7 Sed de patibulo et comburio per omne ingenium crudelitatis exhau-
riat.” Test. de Anima, 1.

8 Sen. Ep. xix. :

9«Trunci naribus auribusque vultus.” Mart. ii. 83. ‘* Pecantis
famuli pungo ne percuto dentes.” Mart. xiv. 68.

G

98 ROMAN SLAVERY.

A slave taken among the soldiers was cast from the Capi-
toline Rock, having been first manumitted, that he might be
worthy of that punishment.’

No distinction seems to have been made between the modes
of punishing male and female slaves. The laws that abolished
the master’s power of life and death appear to have been
obeyed with great reluctance, and were frequently defeated by
an increase in the amount of inferior punishments.

Such, in brief, was the condition of nearly sixty millions of
human beings, scattered through every part of the vast domain
of the Roman empire, in the times of the Caesars, and de-
scended from the most illustrious and remarkable nations upon
the face of the earth. There was no part of the Roman world
that did not witness their sufferings. The Sicilian dungeons
were full. Medians, Meesians, Bithynians, Celts, Germans,
and Britons, were driven in crowds to the Roman markets and
to the metropolis.

The kidnappers, like the modern corsairs of Barbary, were
ever on the alert in the fastnesses of the Ethiopian Troglodytes..
The voice of the slave auctioneer was heard early and late at
Corinth and Delos. From Britain to Parthia, and from the
hills of Sweden to the great African deserts, the eries of the
bondmen went up to Heaven. And even Judea, at the time
of the advent of the Messiah, may have witnessed all the hor-
rors of the Ergastulum, the Questio, the Vivarium and the
Crux. Here, too, the vast possessions of imperial wealth
found their way; here, too, were those princely estates, and
lordly banquets in palaces of splendor; here, too, you might
hear the bustle of busy thousands along the thronged quays, or
as it rose from the amphitheatre and the forum.

It was the home of Roman luxury, of gaiety and of joy,
where royalty drowned itself in dissipation, while the lion roared
over the martyred Christian, and the bleeding gladiator died at
the beck of the applauding multitude.?

Here too, doubtless, many a beautiful Caucasian virgin has
paid the penalty of her temerity, in humbly professing the name
of Jesus of Nazareth, by being thrown to some hungry animal
to glut his thirst for blood, or, what is worse, doomed to lead
a life of open prostitution in some of the public brothels.*

1 Dio. Cassius, i. 48. As slaves could not testify on the rack against

their own masters, they were sold to others, and thus qualified to testify.
Dio. Cass. ly. 857.

2 King Agrippa exhibited at one time, in Judea, seven hundred pairs
of gladiator slaves. Jus. Hist. xix.

8 «¢Nam et proxime ad lenonem damnando Christianum, potius quam

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 99

ESSAY V.
SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Ir is a subject of mooted inquiry as to what position the
Founder of the Christian religion occupied towards civil go-
vernment, temporal institutions, and temporal powers. His
advent furnished a new era in the history of the world. He
was born in the dominions of Augustus; Palestine had become
a province of the Roman Empire, subject to the relentless sway
of a Roman tetrarch. The political code of Moses, once in
force, had been superseded by the constitutions of the Cesars ;
the ecclesiastico-political government of Israel, as such, was no
more. And nothing was now left, separate, but the old Jewish
ritual, of their Hebrew nationality.

The religion of Rome, like that.of Greece and other nations
of antiquity, was of human origin; it was a national religion,
established, governed, and upheld by the authority of the State.
The evidences of Divine countenance, in these systems, are
found oniy in those rude and irreligious fables running through
the mythical lutes of the muse.

The Patricians of Rome had, by law, long monopolized the
order of priesthood; but the effort of Quintus and Cneius
Ogulnius to separate the Patrician order from the plebeian
(perhaps more distinctly), produced a reaction, and led to the
assertion of the claim, on the part of plebeians, to the ponti-
fical order. And hence the bill increasing the pontiffs by four,
and the augurs by five additional incumbents, all eligible from
the plebeians, became a law.’

Asin Greece so in Rome, the rule of action and guide of life
was formed from the civil law, rather than from any separate
code of moral or religious principle. Whatever moral or reli-
gious precepts were recognised, they incorporated into their

ad leonem.” Tert. Apol. cap. L. ‘Sed quedam sanctee femine tempore
persecutionis, ut insectatores sue pudicte divitavent in rapturum atque
necaturum se fluvium progecerunt.” August. De Civit., Dei, i. 26.
‘¢ Fidelissimi quique servi contra vexabantur.”
Lactantius, vol. ii. p. 214.

Paul also mentions slaves as having been baptized. 1 Cor. xii. 13. Yet,
for all this, Christianity did not condemn the institution in itself, but only
its abuse.

t Livy. x. 7, 9.

{00 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

civil jurisprudence. Whatever responsibilities the moral law
imposed upon them were exacted among their political duties.
Moral aphorisms became their legal decalogue; the Roman
students studied and committed the Twelve Tables with as
much awe and veneration as we do the Ten Commandments.
The dependence of the religious system upon the State began
with the Greeks and was completed by the Romans.* Hence
the State was the theologian. It had too much reverence for
ancient customs and names, to change those of the gods whom
the Latins, the Sabines, or Etruscans had brought with them
to Rome, in days of old. But it was the province of the State
to define the nature of those divinities, and to appoint and re-
gulate the ceremonies by which they should be honored.” ‘‘ To
keep up these rights’? (was the assurance of the later Roman)
‘“‘is to preserve the religion which was given to us by the gods
themselves.’’ ‘‘ But let no one be allowed to have deities to
himself ;” nor let any one worship new gods unless adopted by
the State.* The State was also the divinity; the personifica-
tion of Rome as a goddess, enshrined in a magnificent temple,
was no empty form. MReverence for this was the highest that a
Roman could feel.

About half a century before the tribunate of Licinius, C.,
there occurred a year of great distress. An excessive heat and
drought dried up the streams and parched the plains of the
earth ; soon a fearful disease, seizing first the cattle, then the
herdsmen, spread wide through the country and city. In the
extremity of suffering and distress to which the poorer class were
reduced, they turned with new sacrifices to seek new deities.
But the chief men of the city (as the historian called the autho-
rities of the State), were offended at such a proceeding.
Forthwith, therefore, were the Aidiles charged to see that none
but the gods of Rome were worshipped, and none but the rites
of Rome employed. ‘‘Ne qui, nisi Romani dii ne quo alio
mare quam patrio colerentur. ’”

The position of the priesthood is evident. The state was
the theologian; the priests were its disciples. The State was
the deity, the priests were its ministers, its worshippers.°®

This perfect system of centralization in the religio-political
systems of ancient Greece and Rome, this entire union, as we

1 Montesquieu refers to Tatius and Nama, who, he says, ‘‘ Assuverent
Jes dieux a la politique.”

2 Plin. N. H. 2118. Liv. 45: 16. 8 Cic. De Legg. 1118: 11.

4 Liv. iv. xxx. Comp. Id. iv: i.; xi: xxxix.

5 Doum. Etudes Hist. tom. 13, p. 434.

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 101

should say of church and State, rendered their religion and
civil government, mutually dependent upon each other.

The sublime doctrine of a future state of rewards and pun-
ishments was little heeded, and had but little influence over the
religious feeling of those nations. The summum bonum of
mortal was their temporal aggrandizement; the highest spirit
of devotion was devotion to the State. ‘‘ Let the republic re-
ceive no detriment,’’ was the national motto. Whatever in-
fluence their superstitions had, it was all wedded to the good
of the State; religion had no other calling than as an instru-
ment of civil: power; its final end was the prowess of their
arms and the patriotism and power of the nation. For this
purpose, all religious rites and ceremonies were held in the most
_ superstitious awe and veneration. It pervaded the entire mass
in all their daily walks and conversation. ‘‘ Wherever thou
turnest,’’ said the great Roman orator, ‘this superstition pur-
sues you in the forum as in the field, in the senate as in the
Campus Martius; whether thou listenest to a soothsayer, or
observest an augury, whatever happens it is the same.’”!

At the promulgation of Christianity under the sway of uni-
versal heathenism, how far had old things passed away and all
things become new ?

The rise of the star of Bethlehem was like the light of an-
other morn risen on mid-day ; it eclipsed all ancient systems of
religion, law, and refinement, in all things spiritual and divine.
The Mosaic covenant was but for the deliverance of a single
nation from temporal bondage, to establish them within the
borders of the promised land, and give them a constitution and
system of government according to the provisions of the ‘‘ Old
Testament.’’ But the gospel dispensation was something be-
yond—a new bequest to all nations, appended, as it were, in a
codicil to the previous revelations of the ‘‘ Divine will.”’

The coming of the Son of Man, then, was not tc destroy or
‘‘abolish the law, but that the law through him might be ful-
filled.’? His ‘‘ kingdom was not of this world;” his reign was
not that of a temporal prince clothed either with executive,
legislative, or judicial authority.

He came rather to be a new teacher of ‘the truth and the
way ;”’ to bring ‘‘life and immortality to light;’’ to proclaim
the great doctrine of salvation through faith, repentance, and
the forgiveness of sin. How, then, could he fulfil the object of
his mission without coming in collision with the laws and insti-

1 Cic. De Divin., xi : lxxii.

9 *

102 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

tutions of civil government? He came to establish a new reli-
gion for all nations; to ransom the world, not from temporal
captivity, but from ‘‘the gall of bitterness and the bonds of
iniquity ;” to bring the whole earth to the light and knowledge
of ‘‘the one living and true God ;” and to proclaim one com-
mon Redeemer for all mankind. He wielded a spiritual sceptre,
that shook the throne of polytheism to its centre; pagan rulers
and Jewish officers met him at the threshold of his labors, to
protect the sanctity of their synagogues, to avert the impending
sacrilege of their gods, to uphold their national rites, and de-
fend their national religion. The whole conflict of faith and
unbelief during the first centuries of the Christian era, was a
constant warfare upon the institutions of civil government. It
was a protracted siege to break down ‘‘the middle wall of par-
tition’’ between Christianity and heathenism ; to overturn the
great Bastile of idolatry, which rested its foundation upon
the basement of civil government. Christianity first drew
the proper line of distinction, in matters pertaining to religion
and government, between things temporal and things eternal ;
between what belonged ‘‘to Cesar, and what belonged to
God.’’ Hitherto, all governments had been ecclesiastico-poli-
tical, in which religion and politics mutually supported each
other, and were inseparably blended together. Christianity
first severed the bonds, and effected the dissolution of this
union of pagan and Jewish Church and State. Judaism, like
Samson, was shorn of its locks, the sons of Israel were no
longer the only chosen people, nor the priesthood of Aaron the
everlasting keepers of the oracles of truth. ‘The still small
voice of Christianity was simple as the language of a child, yet
it pleased the most fastidious taste; mournful as the voice of
grief, it sounded the highest notes of exultation; secret and
silent as the reproofs of conscience, it proclaimed its truths
upon the mountain tops. The last hope of the destitute and
dying, it sealed the bridal vow and crowned the majesty of
kings. Bright and glorious as the morning star to the be-
nighted traveller, it rolled its terrors like the dark waves of the
deluge over the path of him who wilfully mistakes his way. It
hymned the last vestiges of time, and unveiled the dark myste-
ries of eternity.

Heathenism, with all its pomp, waned before it like a sum-
mer cloud before ‘‘the voice of the morning.”? Her priests
soon sprinkled her shrines with ‘the blood of the Lamb; from
her pagan altars arose the smoke of Christian incense, and be-

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 103

neath the vaulted roofs of her temples echoed the praises of the
living God.

Christianity, in her triumphs over civil and religious despo-
tism, first emancipated the spiritual existence.of man from the
thraldom of temporal power, and elevated him into regions of
truth and freedom, in a higher and more ample field of being ;
and thus it placed spiritual and intellectual liberty and excel-
lence upon the true theory of their advancement. Art, science,
literature and learning sprang up in her footsteps; freedom
and the highest mental and spiritual excellence flourished hence-
forth under the van of her sacred influence. But Christianity
originated in a Roman province ; a Roman emperor sat in the
chair of State, and a Roman court wielded its secular and
social influence over the manners and customs of the inhabit-
ants. ‘‘It was the home of Roman luxury, of gaiety and of
joy, where royalty drowned itself in dissipation, where the lion
roared o’er the martyred Christian, and the bleeding gladiator
. died at the beck of the applauding multitude.’’ It was the
ancient land of promise; ‘‘a goodly land of fields and vine-
yards,’’? and ‘‘flowing with milk and honey.”’ It was the
garden-spot of the world, fruitful in all the products of Roman
industry. Doubtless many of those large predial estates pecu-
liar to the agricultural pursuits of the Romans, had been esta-
blished through the country, and peopled with multitudes of
Roman slaves. Of the position and treatment of these slaves
the founder of the Christian religion must have been constantly
observant. His entire biography, and the whole history of his
mission, show that he was in constant intercourse, and tho-
roughly acquainted with the trials and duties incident to a state
of bondage, or the relation of master and slave, and the accus-
tomed government and regulations of that institution. Many
of the duties and relations appertaining to it are freely inter-
mingled in his parables; most of the metaphors and other
figures by which he illustrates his doctrines and enforces his
precepts, are taken from it.

Of the many instances of the kind that occur in the New
Testament, we shall refer to but few. The first and funda-
mental doctrine of Christianity as set forth in the Gospel, is
prefigured from a state of Hebrew, Greek or Roman slavery.
It sets forth the world as ‘‘ sold under sin,’’! ‘‘into the gall
of bitterness and the bonds of iniquity ;’’? the atonement as
made to pay the price of their redemption; to emancipate

1 Rom. 7: 14. 2 Acts 8: 238.

104 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

them ‘‘from the bondage of sin and corruption into the glorious
liberty of the children of God.’’! ‘‘ Ye shall know the truth,
and the truth shall make you free.’’? ‘‘ Where the spirit of
the Lord is, there is liberty.’’* ‘‘For, brethren, ye have been
called unto liberty.”* ‘‘Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty
wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not again entan-
gled in the yoke of bondage.’’® ‘For ye are bought with a
ance.) *

These, and a thousand other similar figures and expressions
in the New Testament, that in a literal sense have relation only
to a state of slavery, show the perfect knowledge and familiarity
of the inspired penmen with the institution at the time and
place when they wrote.

But in using these figures of speech they only imitated the
style and manner of him ‘‘who spake as never man spake.”’
‘‘And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you
free.”’ “The disciple is not above his master, nor the
[ Sova0s | servant above his lord.’’® ‘‘ No servant [ovxerns, house
slave] can [Sovaeveiy] serve [or be a slave to] two masters,’’®
&e. ‘‘ How many hired servants [io6coi] of my father’s have
bread enough and to spare.’’? ‘‘ Make me as one of thy hired
servants.’’?° ‘‘And sent his servant [Sovaor, slave] at supper-
time to say to them that were bidden, Come,’’"™ &c. ‘‘ And
he sent forth his servants [Sovr0s, slaves] to call them that were
bidden to the wedding,’’” &c. ‘‘ Who is that faithful and
wise steward [6ova0s, slave] whom his master had made ruler
over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due
season??? ‘But which of you, having a servant [dovaos,
slave] ploughing in the field or feeding cattle, will say unto
him, by and by when he is come from the field, Go and sit down
to meat? And will not rather say unto him, Make ready
wherewith I may sup, and gird thyself and serve me till I have
eaten and drunken, and afterwards thou shalt eat and drink ?
Doth he thank that servant [Sovacs, slave] because he did the
things that were commanded him? I trow not.’’?* ‘For I
am aman under authority, having soldiers under me: and I

1 Rom. 8: 21. 2 John 8: 382. 31 Pet. 2: 16.
4 Gal. 5: 18. 5 Gal. 5: 1. 6 1 Cor. 6: 20.
7 John 8: 82. 8 Matt. 10: 24. John 18:16; 15: 20.
9 Luke 16: 138.

10 Luke 15: 17-21. It will be noticed that the prodigal son was not
willing to become a dovdogs or ofxerns, a bond slave, like Onesimus, but rather
a picbios, hired servant.

1 Luke 14: 17. 12 Matt. 22: 3. 138 Matt. 24: 45.

14 Luke 17 : 7-10.

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 105

say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and
he cometh; and to my servant [Sova0s, slave], Do this, and he
doeth it.’’?

These incidents show that the Great Teacher of charity, love
and good will to men, encountered these scenes of domestic
relations, in their various forms, constantly in his daily walks
and conversation; and that he cherished a social and most
affable familiarity with all the circumstances and conditions
appertaining to the same, by using all its epithets, terms and
expressions in his figures and illustrations as familiarly (if we
may be allowed the expression) as the school-boy does his
by-word.

Had he considered it the great moral and political evil that
some of his modern disciples have held it up to be, is it possible
that during his whole ministry, while he preached encourage-
ment and comfort to the masters and healed their sick, that
there should have never one word of censure or shade of reflec-

1 Matt. 8:9. ‘And he sent his servant,” &c. This figure is taken
from the Roman custom of sending out invitations by slaves to their
guests, and of dispatching them to escort and usher in or announce the
individuals as they arrived. ‘‘Piso had ordered his slaves never to speak
about anything except when asked. On one occasion he had invited
Cladius to a banquet. The guests all arrived but Claudius. Piso repeat-
edly sent his slave, who had carried the invitation, to look if he was
coming. At last he asked him whether he was sure that he invited him.
Quite sure, was the reply. Why does he not come, then? inquired Piso.
Because he declined the invitation, was the reply of the slave. And why
didn’t you tell me before? Because you did not ask me, replied the
slave.” See Essay on Greek Slavery, supra, p. 57. There were the
regular servi ab officio admissionum. Cicero, by way of complaint of the
partiality. of these servants toward their favorites, says: “ Hic eum venit,
extra ordinem yocatur; hic solus introducitur, ceteri seepe frugalissimi
homines excluduntur.” From which it would seem that visitors should
be admitted according to their arrival. Cic. Verr. iii. iv. ‘‘ Who is that
faithful steward,” &c. This figure, also, has a direct reference to a cus-
tom peculiar to Roman slavery. There was always a principal steward,
that had the control of the household affairs of the Roman family, called
the ‘‘procurator.”” See Essay on Roman Slavery, supra, p. 85. Cic. De
Or. 1, 58. Si mandandum aliquid procuratore de agricultura aut impe-
randum villico sit. Ad Attic. 14,16. See Petron. 30. Sen. Epist. 14.
Quinct. Decl. 845. (Familiam per procuratores continetis): nihil scire
potui de domesticis rebus, de quibus acerbissime afflictor, quod qui eas
dispensavit, neque adest istic, neque ubi terrarum sit scio (Cic. Ad Attic.
xi. 1); meaning that he never knew where to find the procurator or
steward. He was also called the ‘“dispensator,” which is used in the
Vulgate. Suet. Galb. 12. Mart. 5,42. Juv. 1, 91; 7, 219. The cen-
turion, too, was a Roman slaveholder; yet he ‘“‘had not found so great
faith, no, not in Israel.” So was the young man whom he commanded to
sell all that he had; ‘‘for he had great possessions.”

106 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

tion escaped from his lips. Yet search his whole history from
the moment when he stood upon the banks of Jordan, to the
time of his arrest in the garden of Gethsemane, and there is not
one breath of reproof to the kind and humane master, not one
sigh of sympathy for the condition of the slave. Is that
‘speaking after the manner of men’’ to draw figures and illus-
trations in an approving mood from the most abhorred forms *
of vice and immorality? From the instance of the servant
who waited and served his master at supper, something more
may be gathered than the fact of the familiarity of the author
with the position and duties of slaves. The figure loses all its
beauty and force, and the illustration all its effect, unless it
carries with it a distinct and positive recognition of the fact
that the servant in obeying, had done only his duty and was
entitled to no gratitude from his master.

What thus silenced the voice of Christianity upon the giant
sin, that, at that time, held in its serpent folds, sixty millions
of people within the pale of the Roman Empire? Was it the
paltry fear of being considered pragmatical in matters of civil
government? To accuse Christianity of such tergiversation,
of taking refuge behind temporal expedients to compromise the
truth, of pandering to popular error and moral obliquity, of
truckling to a high-handed sin against God (if such it was), to
my mind is derogatory to the high and holy standard of Chris-
tian rectitude. And the scripture itself spurns such a craven
apology for divine consistency. The prevalence of Christianity
brooks no such compromises, promises no such results. ‘‘ Think
not that I am come to send peace on earth, I came not to send
peace but a sword.”? He came then to pull down the strongholds
of sin, to overthrow iniquity in high places. Whether he
encountered the regal forms of the old Jewish dynasty, or the
more potent dictates of the throne of Cxsar, both felt alike the
terrible visitations of his power. Upon the mount and in the
cities, in the synagogues and by the way, he pursued the same
high and consistent course as to everything just and right, and
the same undeviating averseness to every appearance of evil.
Setting forth the illustrious example that ‘neither principalities
nor power, nor height nor depth, nor things present nor things
to come, could separate him from the love of the Father,” nor
deter him from declaring ‘‘the whole council of God,’’ he
taught his disciples ‘‘to cry aloud and spare not, to lift up thy
voice like a trumpet and show my people their transgressions,
and the house of Israel their sins.” The primeval abettors of
the Christian religion failed not ‘‘to prepare the way of the

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 107

coming of the Lord, and to make his path straight,” to
denounce vice in all its forms, whether public or private; to
‘let their light so shine that others might see their good
works ;”’ to indicate and uphold Christianity in all its moral
and religous teachings. Had they yielded a peaceful submis-
sion to the arbitrary dictates of ‘‘the powers that be,’’ an déoto,
their doctrines and tenets could never have got the first foot-
hold upon the face of the earth. There are but few instances
in which the Saviour himself was called upon to express an
opinion directly upon any of the legal questions of the day in
which he lived.

To pass over the charge which the Jews brought against him
of violating the first great commandment of the Mosaic Law,
by making himself God; we will notice some instances of an
inferior grade, and of a municipal character. The first is his
opinion upon the form of a Jewish oath: ‘‘ Again ye have
heard that it hath been said of them of old time, thou shalt not
forswear thyself, but shall perform unto the Lord thine oaths.’’
‘* But I say unto you, swear not at all;’’ “But let your com-
munications be Yea, yea, and Nay, nay,’ ‘‘ For whatsoever is
more than these cometh of evil.’?! Had the author of this
passage been clothed with the legislative authority of Moses as
a profane lawgiver, it would be construed into an absolute ab-
rogation of the prevailing form of a civil and judicial oath, and
@ positive direction as to what form should be observed.? With
the theological construction of this paragraph, as well as the
following ones which we shall notice upon this point, we have
nothing to do. But if it was to be taken as the paramount law
of the land in a civil sense, here was a direct interference with
civil government in one of the most important principles that
enter into the organization of society. Upon the responsibility
and sacred character of an oath, depends the safety of the life,
liberty and property of mankind. And the form has ever been
cherished with the most sacred awe and veneration.? But the

1 Matt. 5: 36.

2 The form of the Jewish oath was to “‘swear by the Lord God of
heaven and earth,” Gen. 14: 3; to ‘lift up the hand unto the Lord the
st God,” &. Gen. 14:22. Deut. 6:18. Jos. 2:12. I. Sam.

rah.

3 An oath among all nations has ever been held sacred, as an appeal to
some superior being by way of imprecation of divine vengeance upon the
affiant, should he not speak the truth. Among the Greeks there was
always used the expressions iorw Zevs, Oeov paprepouai, and those of a similar
import, in the taking of oaths. Soph. Trach. 899. Antiq. 184. St. Paul
Galat. 1: 20. The Greeks were as a nation deeply imbued with religious

108 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

reason of the scripture here assigned for the modification is,
that the affiant or witness is at all times under all possible
obligations to speak the truth, ‘‘and whatsoever is more than
this cometh of evil.’”’ ‘Fo call high heaven to witness, is to
take the name of the Lord in vain. The reason is predicated
upon a conflict between the civil and the moral law. And the
truest and governing principle, I apprehend, in all instances,
of the interference of Christianity with civil government will be
found to be the conflict of the latter with some well established
moral or religious principle which it could not consistently
countenance.

Again, ‘‘Ye have heard that it hath been said, an eye for
an eye and a tooth for a tooth;” ‘‘ But I say unto you, resist
not evil.’’ In this instance the penal statute of Moses upon the
subject of maiming is the subject of this remark; the penalty
founded upon the lex talionis, was inconsistent with the
heavenly injunction to love your enemies, and the cardinal
virtues of Christian morality. What could constitute a more
- direct and positive interference with the institutions of civil
government than those foregoing strictures upon the forms and
penal codes of both the Roman and Jewish law?

Again, upon the subject of divorce, there are positive
injunctions as the elements of Christian duty, that are diametri-

feeling, and paid high regard to the sanctity of an oath. They prided
themselves in being superior to the barbarians in this respect; all their
treaties of peace, vows, alliances, compacts, and agreements between
nations and individuals were ratified by an oath. (Smith’s Greek and
Rom. Antiqs. Art. Oath.) The practice of swearing, or calling upon the
gods to witness the truth asserted, was as common among the Romans as
among the Greeks. Various expressions were used, as follows: Hercle,
or Mehercle; Pol, Perpol, or Edepol, i. ¢., by Pollux; also, per Gavem
Lupidem, per Superas; per Deos Immortales, &¢. The women never
swore by Hercules, nor the men by Castor. False swearing was not
regarded by the Romans as by us; the culprit was responsible to the
deity alone. (Oper. Cit.)

‘‘Our law,” says Mr. Phillips (after giving his reasons), ‘therefore,
like most other civilized countries, requires the witness to believe that
there is a God, and a future state of rewards and punishments.”
(I. Phil. Ev. p. 21.)

‘‘The very nature of an oath, it being a‘religious and most solemn
appeal to God, as the judge of all men, presupposes that the witness
believes in his existence,” &c. Tyler on Oaths, p. 15. Granl. Ev. 1. sect.
868. The proper question to ask a witness is whether he believes in a
God, the obligations of an oath, and the future state of rewards and pun-
ishments.” Bull N. P. 297. Gilbert Ev. 129. Rose. Do. Criml. 118.
Wheel. A. C. L. 210. Jackson vs. Geidly, 18. John. 103. Cou. Rep,
431. Curtis vs. Strong, 4. Day. 51. Wakefield vs. Ross, 5. Mason,
C. E. Rep. 16. White’s case 1. Leach, 489.

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 109

cally opposed to the lax and dissolute forms of both the Roman
and Jewish law upon that subject.

‘¢ And the Pharisees came to him and asked him, Is it lawful
for a man to put away his wife?’? ‘‘ And he answered and
said unto them, What did Moses command you ?”’

‘“« And they said Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement,
and to put her away.’’

‘‘ And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness
of your hearts he wrote you this precept. ” «But from the
beginning of the creation God made them male and female.”’

‘What therefore God has joined together let not man put
asunder. ’’?

In this terse and significant reply, a volume of practical
truth is revealed. It directly endorses the great truth upon
which civil government is founded, that many things which are
wrong in themselves must be tolerated as temporary expedients
in consequence of the imperfections of human nature. ‘‘ For
the hardness of your hearts he wrote you this precept,’’ or, in
other words, such was the degenerate state of the moral and
‘social sensibilities in the Jewish commonwealth at the time of
writing the law, that such a provision was necessary. But in
the primeval state of purity and holiness in which man was
created, ‘‘in the beginning it was not so.’?’ And as I now
command you to be ‘‘holy even as I am holy,’ and to render
the existing state of society what it should be rather than what
it really is; therefore, ‘‘what God has joined together let
not man put asunder.’’

By this solemn injunction the principles of both the Roman
and the Mosaic law are directly contravened, on the ground
that they are incompatible with the high and holy standard of
Christian rectitude, under the light of the New Testament.

1 Both by the Jewish and Roman law a voluntary separation might take
place between married persons. Matt. 5: 81, 32. Deut. 24: 2.

In Greece voluntary separations were also of frequent occurrence, un-
accompanied by any formalities; the husband rejects the wife, exmepnei,
as the wife leaves the husband, drodeira. Plato, Leg. vi. p. 714; xi. p. 930.
In Rome voluntary divorces became quite common after the Punic Wars.
Val. Max. vi., out of many, selects three examples of this kind, that of
Sulpulius Gallus, who uxorem demisit, quod eam capite aputo focis
versatam cognovecat. Second, Q. Antistius Vetus, quod illum in publico
cum quadam libertina vulgari secreto loquentem videret. Third, of P.
Sempronius Saphus qui conjugem repudii noto affecit, nihil aliud quam se
ignorante ludos ausam spectare. The formula of separation either by
mutual consent, or by the desire of one of the parties, as given in the
Twelve Tables, was ‘‘ Zuas res tibi hebeto.” This applied to the men as
well as : x women. Cic. Phil. ii. 28. Plaut. Amph. iii. 2: 27.

110 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

To regulate the institution of marriage; to prescribe the forms
of civil and judicial oaths, and to punish crimes and offences,
have been, and are still, a part of the municipal laws of all na-
tions; they are founded-upon the institutions of civil govern-
ment, and constitute the most vital principles that enter into
the organization of society.

Can there be any plausible reason assigned, why He, who
taught obedience to the law, should have pointed out and inhi-
bited the foregoing inconsistencies of its conflict with Chris-
tianity, and have omitted that of its permission to purchase and
hold slaves, if that was also wrong? If the fears of contra-
vening the laws of the land would deter him in one instance,
then why not in all? If that had been his rule, his answers
upon all questions of civil law would have been as brief and
decisive as that in relation to the tribute money: ‘‘ Render to
Cesar the things that are Ceesar’s,’’ &e.

The precepts and doctrines taught by the Apostles, and the
transactions of the church from its commencement through the
Apostolic age, down to a later period, should furnish a true
index as to the estimate in which slavery was held by the author
of Christianity.

First, what are the sentiments of the confidential friend and
disciple of Jesus, on whom was bestowed the honor of laying
the first foundation-stone in the new and glorious edifice of
Christianity 2? Did he ever deviate so far from the example of
his Divine master as to cast a censure upon the relation of mas-
ter and slave ?

‘« Servants (é:xerac, domestic slaves) be subject to your mas-
ters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to
the froward,’’ &c. (oxoaos, the unjust, cruel). Here we have
not only a general precept with regard to the duties of obe-
dience of servants to their masters, but there is even the Chris-
tian duty of forbearance and self-denial enjoined upon them,
of obeying the peevish and unjust. ‘‘ For this is thankworthy,
if a man for conscience toward God endure grief and suffering,
wrongfully.’’? But why did not Peter tell them, when you are
cruelly treated, it is your duty to run away? ‘‘ We hear this,”
says a New England divine, ‘‘among us even preached from the
pulpit, at present, almost every Sabbath, and proclaimed on all
sides by journals called Christian or religious.’? It is fairly
deducible from these remarks of the Apostle, as well as from
the instance of the servant who served his master at supper,
that obedience to the kind and humane master is but a reason-
able duty.

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 11]

This epistle of Peter was addressed ‘‘to the strangers scat->
tered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bi-
thynia ;’? the principal slave countries then in the known
world. And this was the doctrine that Peter preached to all
the churches scattered through these vast ranges of country, at
that time containing millions of slaves. I submit the problem
to an ecclesiastical solution whether this epistle of Peter is not
addressed to the strangers scattered through the Southern
States of this Union as well as those countries above named,
or have there been sent some later Apostles to prescribe the
duties of the slaves of the United States ?

Let us next listen to the language of St. Paul upon this im-
portant branch of Christian duty. ‘‘ Servants (Sova0:, slaves)
be obedient to them that are your masters according to the
flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart as unto
Christ ;”’ ‘‘not with eye-service, as men-pleasers; but as the
servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart,”’ &c.
* * “« And ye masters do the same thing unto them, forbearing
threatening ; knowing that your Master also is in heaven; nei-
ther is there respect of persons with him.”’

History informs us that through the various provinces of the
Roman Empire there were frequent insurrections among the
slaves; that they were, many of them, obtained from nations
who wore the yoke with a strong feeling of restlessness and in-
subordination. Hence the frequent injunctions of Christianity
upon them to be obedient and submissive, and the frequent ap-
peals of the Apostles to them in various places to be reconciled
to this condition. The passage we have just quoted is an ap-
peal of Paul to the slaves at Ephesus, reminding them of their
Christian duties to their masters and to their God. Here the
slaves are exhorted to do their duty cheerfully and sincerely, as
from the heart, and encouraged with the hope of reward,
‘Knowing that whatsoever good thing a man doeth the same
shall he receive from the Lord, whether he be bond or free.’’
According to the doctrine of this passage, how are slaves to do
good? by a faithful and sincere obedience and service to their
masters ‘‘as unto Christ,’? &c. Is not this the only honest
and consistent inference that can be drawn from it? But the
slaves in the church at Ephesus were not the only ones to whom
Paul addressed this salutary counsel; to those at Colosse also
he addressed the same language.1. At the same time enjoining

1 Coll. 38 : 22-25, and 4:1. It may be observed that Colosse was the
place of residence of Philemon, whence Onesimus made his escape to

112 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

upon the ‘‘masters to give unto their servants that which is
just and equal’’ (or equitable, more properly). The Greek
word (vsoryza) rendered in the text equal, means, it is true,
when applicable to objects of sense, equality. But, in the
moral or metaphysical sense in which it is here used, it must
mean equity or equitable. For how could the masters be com-
manded to make their slaves equal to themselves, and the slaves
at the same time be commanded to a thorough and sincere
obedience to them with fear and trembling ?

Such a construction as the abolition theologians sometimes
put upon the English translation of this text, is absolutely pre-
posterous, a perfect felo de se. Again, Paul instructed Timo-
thy, whom he had ordained first bishop of the church of the
Ephesians, to exhort the slaves there, as follows: ‘‘ Let as
many servants (Sovacc, slaves) as are under the yoke, count their
own masters worthy of all honor, that the name of God and
his doctrine be not blasphemed.’’ ‘‘ And they that have be-
lieving masters, let them not despise them because they are
brethren ; but rather do them service, because they are faithful
and beloved partakers of the benefit. These things teach and
exhort.”’? ‘‘If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to
wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ,
and to the doctrine which is according to godliness, he is proud,
knowing nothing.’’?

What is to be understood by the phrase ‘‘ under the yoke”’
in the text? Itis a literal and correct translation from the ori-
ginal, and means nothing more than as many as are in a state
of bondage; the yoke means the yoke of bondage in contra-
distinction from a state of freedom. It is pretended by certain
abolition theologians that the servants spoken of in the New
Testament do not refer to that class of Greek, Roman, and
Hebrew slaves of whom we read in profane history, and of
whom we have spoken in our previous essays—but this point
will be considered hereafter. ‘ Count their masters worthy of
all honor,’’ &c. But how would this prevent the name and
the doctrine of God from being blasphemed, unless the obser-
vance of it was a consistent Christian duty, that would stop the
‘mouths of scoffers and blasphemers. ‘‘ And they that have
believing masters let them not despise them, because they are

Rome, where he met with Paul and was converted to the Christian reli-
gion, and sent back by Paul to his master; there were many slaves at
Colosse.

11 Tim. 6: 1-4. Ephesus was an ancient city of Ionia, originally »
province of Greece, and inhabited by Grecian colonies.

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 113

brethren,’? &c. The English translations of the Greek phrase
(uy xarappoverracav) above; scarcely conveys the full force of
the meaning of the original; which seems to me to be some-
thing more than simply to despise or slight, or to treat with
disrespect ; and the Apostle seems to enjoin upon such slaves
as have kind and Christian masters not to take advantage of
their leniency and kindness to plot against them and excite in-
surrection and disturbance, because they are brethren; but
rather serve them (7. e. be their slaves, Sovrsveraoar) ; because
they are beloved and faithful partakers of the benefit. The
doctrine has taught us plainly that, in case the master and ser-
vant are both Christians, the latter is not on this ground to
claim a release from his obligations as a slave, or to plot against
his master to obtain it; 7. e. because they are Christian bre-
thren and one in Christ, it does not follow that their civil and
social relations are changed. And such slaves are expressly
prohibited from attempting to take any advantage of such a
condition. It would seem from the language of the Apostle
that a contrary doctrine had prevailed, that a notion had sprung
up among some of the churches that slaves, on embracing the
Christian religion, became free, especially if they belonged to
unbelieving masters; a doctrine that has been entertained by
even the civil jurisprudence of nations, in more modern times,
to some extent.! Therefore, ‘‘ These things teach and exhort.’’
“‘ And if any man teach otherwise,’’ &e.

How do the modern abolition theologians and churchmen
reconcile their consciences to this passage of Scripture? They
are here plainly denounced by St. Paul as not consenting ‘‘ to
wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ,
and to the doctrine which is according to godliness.’’ ‘‘ He is
proud, knowing nothing.”

Paul enjoins the same upon Titus, whom he had ordained at
Crete. ‘‘Exhort servants [Sovacvs, slaves] to be obedient to
their own masters, and to please them well in all things not
answering again;’ ‘‘ Not purloining, but showing all good
fidelity ; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour
in all things.’’* Suppose some ardent abolition divine should
be travelling at the South, and should be called upon (as is
frequently the case) to preach to a congregation of slaves from

1 In England, it was for a long time a mooted question whether a slave,
by being baptized, was not emancipated from the power of his master,
and great care was taken in the colonies to prevent them from being bap-
tized. See Essay on Political Slavery, post, p. 298.

2 Titus 2: 9-10.

10* H

114 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

the above quoted text, what would be the character of his com-
ment, and what would be his reflections as to their Christian
duty derived from this passage of Scripture. How would he
exhort them to “adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all
things??? Would he adopt the language that Paul here dic-
tates to Titus? Could he avoid it and preach the Gospel ?
“Tf any man teach otherwise, &c. * * Heis proud, knowing
nothing.’

The island of Crete, where Titus was located when this epis-
tle was written to him, is famous in Grecian history for the
laws and institutions that prevailed over it. It was the birth-
place of Grecian slavery.’

By the language of this passage, servants are required to
‘‘ please their masters well in all things;’’ 2. e. to show a ready
and cheerful obedience (uj avrireyorras); not disputing with
their masters, or gainsaying their commands.” Here slaves are
told that they can adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour as
really and truly as their masters, or as nobles, princes, and
kings. But how can they do it? by disobedience, theft, run-
ning away, and the like ?

The same doctrine is reiterated in Paul’s Epistle to the
church at Corinth. ‘‘ Let every man abide in the same calling
wherein he was called.”’ ‘‘ Art thou called being [as to be] a
servant [Sovacs, slave], care not for it [usacro, be not concerned
about it]; but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.”’
“For he that is called in the Lord, being [or to be] a servant
[Sovr0s, slave] is the Lord’s freeman’’ [or rather freedman ] ;
likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ’s servant.?

What, then, becomes of the assertion of the abolitionists,
that slavery cuts off the slave from all hope of salvation by de-
nying him all religious privileges and the like? It seems to
me that there could not be a more perfect refutation of all the
eternal din and commotion even in abolition pulpits about the
present and future welfare of the slave. If the slaves them-
selves need not be solicitous about their condition, except to dis-
charge their duties faithfully to their masters, whence cometh
all the uproar and confusion of the abolitionists but from the

1 See Essay on Greek Slavery, supra, p. 55. Laws of Minos, by Plato
and Aristotle.

21 Cor. 7 : 20-24. Corinth was one of the chief slave-markets of Greece
and afterwards of Rome, where thousands were bought and sold daily.
See Essay on Greek and Roman Slavery, supra, p. 55. Timeus as-
serts that Corinth had, in early times, before Athens had reached her

supremacy, 460,000 slaves. They were called choenix measures, from a
Greek measure which they used.

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 115

father of lies? Verily, ‘‘a disciple is not above his master.’
‘But if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.”” This lan-
guage shows beyond dispute to what condition of servants
these remarks are addressed ; if the servant was not in bondage,
such language would be inapplicable to his condition ; he could
not be said to be made free if he was already so. ‘‘ Use 2 ra-
ther ;’? use what? There has been much controversy among
commentators about the true meaning of this passage. The
original is, daw ec xat Sivacae érevOepos yevecBar, wanrov ypyoat, lite-
rally, ‘‘ But even if you are able to become free, rather desire.”
It will be seen by the Greek scholar that some noun must be
supplied as the object of the verb xzpjoor. The question is,
what noun it shall be; or, in other words, what does the 7 in
_ the English relate to, The late Moses Stewart, of Andover
Theological Seminary, in remarking upon this passage, used
the following language: ‘‘ One and all, the native Greek com-
mentators in the early ages, and many expositors in modern
times, say that the Greek word to be supplied is dovaeca, slavery
or bondage. The reason which they give for it is, that this is
the only construction which can support the doctrine which the
Apostle is aiming to establish, viz.: Let every man abide in
‘statu quo.” Kven De Wette (who, for his high liberty notions,
was banished from Germany), in his commentary on the pas-
sage, seems plainly to accede to the force of this reasoning, and
with him many others have agreed. No man can look at the
simple continuity of logic in the passage without feeling that
there is force in the appeal. But still I am not satisfied with
this exegesis. We have full surely another and different noun
offered by the context, which we may supply. If thou canst
become éazigepos (free), use «revOepre (freedom), rather; 7. e. ra-
ther than be a slave. This is certainly the most facile philo-
logy; although plainly not so congruous, at first sight, with
the Apostle’s sentiment before and after this verse.

‘* Let every one abide in the calling wherewith he hath been
called ;’’ this principle of Christian duty also dictated to Paul
the course to pursue in the case of Onesimus; he was by the
custom and laws of the times and place where he lived, a bond
slave, and justly owed his service to his master, Philemon, at
Colosse. Paul saw nothing incompatible with the Christian
duties of either the master or the slave, in the legal relation
that existed between them. He therefore commanded him to
return and be obedient to him who was his ‘‘ master according
to the flesh ;” 7. e., according to usages, customs, and laws of
the world ; and to serve him “‘ with fear and trembling ;”’ @. e.,

116 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. -

with a proper sense of reverence and respect for his position
over him, ‘‘according to the flesh,’’ or the ways of the world;
“and to please him well in all things, not answering again ;”’
‘(not with eye-service, as men-pleasers,” ‘‘but doing the will
of God from the heart ;’’ ‘‘ that he might thus adorn the doc-
trine of God our Saviour in all things.”

It has been contended by abolition theologians, among whom
is Dr. Barnes, in his Notes on the Gospels, that this interference
of Paul’s to restore the servant Onesimus to his owner, illus-
trates nothing with regard to his views and feelings upon the
subject of the slavery of that age. It would appear from the
Scripture account of this affair, that Onesimus had been a
refractory and unprofitable slave of his master at Colosse ; that
he had then run away from him, and in his wanderings met
with Paul at Rome, by whom he was converted to Christianity.

By this conversion Paul seemed to have faith that he had now
become a faithful, obedient and profitable servant; ‘‘ but now
profitable to thee and to me.’’ ‘‘ Whom I would have retained
with me,’’ &c. ‘‘ But without thy mind [yvauys, consent] I do
nothing.’’ Evidently recognising the right of the master to
control the person of the slave, and his own Christian duty not
to detain him contrary to the will of his master, but to restore
him to his lawful owner. ‘‘ For perhaps he therefore departed
for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever.” By
which language the apostle intimates that it might be a provi-
dential escape that Onesimus had thereby become a convert to
the Christian faith, and would now return and be a faithful and
profitable servant for life. ‘Not now as a servant, but above
a servant [dovaos, slave], a brother, &c. This passage, it is con-
ceded by all the most approved commentators, has reference
only to religious privileges and the spiritual relation between
them as a Christian brother, or brother in the church whom
Paul had begotten in his bonds. The doctrine is here clearly
taught: — 1st. That all Christians are equal and on a level in
that respect; Onesimus, the slave, on becoming a Christian is
the apostle’s son, and Philemon’sbrother. 2d. That Christianity
makes no alteration in men’s political status: ‘‘ Let every one
abide in the calling wherewith he hath been called,” &c.
Onesimus,. the slave, did not become free by embracing Chris-
tianity, but rather remained in that condition; ‘‘that thou
shouldest receive him forever.’? 3d. That slaves should not be
taken and detained from their masters without their consent.?

1§. Macknight on the Epistles, pp. 496-499, N. Y. ed. 1850.

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 117

And 4th. That the value of slaves is greatly enhanced by their
being converted to the Christian religion.

But these abolition theologians tell us that there is no evidence
that Onesimus was a bond slave, owned and held to service by
his master.' What then could have induced Paul to send him
back to Philemon, and to write this most touching and sympa-
thetic appeal to his compassion to forgive him the offence, and
not inflict upon him that terrible punishment which the custom
and laws of that time and place authorised him to do. And
why did Onesimus feel it his duty, after his conversion, to return
to and serve his master, if-he did not belong to him? ‘If he
owe thee anything,” &c.; it is contended that this language,
applied to Onesimus, would indicate a capacity for business
_transactions on his own account, and a higher rank than that
of a bond slave. But this may refer to the loss of his services
by running away ; or it may relate to some transactions relative
to the peculium or peculiar property of the slave.’

It will be noticed that the same word is used in the original
to denote the class of persons to which Onesimus belonged, as
is used by other writers to denote those that worked in chains
in the mines of Laurion. In verse sixteenth, the word Sovaocs
(slave) is used twice to denote the character of Onesimus ;
and in the postscript at the close of the epistle, the word
éixerns (family slave) is used for the same purpose. The
meaning of these words we shall explain more fully in the
sequel : we simply remark here that Onesimus must have been
a purchased slave, as distinguished from one born in his
master’s family or household, as such were called dcxorpup, to
distinguish them from the oxerys; or ordinary house slave.®
Because the subject of this epistle was a person apparently
considered of so much consequence, and was so much in the
favor of Paul, many are disposed to believe that he could not

1 See Barnes’ Notes on this Epistle.

2 Colosse was an ancient city of Phrygia, a Grecian province then
subject to Roman power; either by the slave laws of Greece or Rome the
slave had a right to his peculium, property acquired independent of his
duty to his master. In some instances the Roman slaves attained to
great wealth, and had many slaves under them termed vicarii. See Essay
on Roman Slavery, sup. p. 69. In relation to this they might transact
business, contract, owe, and have debts due to them. The same is true
of the slaves of the present day, between whom and their masters, in
many instances, regular book accounts are kept.

5 'Oixorpip, dovdos dixoyevns. Lucidas. The hoiketrips is a slave born in
the house or family; ‘‘‘Oixorpip cat dlxerns diagepei,” &c., or the one means
a slave born in the family, and the other a purchased slave.

118 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

have been a poor, oppressed, and down-trodden slave. But it
must be remembered that there were in that age many slaves of
high intellectual and literary attainment, many who even prac-
tised the learned professions, over whom their masters held the
absolute ownership, even to the power of life and death. Thus
it is said that Plato and Diogenes were once sold into slavery,
as the father of Virginia is said to have tasted the sweets of
Turkish bondage. Paul pleaded for his Christian brother with
all the earnestness and benevolent feelings that could avail to .
reach the sympathies of the human heart, to save him from that
awful day of retribution that awaited him on his return. The
example is often imitated by humane and benevolent persons
of the present day. Philemon was a man of great wealth, and
an officer of high rank in the church ; he had, as was customary
in that age, a numerous household of slaves: to suffer one to
escape from him in that manner with impunity would have a
deleterious influence upon the others.

The stern demands of justice must therefore be visited upon
him. It was doubtless for this cause that Paul reasoned his
case the more earnestly that, for Christianity’s and mercy’s
sake, he might in this instance avert the relentless rigors of
household discipline. How Onesimus fared on his return, we
are nowhere informed; but doubtless in accordance with the
anticipations of Paul, he was kindly received by his injured
master, who even did more for him than his illustrious bene-
factors could ask. It has been contended that Paul in this
noble instance of Christian benevolence was actuated by a
paltry fear of the civil authorities ; that to have detained Ones-
imus and harbored him from his master, would have subjected
him to civil punishment. And thus they make Paul, as they
would the Saviour, a dupe to moral obliquity through fear of
offending Ceesar.

If Paul sought to avoid interfering with civil government,
how dare he accuse the Romans of ‘‘ turning the truth of God
into a lie; and worshipping the creature more than the Cre-
ator’? This was laying the axe at the root of the tree, and
sapping the very foundations of civil government.

The damsel that followed Paul and Silas from Thyatira was
the slave of a Roman citizen, and brought her master great
gain by her power of divination; ‘‘ but Paul being grieved,
commanded the unclean spirit to come out of her.”’? Here
was an instance not only of a direct and positive interference

1 See Essay on Roman Slavery, sup. p. 69. 2 Acts 16: 18,

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 119

with the civil institutions, but a great damage, as they deemed
it, to private property ; and for which the Apostle was arrested
and thrown into prison. The act of Paul was, in effect, a con-
demnation of the custom or institution of soothsaying, which
was established by law. For this the people complained that
‘«these men do greatly trouble our city, and teach customs that
are not LAWFUL FOR US TO OBSERVE, BEING Romans.’’!

Now, why did Paul interfere with the institutions of civil
government, in this instance, and teach customs that were not
lawful for Romans to observe, rather than in the case of One-
simus? The answer of every honest mind is at hand; because
the custom of divination was incompatible with the doctrines
of the Christian religion, while the simple relation of master
and slave was not.

A similar charge was brought against him by Demetrius the
silversmith, who made silver for the shrine of Diana at Ephe-
sus. He alleged that Paul had not only injured his business by
turning away many from the worship of Diana (by saying that
“there be no gods that are made with hands’’), but that he
had “caused the temple of the great goddess to be despised,
which all Asia worshipped.’? And the assembly, when they
heard this, being enraged, and considering their civil institutions
in danger, to uphold them, and to exhibit and encourage un-
wavering devotion to the State, in their outbursts of popular
enthusiasm, ‘‘cry out, Great is Diana of the Ephesians, for the
space of about two hours.’’?

When Paul came to Athens, and began to dispute with the
Epicureans and the Stoics about their idolatry, why did they
take and bring him to the court of the Areopagus? Because,
as they say, he was a setter forth of strange gods, a teacher of
a religion which it was not lawful for them, being Athenians, to
embrace; and they wished to have it determined by the proper
tribunal whether such a heresy could be tolerated by the State.®
The charge against him at Athens, as at Ephesus, was that of
corrupting the national religion, of setting forth strange gods ;

1 Romans were compelled by law, as we have seen, to adhere to, uphold
and defend their national religion. Acts 16: 21.

2 Acts 20: 34. A national exclamation, similar in import to God save
the Queen! Vive le Empereur! or Hail Columbia!

* The court of the Areopagus had special jurisdiction of all questions
relative to the national religion, as connected with the worship of the
gods; it was for this reason that Paul was commanded to explain his doc-
trines before this tribunal, that the same might be approved or con-
demned by the legitimate authority. See Smith’s Greek and Roman
Antiquities, N. Y. ed. 1854, p. 89, and authorities there cited.

120 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

the same charge for which Socrates was condemned to death.
But how did the Apostle meet the charge before this august
tribunal? Did he wink at the sin of idolatry, or smooth over
its sinful customs, for fear of being pragmatical in matters of
civil government? So far from it, he denounced them all, as
he did the idolatry of the Romans, in the boldest and most
unmeasured terms. ‘‘Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all
things ye are too superstitious,” &c. At the same time that
the Apostle uttered this denunciation against the national reli-
gion of Greece, there were from one hundred and fifty to two
hundred thousand slaves in Athens and the harbors.’ Had
this been also a national sin in the estimation of the Apostle,
why should he have passed it over in silence while denouncing
the sin of idolatry ?- If the dread of offending the civil autho-
rities would not deter him in one instance, then why in the
other? The answer here, again, to every unprejudiced mind,
must be obvious; the national religion of Greece and Rome
was wholly incompatible with the doctrines of the Christian
religion, and an insurmountable obstacle to the spread of the
Gospel, while no such objection existed to the relation of mas-
ter and servant.

Christianity might do its complete work in all its highest
offices of the regeneration and sanctification of the world, and
still leave all to ‘‘ abide in the calling wherewith he had been
called ;’’ still leave the civil relation of master and slave un-
changed. Its precepts of charity, love, and good will, in their
highest and holiest sense of justice, equity, and Christian recti-
tude, are designed to perfect the nature of both master and
slave, to secure the discharge of their reciprocal duties towards
one another, rather than to dissolve the relation. that exists
between them. It has exhibited this truth in its history in a
striking light, from the first foundation of the Church. It
early commenced the work of reforming the institution, by ame-
liorating the asperity of its ancient rigors.

One of the earliest apostolical canons is in the following
words: ‘Servi in clerum non promveantur citra dominorum
voluntate ; hoc ipsum operatur redhibitionem. Si quando vero
servus quoque gradu ecclesiastico dignus videatur, qualis noster
Onesimus apparuit, et domini concenserint, manties emise-
rint, et domo sua obligaverint efficitor.’’?

In the Kpistle of Ignatius to Polycarp is the following:

1 Boeck., Public Economy of Athens, vol. 1, p. 58. See Essay on

Greek Slavery, supra, p. 61. -
2 See Canons of the Apustles, No. Ixxxi.

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 12]

‘‘Overlook not the men and the maid-servants; neither let
them be puffed up; but rather let them be the more subject to
the glory of God, that they may obtain from Him a better
liberation. Let them not desire to be set free at public cost,
that they be not slaves to their own lusts.’’? In the General
Epistle of Barnabas we read as follows: ‘Thou shalt not be
bitter in thy commands towards any of thy servants that trust
in God, lest thou chance not to fear him who is over both; be-
cause he came not to call any with respect of persons, but
whomsoever the spirit prepared.’’? Though these passages all
recognise the right of property, and the right of control of the
master over his servant, yet they manifest a strong ete fas b in
behalf of the slaves.

After the establishment of Christianity under Constantine,
slaves partook of all the ordinances of religion ; and their birth
or condition was no impediment, with the consent of their mas-
ters, to their rising to the highest dignities of the priesthood.
At first it was required that a slave should be enfranchised
before ordination; but Justinian declared the simple consent
of the master to be sufficient. Ifa slave had been ordained
without his master’s knowledge, the latter might demand him
within a year, and the slave fall back into his master’s power.
If a slave, after ordination with his master’s consent, chose to
renounce the ecclesiastical state and return to a secular life, he
was given back as a slave to his master. It was common for
the patrons of churches, till the fifth century, to encourage their
slaves to become clergymen, that they, instead of strangers,
might receive their benefices. Ifa Christian slave fell into the
hands of a heathen master, the latter was prohibited from inter-
fering with his spiritual concerns. Judaism was looked upon
with such horror, that any Christian was entitled to force a
Jewish master to sell him a Christian slave. The laws of the
Christian emperors all tended to the amelioration of the con-
dition of the slaves. Antonius empowered the judge who
should be satisfied about a slave’s complaint of ill-treatment,
to force the master to sell him to another owner. The master’s
power of life and death over his slave was first sought to be
legally abolished by Adrian and Antonius Pius. Constantine
placed the wilful murder of a slave on a level with that of a
freeman; and expressly included the case of a slave who died
under punishment, unless it was inflicted with the usual instru-
ments of correction. Adrian suppressed the Roman ergastula

1 Epistle of Ignatius of Antioch to Polycarp, Smyrna, ch. 2.
2 Epistle of Barnabas, chap. xiy., ver. 15.

!

123 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

or workhouse for the confinement of slaves. Several humane
laws were enacted by Constantine in relation to the separation
of families. One directs that property shall be so divided,
‘‘nt integra apud possessorem unumquemque servorum agnatio
permaneat.’’ Another law says: ‘‘ut integra apud successo-
rem unumquemque servorum, vel calanorum ad scriptitize con-
ditionis, seu inquilinorum proximorum agnatio, vel adfinitas
permaneat.’’

A Christian church afforded very great safety from the wrath
of unmerciful owners; for when a slave took refuge there, it
became the duty of the ecclesiastics to intercede for him with
his master, as Paul did for Onesimus with his master Phile-
mon, and if his master refused to pardon him, they were bound
not to give him up, but to let him live within the precincts of
the sanctuary till he chose to depart, or till his master granted
him forgiveness.1 But at the same time it was enacted by the
Ecclesiastical Council at Nice, in the year 325, when Constan-
tine was emperor, ‘‘Si quis docet servum, pietatis pretextu,
dominum contemnere, et a ministerio recedere, et non cum
benevolentia et omni honore domino suo inservere, Anathema
sit.’’ ‘If any one, under pretence of piety, teaches a slave to
despise his master and to withdraw from his service, and not to
serve him with all good will and respect, Let him be Anathe-
ma.’?? In accordance with the example and the teachings of
the Apostle Paul, there are several early canons of the Church
upon that subject. As they are extremely lengthy, we shall
submit the translation that illustrates the spirit of them all.
It is a papal bull from Pope Gregory to the Pretor Sesquis.

“Concerning Peter, the Servant who ran away.

‘‘Our son Occilianus, a highly respectable man, a tribune
of the city of Otranto, brought with him to our cousin, as is
known, when he was coming to us, a boy named Peter, a baker,
who belonged to that cousin. We have now learned that he
has run away and returned to your country. Let then it be

1 De servis vero, qui pro qualibet culp& ad ecclesize septa confugerint,
&e., Can. xxii., Fifth Council of Orleans. An ancient method of claiming
the benefit of clergy, and perhaps the origin of the custom in the common
law of England.

2 Can. xlvii., Third Council of Paris. This is strictly according to the
teachings of Paul. ‘‘Let them that have believing masters not plot
against them;” ‘‘These things teach and exhort, and whosoever shall
teach otherwise,” &c.

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 123

your care, experienced sir, before he shall be able to get back
to Otranto, to direct, as quickly as you can, a writing to the
bishop of Otranto, or to the aforesaid tribune himself, or to
any one else whom you know that you can depute, to have a
good care for the wife and children of the said slave, and to be
very careful respecting himself, that as soon as he shall arrive
he may be detained, and sent with everything that belongs to
him by all means hither, embarking them on board a ship in
the care of some faithful person.

‘‘You, experienced sir, will therefore exert yourself to do
this with all attention and effect, so as not to displease us with
a delay, or neglect, which we should not desire.’’!

It was enacted early after the conversion of Constantine that
no one who was not a Christian should hold a Christian slave,
upon the principle of the Jewish law contained in Lev.
xxv : 47, 48.?

This was first adopted as a principle of the civil or municipal
law, but was soon after incorporated into the body of the canon
law. Canon xxx. of the Fourth Council of Orleans, reads as
follows, in the translation: ‘‘ Whereas it has been decreed by
former canons, respecting the Christian slaves that are under
the Jews, that if they should fly to the church, or even to any
Christians, and demand their redemption, and be unwilling to
serve the Jews, they should be freed from their owners upon a
fair price being assessed by the faithful and tendered to them ;
we therefore enact that this so just a regulation shall be
observed by all Catholics.”’

Throughout the whole history of the transactions of the
Church, from its first formation, there will be found the most
scrupulous observance of the right of property in the master
to the service and the control of the person of the slave. In
all instances of civil and ecclesiastical legislation:to ameliorate
his condition, the great principle laid down by Paul and the

1 Grecorius Sergio Derensori. De Petro puero fuga lapso.

Filius noster vir magnificus Occilianus, tribunus Hydruntine Civitatis,
&e. Canons of the Church, Lib. vii. indic. ii. epist. 107.

2 Civil Code, Lib. i. Tib. 10. Judeeus servum Christianum nec compa-
rare debebit, ne largitatis aut alio quocunque titulo consequetur.” Again,
‘‘non solum mancipii damno mulctetur, verum etiam capitali sententia
punietur.” Not only shall he be mulcted by the loss of the slave, but he
shall be punished by a capital sentence. Again, ‘‘Graecus, seu paganus,
et Judzus, et Samaritanus, et alius hereticus, id est, non existens ortho-
doxus, non potest Christianum mancipium habere.” A Greek or pagan,
a Jew, a Samaritan, and any heretic that is not orthodox, cannot hold a
Christian slave.

194 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Apostles that Christianity did not change the civil relations
of master and slave, but left each to ‘‘abide in the calling
wherewith he had been called,’’ was never lost sight of. Hven
the blaspheming Jew could not be deprived of his property in
a Christian slave without an adequate compensation. Is the
Church now more holy than in the pristine days of the
Apostles ??

History of the word Slave, in Scripture use.

But it is stated that the word slave does not occur in the
Bible. This, however, is a mistake with reference to King
James’ Translation of the New Testament. In that version
of the Revelation of St. John, the learned commissioners
rendered the last clause of the 13th verse of the 18th chapter,
‘‘and the slaves and the souls of men.’? The writer of this
passage was enumerating the several articles of merchandize
usually bought and sold at Babylon; he mentions the mer-
chandize ‘‘of beasts, and sheep, and horses, and chariots, and
slaves, and souls of men.’’? Supplying the Greek word yopoy
where it is properly understood, the original reads thus, zac
yomoy cauatav, xa Luxos avOpaxay, literally, and the merchandize
of the bodies and the souls of men. There is no conceivable
reason why the making merchandize of the bodies and souls of
men at ancient Babylon, should render them slaves, more than at
Jerusalem, or Tyre, Sidon, Corinth, Delos, Athens, Rome, or
any one of the slave markets of the Roman Empire. Doubtless
the permission given to the Jews by the statutes of Moses to
‘‘buy their bondmen and bondmaids of the heathen round about
them,” included the market at Babylon as well as others; yet
the learned seventy of the Alexandrine school of critics, in
translating that statute into Greek, rendered the bondmen and
bondmaids so to be purchased, by Sovaovs xav dSovaas,” meaning

1 Upon the subject of slavery in the New Testament, we have consulted
most of the current commentators of the day. Upon the subject of
Canon Law and Civil Law, upon this subject during the early centuries
of the Christian Era, we have examined the different codes of the Roman
law, including the Theodosian and Justinian; also the Digest and Novles,
which properly constitute a part of the jurisprudence of Louisiana.
Also several volumes of the Canon Law, Bishop England’s Letters,
Bower’s Lives of: the Popes, Lingard, Antiquities of Italy, Muratori,
Gihon, and others. There may also be found a very well selected and
convenient compilation of these transactions of the Church, in the work
of John Fletcher. Studies on Slavery, Study iv. p. 246, 1852, Natchez ed.

2 Sept. Liv. 25: 44. In Ezek. 27: 13, this same Oriental slave trade is
alluded to.

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 125

- Slaves bought with money; the same words which the English
translators have rendered male and female, or maid, servants,
universally throughout the Scriptures. So also in the family
of Abraham those slaves bought with his money are properly
called Sovrz01.' In Joshua and in Judges the same word is used
in the Greek ;? meaning, in the former, those slaves ‘‘cursed to
be hewers of wood and drawers of water; and in the latter
the slaves of Gideon, which were either captives or ‘‘ bought
with his money.’’ In other instances this word and a variety
of its derivations are used in the Septuagint in a similar sense.
If then the Greek word 6ov0;’, in its primitive and literal signi-
fication means what we understand by the word slave, a person
that belongs to another in a certain sense, as a piece of pro-
perty or merchandize, as defined by Aristotle and used by all
the Greek authors, why did the learned translators of King
James’ version of the Bible universally render that word by
the English word servant, and yet use the term slave in the
passage in Revelation? or to put the question in a different
form, why does not the word slave occur more frequently in the
present English version of the Bible?

This question we have partially promised to attempt to an-
swer, and we submit the following as our only conceivable rea-
son. ‘The history of the English word slave, and the manner
in which it came into legitimate use, furnishes the only expla-
nation of the mystery. The legitimate use of this word in the
English must be of comparatively modern date. It first ori-
ginated with the French in the eighth or ninth century, and
was used as a term of reproach to degrade the miserable race
of Sclavonian captives in the eyes of their Norman lords.* It
is a well-known fact, in the history of the English tongue, that
the strength, purity, and beauty of the Anglo-Saxon dialect
never became corrupted by the use of the Norman French
idioms, words, and phrases, till after the intermingling of the
French and English people subsequent to the Norman conquest,
in the year 1066. This word, then, which was originally ap-

1Gen. 17: 12, 27. Exod. 12: 44.

2 Josh. 9: 28. Judges 6:27. Sept.

% From the Euxine to the Adriatic, in the condition of captives, sub-
jects, or allies, the Sclavonians overspread the land, and the national ap-
pellation of ‘‘s/aves” has been degraded by chance or malice from the
signification of what is glorious to that of servitude.

‘« This conversion,” he says, ‘‘seems to have arisen with the French in
the eighth century, where the princes and bishops were rich in Sclavo-
nian captives, from whence the word extended to gradual use in all the
modern languages.” Gib. Dee. and F. R. E., vol. 4, p. 88.

11*

126 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

plied to the Sclavonian captives as a stigma in terms of re-
proach, a kind of nickname invented, as Gibbon says, by acci-
dent or malice, and used only in a bad sense, the same as Helot
was applied to Spartan slaves, would, like the Norman manners
and customs, be reluctantly received, and be a long time in
working its way into legitimate use by the English. It would
not, therefore, be readily adopted into the high and holy stand-
ard of Scripture phraseology. But the Anglo-Saxons read
the Bible in their own tongue long before the days of Alfred.
They had the versions of Adhelm Acbert, of Bede, and of
Alfred himself. In 1319, Richard translated portions of
the Bible. Soon after came the translations of the New Tes-
tament by John Wickliff, copies of which are still extant.
Next came Tyndal’s Bible, revised by Mathews, 1537, known
as the Bishop’s Bible. The Bible, however, as such, was re-
organized and read only in the Latin till a comparatively short
time previous to the publication of the royal version of King
James. The vulgate and the Bishop’s Bible had been by a
royal order a short time previously submitted to the option of
the clergy and the people, and to lay side by side in the churches
and monasteries. A halo of superstitious veneration had so
enshrined this Latin text of St. Jerome in the. heads and me-
mories of the church at that day, that it is with reluctance given
up by the priests even at. the present time. To suit the whim-
sical notions of the age, great deference would naturally be paid
to the Latin Bible, and great care taken in all previous and
subsequent versions to preserve all the names and terms there
with as little alteration as possible. This, it appears, had been
partially done to suit the fantastical notions of the laymen and
the clergy in the version known as the Bishop’s Bible. There-
fore, King James enjoined upon the commissioners, which he
held appointed to prepare the present English version of. the
Bible, the following instructions: Ist. The Bible, commonly
read in the churches, known as the Bishop’s Bible, should be
altered as little as possible. 2d. All the old and venerable
Scripture names to be kept sacred according to all Scripture
usage. 38d. All ecclesiastical words to be retained. 4th.
When any word had several significations, that which had been
most commonly used by the most celebrated. Christian Fathers
should be preferred... It would have been impossible for the
modern word slave to have been used in any versions of the
Scriptures during the Danish or Anglo-Saxon period of the

1 Robinson’s Calmet, Art. Bible, p. 182.

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. LOY

English tongue. It is a Norman French word, and slavery
found its way into the English as the manners and customs of
that people did into England. This word, then, converted,
through malice by the Normans, from what is illustrious and
noble to what is base, to degrade their captives in the eyes of
freemen, and used only in a bad sense, could not have partaken
of that sacred and venerable character esSential to a Scripture
term, or as are used by the most celebrated and venerable Fa-
thers. And under these royal instructions the translators could
not have so innovated upon the ancient Scripture liturgy as to
substitute the word slave for that of servant; a word of poetical
endearment, and used only in a good sense; a word, too, idem
sonans, and of such easy transition from the word servus or ser-
vans ; consequently, we find, as we should expect, that the word
slave is, by the translators of that day, used in but one passage,
and that, too, with reference to those carried into captivity and
sold in Babylon, the mother of harlots. But, in the use of the
word servant, the translators have universally qualified it with
some epithet, when it means anything in its literal sense but what
we now understand by the word slave. The Greek words dovaos
and dxsens are the words most frequently used in the New Tes-
tament and in Greek authors, as the general terms for servants
or slaves. Other terms are used to denote specific classes, or
for particular reasons, all of which, for the reasons which are
assigned above, the translators of King James have rendered
servant. But that they mean in their literal signification what
we mean by the word slave, we will cite a few instances of their
use by numerous authors in the mass of Greek literature, now
extant, to prove. In addition to those already cited in our
Essay on Greek Slavery, we quote the following for this pur-
pose alone :—

We commence with the Iliad. In book iii., line 409, dovdy
is translated by Pope, ‘‘slave.’’ In book vi., line 464, ayvvetv
dovitoy jvap is translated ‘‘to ward off the day of slavery.’’
In Odyss. xiv. 339, dovdtov xuap spo, in regard to which, Pope
says: ‘‘ With ready hands they rush to seize the slave.’’

Eurip. Troad. 678: vavc0odpat o eyw mpos EE 2dad', atyparw-
tos ets dovioy Cvyov. ‘IT go by sea’ a prisoner of war to the
yoke of slavery.’’

Bacch. 1028: @¢ ce stevaEw, dovios Gy pev adi’ bpws xonorois
doviois supgopa ta deoxotwy. ‘‘ How I lament this, though a
slave; yet slaves, if faithful, mourn the ruin of their masters.’’

Helen. 283: xa gihwy tytwpdn, Oobd¢n xabeotnx ove chevdepuwy
azo. ta BapBapwy yap dovio navta mdjy Eds. ‘* Of friends de-

128 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

prived, I, from the free who draw my generous blood, am made
a slave; for, among barbarians, all are slaves save one. ”’

In this instance, as in many others which we shall notice, the
word Jdovios is used in contrast with the word ehevOepos, and can
mean nothing but a person in a state of bondage.

Idem, 1630: adda deoxotady xparyosis, dovdos ody, ‘‘ Slave as
thou art, wilt thou control thy master ?”’

Idem, 1640: zpo dsaxot@y tolst yevatotot dovhots evxdegatatoy
davetv. ‘* To home-born slaves it is glory to die for their mas-
ters.??
Jan., 855: todvopa ta © alka nayta toy eevOepwy ovdets xaxtwy
Govihos, batts ecOhog }. ‘It is the name; in all else than ane
free, the slave is nothing worse, if he be virtuous. ’’

Methu., line 54: ypnotots Siulote Evpgopa tadecxotay xax@s
MITVOVTO. Sif gpevayv avOantetaf. ‘* Slaves who are faithful, suffer
in the afflictions of their master.’

Hecub. line 234: Ei & Zari toig Sovaois tovg edevbepous, &e.
‘«But to many slaves it is permitted to ask of the free,”” &c.

Idem, line 291: vopos © & opty trols 7 ehevOepots toos xat ois
dobhots aivatos xetrat nept ‘*' The laws of blood are equal to us
slaves, and to you our freemen (or masters).’’

Orestes, line 1522: Avdbisos wy gofet tov Atdny, dg o anadda&st
xax@v. Slave: Mas dup, xav dovhos 7 tis, ndetal to yds pdr.
Orest.: ‘‘Fears a slave death, the end of all his ills ?”? Slave:
‘To slave or free, sweet is the light of heaven.”

Thucydides, lib. i. chap. 34: 06 yap emt t® Sovhol add ext
TO Opots tots retropevots eltvat exneuxovtat, ‘‘ They are not sent
out to be slaves, but to be the equals of those who remain
behind. ’’

Chap. 55: Kai téy Kepxvpatdy dxtaxoctovs pév of noav dSoviot
arndovto, ‘Hight hundred of the Carcyrean prisoners, who
were slaves, they sold at public sale. ’’

Lib. ii. chap. 63: Mndé vopicat xepf evos povov, dovietag art?
chevepias. ‘Think not you have only one point at stake, the
alternative of slavery or freedom.”?

Idem, chap. 78: Kat adhog ovdsis Ay &v th tetyet, obte dodios,
odte elevOepoe. ‘Nor was there any other portion within the
wall, either slave or free.”’

Chap. 118, lib. iv: Myre erevdepov, pate dovdov. “ Whether
they be freemen or invest!

Lib. 3, chap. 63: Youg péev xatadoviovpevoug thy ’EAdda, tous
d¢ éhevOepodvtas. ‘The Athenians have truly enslaved your
country, and the others would regain its freedom.”’

Xenophon Mem. lib. i. chap. 8, § 11: 2 tAjuov, Egy &

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 129

Lwxparns, xat tt av ofet mabely xaddy gilnoas 3; ap odz% ay avtiza paka
dovos pcv elval avr ehevepov. ‘‘ Miserum te, ait Socrates, quid
eventurum tibi existimas, si formosum osculeris? anon subito
pro libero servus esses ?’’ (Leuncluvius. )

Idem, chap. 5, § 3: Aovdw & dxpartel: exttpedatuey dv 7 Booxy-
pata} tapisia 7 ey@y extotaciay, ‘* Et servo intemperanti num
vel pecora, vel penum, ut operi preesset, committeremus ?”’
(Leunc. )

Idem, chap. 6, §,9: Aakerov 02 xat Oycavta xateyetv, dorzep
doviov. ‘‘Neque minus difficile vinctum retinere tanquam
servum.’’ (Leunc. )

Idem, chap. 7, § 3 and 4: °“Oré v7 Ai, &on, 6 pev dovdove
tpeger, ey@ O¢ elsvOepovs. Kat motepov, Egy, tous mapd coil ehev-
Oepovs otet Bedtioug elvat 4 tovg mapa Kepdpwyt doviovs. ‘‘ By
Jupiter, said | Aristarchus], he rears up slaves, and I only
freemen. Well, then, said [Socrates], which do you prefer,
your freemen or Ceramon’s slaves.”’

Lib. iii. chap. 12, § 2: Iodhoé dé Ot adto toute Edyte¢ adto-
xovtat, xat Gddvtes 7tot dovdevovot tdy Aotzoy Boy, cay ovtTw Thywor
thy yakexwytatyy Oovistay. ‘Many endure the most burdensome
slavery, produced by their having been taken captives in war,
and, as captives, slaves themselves through the remainder of
their lives.’’

Xenoph. Cyrop. lib. iii. cap. 1, § 2: Kat ydép éorw, egy o
Kodpos, xaddy pdzecbat, onws py xoté tis dovdog pedhoe yevyocobat
jy 08 On zolepw xpatyaberc, 7 xat adhov tivd tporoy dovlwOsts, ext-
ysip@y tis gawntat tovs Osonotas anootepety eavtov, TOUTOY oD,
mpwros etre, Totepov Ws ayaloy avOpa xat xakd TpattoOvTaA Tias 7] WS
ddtxodvta, % AaBns, xorafets; xolafw, gyn. ‘It is indeed noble,
said Cyrus, to fight, in order not to be made a slave! But if
a man be conquered in war, or by other means reduced to
slavery, and be found attempting to throw off his master, do
you yourself first pronounce whether you reward or honor such
a one as an honest man, and as one that does noble things, or,
if you take him, do you punish him as one that acts unjustly ?
I punish him, said he.’’

Ibid: Hy 7, v4 At, favte cvovoidev ehevdepiag pév exiOvpnoas
dovhoos 0 ws obdsrwxote yevopevos. ‘Why, by Jupiter, being
conscious of himself that, effecting his liberty, he has become
by far much more a slave than ever.’’

Lib. iv. chap. 8; Adrixa para SWecbs, wonep dodlwy aro
Odpacxovtw xat edpnugvwy, tous péyv txetebovtwy adbtwy, tous 08
geyovtas, tous O o0b0é tadta gpvew dvvapgvous. ‘* You will see
them like slaves that have run away and are discovered, some

ZI

130 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

supplicating for mercy, some flying, and some without presence
of mind enough to do either.’

Idem, chap. 23: Adros 0¢ 6 Kupog avetnety, éxedevaer, ef tg &v
tw ’Acovpiuy 7} Lvpwv 7 ’ApaBiwy otpatevpate avy dovhog 7 Mydwy,
} Ilepody, 7} Baxtptavdv, 7 Kapov, 74 Kihexdv, 4° Edgjvwv, j adhobev
mobev BeBiacpévos expatvecOat. ‘‘QOyrus himself ordered them to
make proclamation, that whatever slave there might be, either
in the Assyrian, Syrian or Arabian armies, whether he were
Mede, Persian, Bactrian, Carian, Cicilian or Greek, or of any
other country, forced to be a slave, that he should appear.’’

Anab. lib. i. chap. 9: [apd pev Kupov, dovdov dytog, ovdeig
anynel nog Bactlea, ‘‘No one, not even a slave, ever deserted
Cyrus to go to the king.”

Lib. ii. chap. 3: Aodsoé O¢ zodhot etxovto. ‘‘ They were at-
tended by a great many slaves.”

Chap. 5: Merd of tavta téy BapBdpd, tives inzewy, Ola tov ze-
Olov ehavvovtes, gtwe evtvyyavoley °EdAnvi 7 dovlw 7 ehevdepo,
mavtas exteivov. ‘After this, some of the barbarian horse,
scouring the plains, killed all the Greeks they met, both freemen
and slaves.’’

Lib. vii. cap. 4: ‘O © efmev AMP Eywye ixavyy vopifw vd» deny
eyetv odtot doviot ecoutat ave’ edevOcpwyv. ‘* And then he said, I
think myself sufficiently revenged, if these people, instead of
freemen, are to be made slaves.’’

Idem, chap. 7: You pév ydp xpatovytos, dovieta brdpyel avtots
xpatovpevou O€ od éhevdepia. ‘For if you conquer they are
slaves (lit. slavery has them), but if you are conquered they
are free (lit. freedom has them).’’

Demosth. Olenth. 2: ... i we of zapa try adtwy a€iay dedov-
hopévot Oetrahot viv obx av ehevbepot yevotto atopevot. ... ‘* Or
that the Thessalians, who had been so basely, so unjustly en-
slaved, would not gladly embrace their freedom. ”’

De Corona, p. 208: zores ws 6 xat7p cov, Tpduns, edobdeve
map °Edrig tp mpds tH Oynociw didacxovtt ypappata. ‘* Just as
your father Tromes served as a slave to Theseus, teaching
grammar in Elpia.’’

Idem, p. 289: doz &evdepos & doviov, xai, &e. “Just as a
freeman from a slave.’’

Orat. ili. adv. Apho. p. 248: ddd xat doviov elvat tév dv0pw-
mov tm dytt, ‘ But even a slave is a man in his being.”

Orat. in Pant. p. 80: tic ydp xézote tH deondty haydy, tod
Soviov td zpdypata, Wonxep xvptov, xatnydépncev. ‘For who,
drawing lots with the master, will ever claim the private pro-
perty of the slave, as of his lord.’

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 131

Orat. in Macart. p. 173: énayyédkew 08, zept pdy toy dobduy
te deandty mept 0 tay ehevdépwy tots ta ypypar eyovew. ‘To
make proclamation concerning the masters of the slaves, and
concerning those having the possessions or rights of freemen.”’

Aischylus Promth. Chained, line 463: xafevfa mpatos &
Cuyots xvddaha Eevyhatct Oovievovta. ‘‘I first subdued the nodu-
lion to the yoke, to serve or be a slave in the cholars.’’

_ In this instance, the verb dovdevw, meaning to be a slave, is
applied to the service of domestic animals.

Again, in Lucian Duil, of the gods Mue and Muia: dozep
ot &y yy xax@¢ Dovievortes. ‘‘ As those prone to earth, following
an abject servitude. ’’

Sophocles, Antig. line 517: 05 ydp ti dovdos, alk adehgos
@ieto. ‘For he died not as a slave, but a brother. ”’

Ajax, line 489: vdv & efué doddn. ‘‘ Though now a wretched
slave.”’

Idem, line 1020: dovhog Aéyotaty avr ehevOepov Yravets. “From
a freeman, by thy sentence doomed to be a slave.”’

Idem, line 1289: 6 dodios, 6 & tis BapBapov pytpds yey.
‘A slave descended from a barbarian mother.”’

Trachin. line 63: ide ydp yuv7} doddy psy, etpynxev O 2edOepov
doyov. ‘‘ For this woman, as a slave, hath spoken like a free-
man.’’

Philoe, line 995 : of pol rahas Hpac pév ws Oovdovs cagds zat7p
ap e&eguacy, ovd ehevfepovs. ‘‘O me miserum! That our
father should have unfortunately begot us slaves, instead of
freemen.”

From the poets, orators, and other historians, we turn now
to the primitive use of this word in the plain and unvarnished
style of the Father of Historians.

Herod. lib. i. chap. 7: ex dobsns te tis Lapdavov yeyovotes
xat “Hoaxheos. ‘‘The Heraclide are descended from Hercules
and a female slave of Iardanus.”

Chap. 94: Avdot pév d7 5x0 Heponot dcdovdwyto, ‘Thus the
Lydians were enslaved by the Persians. ’’

Idem, chap. 95: Kat azocapevot tiv dovdocbyny ArevdepaOnoay.
“‘ And rejecting slavery, they became free.”

Idem, 173: Kat jy wey ye yovy dotn dovdw cvvotoyon, yewata ta
texva vevoutotat, ‘If any free woman cohabits with a slave,
the children begotten are subject to the law.”’

Lib. ii. chap. 1: 2¢ dovioug zatpwious covtas evopife. “The
law makes slaves heritable property (or subject to inherit-
ance) ’’

132 SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Similar quotations might be multiplied from the various
authors to filla volume. We have selected but a few, as the
most convenient and appropriate. Whoever wishes to see a
more elaborate investigation of the use of this word and its
derivatives, in Greek literature, will find the most extensive
and well-digested compilation of passages from the various
Greek authors whom we have cited above, that can be found
in this or any other language, in Fletcher’s Studies on Sla-
very; for which the literary world must be for ever indebted to
the indefatigable labors of John Fletcher, of Louisiana.

But we have as yet considered only the poetical and histo-
rical use of this word: it remains yet to consider its political,
moral or philosophical, and religious signification. This, it
will be readily conceded, can be best ascertained from the
writings of Plato, Aristotle, and the Bible.

Plato, De Leg. xi. p. 930: dobdAn pev éay ouptty doblw 7
ehevOepw 4 axchev0pw, ratwsg tod dsoxotov gotw tig Oovdns tO
yewwdpevov, &c. See Essay on Greek Slavery, where the pas-
sage is quoted and translated in full (sup. p. 59.)

For further illustrations of the meaning and use of this
word, we must beg leave to refer to our Essay on Greek Sla-
very, entire, including its philosophical definition by Aristotle,
its political and legal use and meaning by Plato, Athenseus,
and others; also to our Essay on Slavery in the New Testa-
ment, showing the use of the term by the learned Seventy, and
by the Evangelists and Apostles. After a careful and some-
what thorough examination of this subject, we have been
forced to the irresistible conclusion, that whoever will delibe-
rately say that the Greek words doviog and dlxetys do not
literally mean what we understand by the English word slave,
must be either a literary novice or knave. It is true that the
relation of master and slave is often alluded to by writers and
speakers for the purpose of illustrating great truths and en-
forcing doctrines and precepts, and hence these words must
frequently be used in a figurative sense; but we treat only of
their primitive and literal signification. !

1 Hendrico Greek Lex. verb dovAxos, Sixers. Scurvill, do., Pickering, &c.
Lidell & Scott. Don. Groves, Robinson’s Lex., Greek New Testament.

SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES. 133

ESSAY VI.
SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

Tue decline of the Roman sway in Western Europe left
behind its language, literature, and laws, as a precious inhe-
ritance to subsequent nations. Although the ancient flag of
her vast empire no longer waved over them; though they were
no longer subject to the proud prowess of her arms, still had
she left behind the pure traces of her ancient nationality, in
aer letters and jurisprudence, whence the modern literature
and laws of those nations took their source. The Corpus
Juris Civilis was a great heir-loom in these national genera-
tions and families; the Pandects was their legal Bible; the
Twelve Tables their Pater Noster and Decalogue. Hence the
general uniformity in all their fundamental principles of law
appertaining to the rights of persons and things. In all those
modern nations deriving their legal systems and codes from
the civil law, including the canons of the Church, which con-
tained many important principles upon the subject of freedom,
there is necessarily a great uniformity upon the subject of sla-
very. ‘‘When the Goths and Vandals overran the Roman
Empire in the West, the great swarms of Roman slaves began
to disappear. But the Middle Ages witnessed rather a change
in the channels of the slave trade, than any diminution of its
extent. The Saxon race carried the worst and most repulsive
form of slavery into England, where the toll on the sale of a
slave was only four times that of an ox! The long wars
between the German and Sclavonic tribes imparted to the
slave trade of the Middle Ages its greatest severity. This
traffic filled France and its neighboring States with such num-
bers of Sclavonie captives, that they adopted the name of
those people for condition of servitude.”’ Slavery then pre-
vailed in every nation of Europe, most of which were governed
directly by the civil law.

Such, then, being the uniformity of the laws of those
nations, as well as their customs regulating this system of
slavery, we prefer rather to treat them all collectively, under
the topic placed at the head of this Essay, than to particular-
ize by going into a separate analysis of their laws, which would
be but a useless repetition.

1 See Essay V, p. 125.
12

134 SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

In the various codes containing the laws and institutions of
the Middle Ages, the first thing that strikes us is the distine-
tion of social ranks. .'[The fundamental one is that of freemen
and slaves. Before the conclusion of the fifth century, the
Roman Empire in all the west of Europe was overthrown by
the Northern barbarians. The Vandals were masters of
Africa; the Suevi held parts of Spain; the Visigoths held
the remainder, with a large portion of Gaul; the Burgundians
occupied the provinces watered by the Rhone and the Soane ;
the Ostrogoths nearly the whole of Italy. Among these bar-
barous nations, involuntary servitude, in various forms, seems
to have existed.

The following passage occurs in Tacitus: ‘‘ The slaves, in
general, were not arranged at their several employments in the
household affairs, as is the practice at Rome. Lach has his
separate habitation, and his own establishment to manage.
The master considers him as an agrarian dependant, who is
obliged to furnish a certain quantity of grain, of cattle, or of
wearing apparel. The slave obeys, and the state of servitude
extends no further. All domestic affairs are managed by the
master’s wife and children. To punish the slave with stripes,
to bind him with chains, to condemn him to excessive labor, is
unusual. It is true, the slaves are sometimes put to death —
not under color of justice or of any authority vested in the
master, but in a transport of passion, in a fit of rage, as is
often the case in a sudden affray; but it is also true that this
species of homicide passes with impunity. The freedmen are
of not much higher consideration than the real slaves. They
obtain no work in their master’s family, and, if we except the
parts of Germany where monarchy is established, they never
figure on the stage of public business. In despotic govern-
ments, they rise above the men of ungenerous birth, and even
eclipse the whole body of the nobles. In other states, the
subordination of the freedmen is a proof of public liberty.’’’

Besides the slaves who became so by birth or the fortunes
of war, anciently, any freeman could dispose of his own liberty,
by the provisions of these antique codes of law.? If a free-

man married a female slave, he incurred the same penalty; if -

unable to pay his debts, he became the bondman of his credi-
tors. ‘The code of the Lombards, in Italy, seems, in some
respects, to have been peculiarly rigorous. For him who slew

1 Tac. De Mos. Germ. xxv.
2 Such as the Lex Salica, the Code of the Ripuarii, Code of the Bur-
gundians, Lex Saxonum, &c.

Sa toe

SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES. 135

his own slave, no punishment was provided; but no composi-
tion would atone for the life of a slave who assassinated a
freeman. If a slave presumed to marry a free woman, the
doom of both was death; but the freeman might marry his
maiden, provided he previously enfranchised her. Such unions,
however, were regarded as disgraceful. The slave had little
hope of escape. Enfranchisement was far from frequent, and
the libertus was as dependent on his patron as the slave on his
owner: neither could marry beyond his own caste without in-
curring the penalty of death; yet marriage was all but obli-
gatory, that servitude might be perpetuated. Manumission
generally took place in the churches, or by will, or by written
instrument; and those thus made were also common to the
Romans. But there were other modes, peculiar to certain
nations. In France, it was effected by striking a denarius
from the hands of the slave, or by opening the door for him
to escape. The Lombards delivered him to one man, this
man delivered him to a third, the third to a fourth, who told
him he had leave to go north, south, east, or west.' The
owner might also deliver his slave to the king, that the king
might deliver him to the priest, who might manumit him at
the altar. Among the Lombards, the symbol was sometimes
an arrow, which, being delivered to the slave, betokened that
he was now privileged to bear arms—the distinguishing cha-
racteristic of freedom.’

It is difficult to determine whether slavery was more rigorous
in Germany or in Gaul. In the latter country the influence of
religion was much greater, while in the former there was more
individual independence. In Gaul, however, manumission was
much more frequent, the slaves being made free in order that
they might, on any occasion, be able to assist their lords, who
had not, like the German barons, free-born warriors always at
hand to assist them. In Gaul the Church had a much greater
number of slaves, and under the influence of Christianity slavery
has always been mitigated.

The condition of the libertt varied ; those who were emanci-
pated before the altar were exempt from every species of
dependence. The same may be said of the manumissio per

enarium, per quartum manum, per portus potentes ; but if
per chartam, the libertus obtained a much less share of freedom :

1 Similar to the form of manumission prescribed by the Twelve Tables
of their selling the slave.
2 See Muratorius Ital. Scripts. Rerum. vol. i. Pars. ii. p. 90.

136 SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

if he escaped from personal, he was still subject to other service
and to the jurisdiction of his late owner.

Among the Salian Franks, if a freeman married a slave he
became a slave. The Ripuarians were still more severe; the
woman who married a slave was offered, by the local judge at
court, a sword and a spindle; if she took the former she must
kill her husband ; if the latter she must embrace servitude with
him. The greatest severity was found among the Burgundians,
Visigoths, and Lombards. Among the Saxons, says Adam of
Bremen, it is commanded that no unequal marriage be con-
tracted—that noble marry with noble, free-man with: free-
woman, freed-man with freed-woman, slave with slave; for if
any one should marry out of his condition, he is punished with
death.

A criminal leniency towards crimes committed against slaves,
and great severity toward crimes committed by that unfor-
tunate class, characterized, more or less, all the German codes.
By the Lex Saxonum, the mulct for the murder of a noble was
1440 sols to the kindred, besides a fine to the state; for the
murder of a freed-man, 120; for that of a slave by a noble,
36; but by a freedman an oath of compurgation sufficed.

The perpetual wars in which those nations were engaged,
greatly increased the number of slaves. The Goths, the Bur-
gundians, or the Franks, who returned from a successful expe-
dition, dragged after them a long train of sheep, of oxen, and
of human captives, whom they treated with the same brutal con-
tempt. The youths of an elegant form were set apart for the
domestic service ; a doubtful situation which alternately exposed
them to favorable or cruel impulses of passion. The useful
smiths, carpenters, cooks, gardeners, &c., employed their skill
for the benefit of their masters. But the Roman captives, who
were desitute of art, but capable of labor, were condemned,
without regard to their former rank or condition, to tend the
cattle, and cultivate the lands of the barbarians. The number
of the hereditary bondmen, who were attached to the Gallic
estates, was continually increased by new supplies from this
source.

When the masters gave their daughters in marriage, a song
train of useful servants, chained on the wagons like captives to
the car of a conqueror, to prevent their escape, was sent as a
nuptial present into a distant country. |

The Roman laws protected the liberty of each citizen against
the rash effects of his own distress or despair. But the subjects

SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES. 18

of the Merovingian kings might alienate their personal
freedom.?

From the reign of Clovis, during five successive centuries,
the laws and manners of Gaul uniformly tended to promote the
increase of servitude. In a later age, and during the preva-
lence of the feudal system, the lower classes of the population
may be considered under three divisions. 1st. Freemen dis-
tinguished among the writers of the Middle Ages as Arimani,
Conditionales Originari, Tributales, &e. 2d. Villani. They
were likewise adscripti glebe, or ville, from which they derived
their name. And 3d. The Servi. The master of slaves had
absolute power over their persons and could inflict punishment
when he pleased, without the intervention of a judge. They
possessed this dangerous right not only in early times when
their manners were fierce, but it continued as late as the twelfth
century. Even after this jurisdiction of the master came to be
restrained, the life of the slave was deemed to be of so little
value, that a very slight compensation atoned for taking it
away. Slaves might be put to the rack on very slight occa-
sions. All the children of slaves were in the same condition
with their mother, and became the property of their masters.
Slaves were so entirely the property of their masters that they
could sell them at pleasure. While domestic slavery continued,
property in a slave was sold in the same manner precisely as
property in any other commodity. Afterwards slaves became,
or were merged into the class of adscripti glebe, and were con-
veyed by sale, together with the farm or estate to which they
belonged. Slaves had a title to nothing but subsistence and
clothes from their masters. Slaves were distinguished from
freemen by their peculiar dress. Among all the barbarous
nations, long hair was a mark of dignity and freedom. Slaves
were, for that reason, obliged to shave their heads, and thus
they were constantly reminded of their own inferiority. For
the same reason it was enacted in the laws of all Europe, that
no slave should be admitted to give evidence against a freeman
in a court of justice. The multifarious classification of slaves
during this period, though numerous, seems somewhat less than
that of the ancient Romans.’

~1VLicentiam habeatis mihi qualem cunque volueritis disciplinam
ponere; vel venumdare, aut quod nobis placuerit de me facere.”

2 Ducange, under the word servus, mentions, among others, the follow-
ing classes of slaves: ‘‘Of the field, beneficiarii; attached to the soil,
adscripti glebe, censuales servi civitatis ; public slaves, servi comitum ; cone
suetudinarii, a species of serfs; ecclesiastici, belonging to the Church;

12*

138 SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

When charters of liberty, or manumissions, were granted to
persons in servitude, they contained four concessions corres-
ponding with the four. capital grievances to which men in a
state of bondage are subject: First, the right of disposing of
their persons by sale or grant was relinquished. Second, power
was given them to hold property, and to convey the same by
will or any other legal deed. ‘Third, the tribute which they
owed to their superiors, of all kinds, was precisely ascertained,
which was previously at the will of the master. Fourth, they
were allowed the privilege of marrying according to their own
inclinations, and to transmit their property by inheritance, the
same as other persons. Many circumstances combined to effect
their deliverance for the slaves.

‘‘The humane spirit of the Christian religion,’’ says Dr.
Robertson, ‘‘ struggled long with the maxims and customs of
the world, and contributed, more than any other circumstance,
to introduce the practice of manumission.’’ A great part of
the charters of manumission, previous to the reign of Louis X.,
were granted, ‘‘pro amore Dei, pro remedio anime, et pro
mercede anime.’’! The formality of manumission was executed
in the church as a religious solemnity.

The person to be set free was led round the great altar with
a torch in his hand; he took hold of the.horns of the altar,
and there the solemn words of conferring liberty were pro-
nounced. ‘The princes on the birth of a son, or other joyous
event, enfranchised a certain number of slaves as a testimony
of gratitude. The obdlatz, or voluntary slaves of the churches
or monasteries, were very numerous.

Slavery, however, notwithstanding the benign influence of
the Christian religion, maintained most of its ancient rigors;

jiscales, connected with the royal treasury; fugitivi, servi fundarum,
gregurit, massari, a species of serfs; ménisteriales, domestics employed in
and about the house, of whom twenty classes are enumerated; palatii,
servi pene, stipendarii, testamentales, tritularii, triduani, who served three
days for themselves, and three for their masters; vicarii, who performed
in the country-seats duties for their masters,” &c.

1 When Pope Gregory, towards the end of the sixth century, granted
liberty to some of his slaves, he introduced this reason for it: ‘* Cum Re-
demptor noster, ‘totius conditor nature, ad hoc propitiatus humanam
carnem voluerit assumere, ut divinitatis sue gratia, dirempto (quo teneba-
tur captivus) vinculo, pristine nos restitueret liberati; salubriter agitur,
si homines quos ab initio liberos natura protulit, et jus gentium jugo sub-
stituit servitutis, in ea, qua nati fuerant manumittentis benefieio, libertate
reddantur.” But it should be remarked that the class of persons to
whom the Pope has reference were as capable of enjoying their liberty as
those who held them in bondage.

SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES. 139

and instances of enfranchisement were comparatively few, while
the feudal system maintained its ascendency.. The inferior
order of men owed the recovery of their liberty, in a great
measure, to the decline of that aristocratical policy which
lodged the most extensive power in the hands of a few mem-
bers of the society, and depressed all the rest.

When Louis X. issued his ordinance, some slaves had been
so long accustomed to servitude that they refused to accept of
their freedom. Long after the reign of that prince, several of
the ancient nobility continued to exercise dominion over their
slaves.

Not only in Germany and in Gaul, but in Britain, even
among our English ancestors, slavery seems to have existed
from the earliest times. The Anglo-Saxons in their conquests,
probably found, and certainly made, a great many slaves. The
posterity of these men inherited the lot of their parents. Many
free-born Saxons, on account of debt, want, or crime, lost their
liberty.

In the more ancient laws, we find various classes of slaves.
The most numerous class were the villani. All, however,
were forbidden to carry arms, and subjected to ignominious
punishments, and might be branded and whipped, according
to law.

In the charter, by which one Harold, of Buckenale, gives
his manor of Spalding to the Abbey of Croyland, he enume-
rates among his appendages, Colyein, his bailiff; Harding, his
smith ; Lefstan, his carpenter; Elstan, his fisherman ; Osmand,
his miller, and nine others, probably husbandmen ; and these,
with their wives and children, goods and chattels, and the cot-
tages in which they live, he transfers in perpetual possession to
the Abbey. ‘The sale and purchase of slaves prevailed during
the whole of the Anglo-Saxon period. The toll in the market
of Lewes was one penny for the sale of an ox, and fourpence
for that of a slave. On the importation of foreign slaves, no
impediment has ever been imposed. The export of native
slaves was at length forbidden under severe penalties. But
habit and avarice had taught the Northumbrians to bid defiance
to all the efforts of the legislature. They even carried off their
own relations and sold them as slaves in the ports of the con-

1 In the reign of Anthelstan, a man-thief was ordered to be stoned to
death, by twenty of his fellows, each of whom was punished with three
whippings, if he failed thrice to hit the culprit. A woman-thief was
burned by eighty women slaves, each of whom brought their billets of
wood to the execution. If either failed, she was likewise whipped.

140 SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

tinent. The men of Bristol were the last to abandon this
traffic. Their agents travelled into all parts of the country ;
they were instructed to give the highest price for females in a
state of pregnancy; and the slave ships regularly sailed from
that port to Ireland, where they were secure of a ready and
profitable market. Daily might be seen, upon the wharves at
Bristol, the fairest specimens of Anglo-Saxon beauty and come-
liness loitering there awaiting their transportation to Ireland to
be sold for slaves. At last, Wulstan, Bishop of Worcester,
visited Bristol several years successively, resided for months in
the neighborhood, and preached every Sunday against the bar-
barity and irreligion of the slave-dealers. The merchants were
convinced by his reasons, and solemnly bound themselves to re-
nounce the traffic. The influence of religion considerably
mitigated the hardships of the slaves. The bishop was the
appointed protector of the slaves in his diocese.

In the abstract of the population of England, in Doomsde
Book, at the close of the reign of William the Conqueror, the
whole population is stated at 283,242; of which the servi are
25,156; ancille, 467; bordarii, 82, 119; vwvillant, 108,407 ;
total, 216, 149; leaving, for remaining classes, 67, 093. “The
servi of the Norman period,’’ says Bishop Kennett, “might
be the pure villani, and villani in grass, who, without any
determined tenure of land, were, at the arbitrary pleasure of
the lord, appointed to servile works and received their wages
and maintenance at the discretion of their lord.’’ We have the
authority of Bracton for asserting that, however unhappy the
condition of the servi was in other respects, yet their lives and
limbs were under the protection of the laws; so that, if a mas-
ter killed his bondman, he was subject to the same punishment
as if he had killed any other person. The form of the emanci-
pation of the servi is minutely described in the laws of the
conqueror. The ancille were the female slaves, and under the
same circumstances of the servi. Their chastity was, in some
measure, protected by law. The bordarii were distinct from
the servi and the villani, and seem to be those of a less servile
condition, who had a bord or cottage with a small parcel of
land, on condition that they should supply their lord with eggs,
poultry, &ec., as necessary for his board and entertainment.
Brardy says ‘they were drudges, and performed vile services,
which were reserved by the lord upon a poor little house, and
a small parcel of land.?

1 See Genl. Introd. to Doomsday Book, by Sir Henry Ellis, 2 vols., 1833.

———

SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES. 141

There seems to have been no general law for the emancipa-
tion of slaves in the Statute Book of England. Though the
genius of the English constitution favored personal liberty, yet
servitude continued long in England in particular places.
There were some points of distinction between the villanz and
the servi proper, that it may not be irrelevant to notice. The
villant were likewise the adscripts glebe, or ville, from which
they derived their name. They differed from the servi proper,
or slaves, in that they paid a fixed rent for their lands to their
lords, and after paying that, all the fruits of their labor and
industry belonged to themselves in property. They were, how-
ever, precluded from selling the lands on which they dwelt.
Their persons were bound, and their masters might reclaim
them at any time in a court of law, if they strayed.1. In Eng-
land, at least from the reign of Henry II., the villiens were
incapable of holding property, and destitute of redress, except
against the most outrageous injuries. This tenure bound them
to what was called villien-service, such as the felling of timber,
carrying out manure, repairing of roads, &c.? But by the
customs of France and Germany, persons in this abject condi-
tion seem to have been serfs, and distinguished from villiens,
who were only bound to fixed payments of rents and duties.
How the class of servi proper, or slaves, became extinct in
England, it is impossible now to definitely ascertain; though
the probability is, that in the progress and gradual development
of the principle of personal liberty, their bondage was at length
lost in that of villien service, in the same manner as villanage
was finally merged in the modern English system of tenant at
will.

In the year 1514, we find a charter of Henry VIII. enfran-

chising two slaves belonging to one of his manors. As late as
1547, there is a commission from Elizabeth with respect to the
manumission of certain slaves belonging to her.
_ While slavery was still universal in Europe, in Italy, in the
eleventh and twelfth centuries, the number of slaves began to
diminish. larly in the fifteenth century, a writer, quoted by
Muratori in his Antiquities of Italy, speaks of them as no
longer existing.

The greater part of the slaves in Germany had acquired their
liberty before the end of the thirteenth century ; in the northern
and eastern portions of Europe they remain in bondage to this
day.

1 By the action of trover. See Essay on Political and Judicial Attitude
of Slavery, post, p. 293.

2 See Blac. Com. ‘ Villanage.”

1492 SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

As in America, so in Europe, from a universal prevalence
of slavery and the slave trade, some States and nations have
abolished the one and.prohibited the other by positive law;
and ‘the domination of the power of a master to reclaim his
escaping bondman in Europe commenced in the enactment of
laws of prescription in favor of privileged communes. Bre-
men, Spire, Worms, Vienna and Ratisbon, in Germany; Car-
easonne, Béziers, Toulouse and Paris, in France, acquired
privileges on this subject at an early period. The Ordinance
of William the Conqueror, that a residence of any of the ser-
vile population of England, for a year and a day, without
being claimed, in any city, burgh or walled town, or castle of
the king, should entitle them to perpetual liberty, is a specimen
of those laws.”’

In France, after innumerable instances of manumission had
taken place, Louis Hutin, by a general edict, in 1315, asserting
that his kingdom is denominated the kingdom of the franks,
that he would have the fact correspond to the name, emanci-
pated all persons in the royal domain upon paying a just com-
pensation, as an example for other lords possessing slaves to
follow. Philip the Long renewed the edict three years after-
wards. Predial servitude was not totally abolished in all parts
of France till the Revolution. Bodin, a jurist of the sixteenth
century, the earliest publicist who discussed this subject, says :
‘In France, although there be some remembrance of old servi-
tude, yet it is not lawful here to make a slave or to buy any one
of others, insomuch as the slaves of strangers, so soon as they
set their foot within France, become Frank and free, as was
determined by an old decree of the court of Paris against an
ambassador of Spain who had brought a slave with him into
France.’? He states another case, which arose in the city of
Toulouse, of a Genoese merchant, who had carried a slave into
that city on his voyage from Spain; and when the matter was
brought before the magistrates, the ‘‘ procureur of the city, out
of the records, showed certain ancient privileges given unto
them of Toulouse, wherein it was granted that slaves, so soon
as they should come into Toulouse, should be free.”

Charles V. of France exempted all the inhabitants of Paris
from serfdom, or other feudal incapacities, in 1371, and this
was confirmed by several of his successors.

In 1615, the Tiers Etat prayed the king to cause all the serfs
to be emancipated on paying a fair compensation, but this was

1 Dulaire, Hist de Paris, tom. iii. p. 546. Broud Cout. de Par. 21.

SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES. 148

not complied with, and they continued to exist in many pro-
vinces. Throughout almost the whole jurisdiction of Besancon
the serfs were attached to the soil, not being capable of leaving
it without their lord’s consent; in some places he inherited
their goods, to the exclusion of their nearest relations. Vol-
taire mentions an instance of his interfering in behalf of a few
wretched slaves of a certain French compté. About the mid-
dle of the fifteenth century some Catalonian serfs, who had
escaped into France, being claimed by their lords, the parlia-
ment of Toulouse declared, by an edict, that every man who
entered the kingdom of enceiant France should be free.?

Thus the history of the world shows us that slavery and the
slave trade are not local, and created only by special laws, as
asserted by Justices McLean and Curtis, in their dissenting
opinions in the Dred Scott case, but rather that they are ori-
ginally universal, founded upon immemorial custom and uni-
versal principles of international law’ and that all free terri-
tory, or territory where this right can no longer exist, has
originated from some abrogation of this time-honored custom,
or some modification of these long-established rights of pro-
perty and of persons, by the potent arm of legislation. This
is a historical fact, that the decision of no court, nor the dictum
of any individual, can alter.

From about A. D. 990, regular accounts of the negro slave
trade exist. These are its earliest traces in Hurope. At that
period Moorish merchants from the Barbary coast first reached
the cities of Nigritia, and established an uninterrupted exchange
of Saracen and European luxuries for gold, the gold and slaves
of Central Africa. Even though whole caravans were some-
times buried in the sands of the desert, and, at others, without
shade and without water, suffered the horrors of parching thirst
under a tropical sun, yet the commerce extended, because it was
profitable ; and before the genius of Columbus had opened the
path to the New World, the negro slave trade had been re-
duced to a system by the Moors, and had spread from the
native regions of the Ethiopian race to the heart of Egypt on
the one hand, and to the coasts of Barbary on the other.

“‘Tt was not long’’ (says the same author) ‘‘after the first
conquest of the Portuguese in Barbary, that the passion for

1 Ordinance of Toulouse, Civitas Toulosana fuit et erit sine fine libera,
adeo ut servi et ancillz, sclavi et sclavee, dominos sive dominos habentes,
cum rebus vel sine rebus suis, ad Tholosam vel infra terminos extra urbem
terminatos accidentes acquirant libertatim. Hist. de Langue. tom. 3, p.
69, &. See Dred Scott case, 19 How, p. 479.

144 SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

gain, the love of conquest, and the hatred of the infidels, con-
ducted their navy to the ports of Western Africa; and the first
ships that sailed so far south as Cape Blanco, returned not with
negroes, but with Moors.’’?

From these captive Moors they derived their most important
information relative to this portion of Africa. And when they
were restored by Antony Gonzalez to their native country, the
Moors gave for their ransom not gold alone, but black Moors,
with curly hair.

Thus commenced the notorious traffic in negro slaves in
Europe, and mercantile cupidity immediately observed that
negroes might become a lucrative commodity. Spain also en-
gaged in the traffic. The merchants of Seville imported gold
dust and slaves from Western Africa; and negro slavery,
though the severity of the bondage was mitigated in its cha-
racter by benevolent legislation, was established in Andalusia,
and abounded in the city of Seville before the enterprise of
Columbus was conceived. ‘The coasts of America, like those
of Africa, were also visited by ships in search of slaves; and
there was not a convenient harbor on the whole Atlantic fron-
tier of the United States that was not entered by slavers. The
native Indians themselves were ever ready to resist the treach-
erous merchant; the freemen of the wilderness, unlike the
Africans, among whom slavery had existed from time imme-
morial, would never abet the foreign kidnapper, or become his
factors in the nefarious traffic. Fraud or force remained, there-
fore, the means by which, near Newfoundland or Florida, on
the shores of the Atlantic or among the Indians of the Missis-
sippi valley, Cortereal and Vasquez de Ayllon, Porcallo and
De Soto, with private adventurers, whose names and whose
crimes may be left unrecorded, transported the natives of North
America into slavery in Europe and the West Indies. The
glory of Columbus did not escape the stain; enslaving five
hundred native Americans, he sent them to Spain, that they
might be publicly sold at Seville.2 The generous Isabella com-
manded the liberation of the Indians held in bondage in her
European possessions. Yet her benevolence extended not to
the servile condition of the Moors nor the Africans; and
though she manifested a temporary sympathy for the oppressed
in the New World, yet in her commissions for making disco-
veries, issued but a few days after her interference to rescue
those whom Columbus had enslaved, she reserved for herself

1 Hist. U. S. vol. 1, p. 165.
2 Irving’s Columbus, b. viii. c. 5.

SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES. 145

and Ferdinand a fourth part of all the slaves which the new
kingdoms might contain. The slavery of the Indians was
recognized as lawful, and was practised in the early settlements
of New England by our Puritan fathers.2 The practice of
selling the natives of North America into foreign bondage con-
tinued for nearly two centuries, and even the severest morality
pronounced the sentence of slavery and exile on the captives
whom the field of battle had spared.

It was not Las Casas who first suggested the plan of trans-
porting African slaves to Hispaniola; Spanish slave-holders,
as they emigrated, were accompanied by their negroes. The
royal ordinances of Spain authorized negro slavery in America.
_ King Ferdinand himself sent fifty slaves from Seville, to labor
in the mines; and because it was said that one negro could do
the work of four Indians, the direct traffic in slaves between
Guinea and Hispaniola was enjoined by a royal ordinance and
deliberately sanctioned by repeated decrees. The very year in
which Charles V. sailed with a powerful expedition against
Tunis, to check the piracies of the Barbary States, and to
emancipate Christian slaves in Africa, he gave an open legal
sanction to the African slave-trade. The sins of the corsairs
were to be visited on the negroes; and the monopoly for eight
years of annually transporting four thousand negro slaves to
the West Indies, was eagerly seized by La Bresa, a favorite
of the Spanish monarch, and was sold to the Genoese, who
purchased their cargoes of Portugal.

A series of Papal bulls had secured to the Portuguese the
exclusive commerce with Western Africa; ‘‘ but the slave trade
between Africa and America was,’’ says Bancroft, ‘‘ I believe,
never expressly sanctioned by the See of Rome.’’ The spirit
of the Romish Church was against it.

In conclusion, it may be remarked that in the darkness and
confusion which reigned from the fourth to the fourteenth cen-
tury, slavery of the most barbarous form would be likely to
prevail; during the last years of the Roman Empire, an unfor-
tunate change was going on which was destined to revive and
perpetuate such a system. The middle class in society was
dwindling away. A few distinguished families swallowed up
the moderate land-holders, or drove them out of the country.

The Goths and Vandals threw their chains on the descend-
ants of Cincinnatus and Brutus, and sent them to work in their

1 «« Bsclayos é negros, é locos que en estos nuestros reinos sean habidos
é espatandos por esclavos,” &c. (Leo B.’s H. U. 8.)
2 See Essay on Political and Judicial Attitude of Slavery, post, p. 293,

13

146 SLAVERY IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

kitchens and farm-yards. The way had been prepared by the
destruction of the middle class—a.class that contains the
bone and muscle of any community in which it exists. These
barbarous lords then rushed in, finding scarcely any thing to
obstruct their progress. The children of the men from whom
Scipio sprang became the scavengers and scullions of Visigoths
and Huns. And hence followed the long and barbarous slavery
of the noblest blood of the human family during the Middle
Ages.

Christianity, as in all instances of human progress, exerted
its own appropriate influence in special instances of emancipa-
tion, and the general amelioration of the condition of the slaves
of this period. By various canons in the early history of the
Church, as we have seen, this work of benevolence and human
kindness was commenced and carried forward. Yet in all its
teachings upon that subject there can be found nothing that
essentially abrogates the fundamental relation of master and
slave ; all its tendency and influence is rather to perfect than to
destroy that relation, except where the slave may ‘‘be made
free,’’? then it would ‘‘use it rather.’? But there were other
influences that co-operated with Christianity to soften the
asperities of this system of slavery. The expeditions of Peter
the Hermit had their influence in partially breaking the yoke
of these feudal bondsmen. The contemporaneous revival of
literature and learning must come in also for its share of the
humane work. Xenophon, Cicero, and Lucian, could not be
perused without exciting a beneficial influence in ameliorating
the asperity of the manners, in inspiring a love for freedom,
and a tender sympathy toward the oppressed. The more
northern nations of Europe seem always to have possessed a
strong sense of individual freedom and of personal rights,
which when directed and enlightened by Christianity and letters,
became a powerful antagonist force to slavery. The spirit that
broke out at Runnymede; at London, in 1688; at Philadel-
phia, in 1776; was nurtured in its infancy in the woods of
Sweden and in the marshes of Denmark.!

1 Whoever may be curious to pursue the subject of this essay more in
detail, may consult the following authorities: The Glossarium of Ducange
on the words Servus Villanus. Tributales Originarii Oblatii Manumisso,
&ec., in 6 vols. folio. Heineceius, in 8 vols. quarto. Muratori’s Antiqui-
ties of Italy, in 6 vols. folio. These books are found in Boston Atheneum
library, and are an invaluable source of information upon these subjects.
Robertson’s History of Charles V. Hallam’s Middle Ages. Bordie’s
British Empire. Vol. I’ of Lingard’s Hist. Eng. Turner’s Anglo-Saxon
Race. Danum’s Germanic Empire. Sismondi’s Italian Republic. Mon-

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 147

~ We have thus attempted to give a kind of historical analysis
of the laws and government of the institution of slavery in the
principal nations both ancient and modern. Hitherto we have
been unable to make any distinction between the intellectual
capacity, mental and moral characteristics of the race of
masters and slaves in any age or nation; but have proceeded
upon the hypothesis that they were both of the same type of
mankind, and equal in those particulars. And we find the truth
of this supposition strikingly illustrated in the .subsequent
history of those nations from which, anciently, slaves were
principally obtained. These nations have all, except Africa,
risen to supremacy in letters, science, arts, and arms over the
nations that once held their sons in bondage.

Our future remarks will be directed to the institution of
American, or Negro slavery, and the mental, moral and physical
characteristics of the slaves in our own country. In the follow-
ing essay we shall endeavor to explain the real origin and cause
of this kind of slavery, to show its necessity in the present
organization of society, and the true principles upon which it
has been and must be vindicated.

Ba AwYe'cV LI;
THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES.

WE will take the ‘‘ golden rule’’ for our theme in this essay ;
‘‘Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you do ye even
so to them.’’?

This precept is declared to be the foundation of our rule of
duty towards one another ; when correctly understood, it is the
principal test by which to determine the moral character of our
actions. It is a precept clear and comprehensive, and both
practical and universal in its application ; and with all, perhaps,
the most perfect formula for the government of human actions
that could have been conceived.

But, generally, both theologians and moralists are as much
mistaken in point of consistency, in their interpretation and

tesquieu. Blackstone’s Comments. Grotius. Bracton. Littleton. Irving’s -
Columbus. Prescott’s Ferd. and Isab. Bancroft’s Hist. U. 8. A., &c.
1 Matt. 7: 12.

148 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

‘application of this rule, as they are in fault in not living up to
its requirements.

It is true of the moral as well as of the civil code, that all
laws in pari materia must be construed together; the moral
code is a unity, all its precepts emanate from the same source ;
all are of equal dignity and force; all relate to the same subject
matter, and must all be taken and interpreted in their qualified

relations. Hence in determining moral rectitude and the path .

of duty, all. moral precepts must have their due weight, all
inust be so construed as to violate none, but to properly observe
their various requirements, and properly to heed their various
modifications towards one another. Hence men are as well
limited by this precept, as to what they desire should be done
to them as they are enjoined by the same to do the like to
others.

The term ‘‘ would,’’ in the former clause of the sentence, im-
plies a desire, a will or wish, and is, in the eye of the law, as
much a moral action as the performance of the reciprocal deed
enjoined by the latter. Therefore, this great and golden rule
obligates us only to do to others as we have a moral right to
ask and desire that they should do to us. Men are as much in
danger of transgression in their covetings and desires as to
what should be done for themselves, as they are in their dere-
lictions as to what they ought to do to others. If these con-
clusions are correct, this precept is, indeed, a golden rule; it is
beautifully adapted to operate as a reciprocal limitation both
to men’s actions and desires towards one another.

We cannot lawfully ask a man to violate any moral or poli-
tical duty, or to wrongfully do himself a great injury to gratify
our unhallowed covetings of ‘‘ his ox, or his ass, or anything
that is our neighbor’s,” therefore, we are under no obligations
to gratify his sinful or unjust desires of us in our transactions
with him. It is sometimes said that this precept to be correctly
understood needs to be modified with the qualification of a
change of place of the parties, or in like circumstances, and
shonld read thus: Whatsoever ye would that men should do

to you were you in their places, or in like cireumstances, do ye.

even so to them. But even this will not serve to relieve it of
all the obligations to which such a construction is liable; it
still wants the reciprocal limitation to men’s desires as to what
should be done for them by others. For instance, take the
convict, under sentence of death for murder, who applies to
the executive for a pardon; because that officer would, through

the weakness of human nature, desire to be pardoned were he

a

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 149

a convict, does it follow that he is morally bound to comply
with the prisoner’s request ?

Take again the case of the miser who has plodded on through
life, freezing his soul over the chilling themes of worldly policy
and golden gains till the last spark of animated existence be-
comes extinct, he meets the beggar boy in the street, who asks
such a portion of his goods as to make him rich; because the
miser would, through the sinful covetousness of his disposition,
in a change of circumstances and place, earnestly desire the
same thing; is he, therefore, bound to comply with the beggar’s
request? No one will pretend it, and why? because the de-
sire in the first instance is not such a one as the law permits ; it
is a violation of the tenth commandment.!

Like instances might bé multiplied, but these are sufficient to
show that no desire, will, -or wish, as to what should be done
for him by others, will impose any obligation, direct or reci-
procal, upon either, but such as is in accordance with the moral
code, and requires no remission of duty, in its widest sense, to
be complied: with.

This passage is often quoted as a rule by which Southern
masters should be guided in determining their duty towards
their slaves, and hurled at them with an air of defiance as in-
culcating the doctrine of immediate emancipation.

But, as an enlightened Christian moralist, he has learned
that ‘‘the human heart is deceitful above all things and despe-
rately wicked,” and, in determining his duty, he cannot trust
its dictates and desires, either in what he would himself desire
of others were he in their situation, or what others might de-
sire of him.2, He looks at the moral law as a whole, and feels
his obligation to his neighbor to love him as himself, he feels
his obligation to the community in which he lives as well as to
those whom he has under his charge; and can never resolve
upon a course of conduct, as his duty, which he knows, will
necessarily wrong and injure them all as well as himself. Would
he be loving his neighbor as himself, who, turned loose upon
the community an army of vagabonds to beset it with discon-

1 We do not here allude to the duty of bestowing charity upon the poor,
but the hypothesis is predicated upon a covetous desire of his neighbor’s
goods, not for the relief of immediate wants, but to place the beggar in
opulent circumstances.

2In the Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp is the following: * * ‘but let
them [slaves] be the more subject to the glory of God that they may ob-
tain from Him a better liberation. Let them not desire to be set free at
public cost, that they be not slaves to their own lusts.” See Slavery in
New Test., supra p. 120.

13 *

Loti THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

tent, pillage, and every inconvenience and danger which the
viciousness of a prowling banditti could invent? Would he
be loving the slave himself, who is, in this country, in a helpless
condition, without any fault of his own—the aged, infants,
and infirm, as well as youth and manhood, to withdraw from
them the fostering care and protection, in sickness and in health,
which he has long extended over them, and leave them to de-
generate into barbarism, or perish, for want of sustenance from
the cold charities of the world? Would that be giving the
‘¢slave what is just and equitable ?’’ His zeal for the good of
mankind includes the whole human race; his philanthropy is
peculiar to no race or condition; he sympathizes with the vic-
tims of oppression, pestilence, or famine, in every quarter of
the globe.

He seeks out no peculiar spot, no singular errors, crimes, or
abuses, as alone worthy of his charitable consideration. The
miseries of starvation in Ireland ; the tears, groans, and chains
of the coal-pits and work-shops of England; the crimes,
abuses, wretchedness, and woe too prevalent in all parts of his
native country, are all included under the broad wing of his
benevolence. One of his neighbors is a lonely and disconso-
late widow, surrounded by a group of helpless children, with
no shield or protector but the fears and anxieties of a tender
mother; and all dependent for their resources for support,
rearing, and suitable education of the children, upon what
they realize from the labors of a few families of devoted ser-
vants, which the children have inherited from the deceased .
father (as Isaac did from the Father of the Faithful), who are
well provided for in sickness and in health; who are allowed
all the religious privileges, and deeply sympathize in all the
fortunes and misfortunes, and share all the joys and sorrows «
of the household; and who are happy and contented in the ©
discharge of all their duties. He feels that to rashly dissolve
the relation that exists between these servants and their owners,
and to deprive them of the care and protection of a merciful
and humane mistress, would not only deprive this helpless
family of their only means of a support, and reduce them to
beggary and want, but it would also deprive the slaves of a
comfortable and happy home, and reduce them to misery and
wretchedness.

Another is a cruel, morose, and inhuman master, who rules
with a rod of iron; neglects the proper care for the health,
food, and clothing of his slaves; and yet forces them to unrea-
sonable exposure and tasks for the love of gain.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 151

This he classes in the common calendar of the frailties and
imperfections of human nature, under the same head and in the
same catalogue as cruel and abusive husbands, neglectful and
brutal parents, fiendish guardians, and the aumerous list of the
other abuses of the power and authority which one has over
another, in the present organization of society.

He consoles the servants by preaching to them the heavenly
consolations of the Gospel, as taught by St. Paul in his Epistle
to the Ephesians, and others. He does not preach to them
abolition; he does not encourage them in insurrection or
absconding ; but he tells them, in that heaven-born spirit of
meekness and Christian resignation which is everywhere breathed
throughout the writings and teachings of the Great Apostle to
the Gentiles: ‘‘Art thou called being a servant, eare not
for iin?!

The cruel master he apes not denounce as a thief or robber,
or by any other opprobrious epithet; but strives, with the in-
fluence of holy precept and good example, to reclaim him from
the error of his ways to the path of rectitude and duty, as he
strives to reform the wayward propensities and sinful practices
of all other men. He opens to him those divine precepts that
proclaim the doctrine of universal love, peace, charity, kind-
ness, and compassion as among the cardinal virtues of the
human heart, and sets forth one common Redeemer for all
mankind. Following the illustrious example of the author of
the celebrated Epistle to Philemon, he approaches him with
the same spirit of forgiveness, charity, and kindness which he
wishes to impress upon him by his teachings, and persuade him
to exercise in his daily duties.

Such, as we have seen, was the genius and spirit of the
whole Christian system, so far as it related to this subject —
not to abrogate the relation between master and servant, but
to improve and perfect the character and condition of both, in
the calling wherewith they had been called. Not one syllable
was ever uttered by the Founder of its doctrines, condemning
this relation as wrong in itself. Throughout the writings of
the apostles Peter and Paul, the relation is recognized as right
in itself; and both master and servant are exhorted to a faith-
ful performance of their respective duties. The sole object
of their ministry, so far as it related to this subject, was to
improve the condition of both, and not to abrogate the rela-
tion that existed between them.

Such was the object of Jesus Christ and his Apostles; such,
as we have seen, was the object of the Christian Fathers during

152 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

the Apostolic ages, and even down to a late period in the his-
tory of the Church. And such is the object of the enlightened
and sincere Christian moralist of the present day.

The Golden Rule, then, as expounded by divine authority,
does not require of the kind, humane, and Christian master,
to withdraw the care, protection, and support which has long
secured and promoted the welfare and happiness of his slaves,
as a shield thrown around their helpless condition, and leave
them to perish for the want of it; but only to continue his
kind and humane treatment, by continuing the relation existing
between them, and ‘‘to give them that which is just and equi-
table.’”’ But methinks I hear the upbraidings of the abolition-
ists, in language like the following: ‘‘God hath made of one
blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the
earth.’’ ‘All men are created equal.’’ ‘‘ Slavery degrades its
subjects to mere chattels, and places them in the catalogue of
the brute creation: it deprives them of every hope or possi-
bility of advancement, or of bettering their condition.’’
‘Tt is a high-handed sin against God, a malum in se that
no man has a right, for a single moment, to persist in.”’
‘‘Freedom would not result in injury to the slave; it is just
what he requires to put him upon the true theory of his ad-
vancement.’’ ‘‘ The master has no right to come to any such
conclusion ; it is all wilful blindness and selfishness that leads
him to do it.’’ ‘‘ No man has a right to enslave another man ;
there can be no such thing as property in man.’’? ‘‘ Slavery
corrupts the public morals; prostrates the industrial energies,
and impoverishes the States in which it exists, and should,
therefore, be abolished and suppressed by law.’? ‘‘No man’s
conscience can justify slavery, therefore it is wrong,’’ &e.

These are some of the leading so-styled axioms of the aboli-
tionists; they are like a class of groundless fabrications that
are so oft repeated for truths, that their very author is at last
cheated into a partial belief in their verity. They have be-
come so hackneyed and stale as to pass quite current for self-
evident propositions, and, consequently, he who presumes to
dissent from this truth, and whose conscience dictates a different
view of this subject, is proscribed, and subjected to the worst
form of intolerance and persecution. We have defined to some
extent the position and views of the inspired expounders of the
scriptural law and Christian doctrines upon this subject. We
shall next presentt some of the views that may be honestly
maintained by the moral apologist for modern slavery. The
first proposition in the above series is taken from Paul’s dis-

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 153

course to the Athenians at the court of Areopagus. The pas-
sage in the original reads thus: Eroiyoa ve & évoe aiuaros nav
EOvos avOpanwv, Ke. Acts 17:26. The verb xocew is Acre used
in an active transitive sense, with the noun £6v0s for its object ;
its primitive meaning in this form is, to make, to mould, form,
shape, or fashion.1 In this passage it means the making of the
nations or races, in the same sense that man was made in the
beginning. ‘‘ He that [xoiyjoas| made them at the beginning
[éxovyoev |, made them male and female;’’? ‘‘ Who [éxouyoe |
made the heavens and earth and sea.’’?*> “ Hath not my hand
[ exornoe | made all things ?’’*

But, when the Scriptures say: ‘‘ All things were [éyévero |
made by him,’? &c.,° the verb ya:wouo. is used, signifying to
cause to be, or to exist. The one means the immediate work
of his hand, in an active transitive sense; the other simply the
cause in a passive signification, as by enacting and upholding
the laws of nature. But how does this comport with the theory
of the unity and common origin of all mankind? If there is
any meaning in Scripture language, God made [ay 26x05 | every
race as type of men, as certain as he did man himself; for the
same language is used in both instances.°®

Adam Olark, in his learned Commentaries, says, in reference
to this passage, that the noun aiuaros is wanting in many an-
cient MSS. and, consequently, that the numeral évos may as
well qualify any other noun as that. But this is immaterial to
our view of the subject. av 20s uvOpexov: This phrase in the
English is rendered, ‘‘all nations of men ;’ and is certainly
susceptible of a different construction and of a different idea ;
tgvos is in the singular, in which form the adjective zas is never
used in a collective sense in the New Testament, except when
applied to a noun that admits of no plural, as was 6 yoopos, the
whole world, and the like. When applied to one of a number
of like things in the singular, with or without the article in the
New Testament, it is, or should be, invariably rendered each
or “every,’’ and conveys a distributive, rather than a collective,
idea.’ In the plural it is universally rendered ‘‘all,’’ collect-

1 See Gr. Lex.’s Lid. and Scott, Dan., Pick., Gro.

2 Matt. 19: 4, 8 Acts 14: 5.

*Acts7: 50. Mark10:6. Heb. 1. Comp. Sept. Gen. 1: 1, 7, 16,
mapee, 20; 2:2; 6:2.

5 John 1: 3.

6 6vo¢ is used with reference to the natural, rather than civil, divisions
of mankind, and means a race or type, whence the science of ethnology.

T Tavros Z0vovs, ** from every nation.” Acts 2: 5. mas o' yeyevvnuévos, ‘* every

154 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

ively, in the New Testament. In the Septuagint, in the plural
it is sometimes rendered every, but I think never, all, collect-
ively, in the singular.

The only exception that can be found to this rule in the New
Testament is in the passage in dispute. In Acts 2 : 5 (aavtos
é0vovs), is correctly rendered ‘‘every nation;’’ respectively,
being in the singular. Then why should (av 26v0s) be rendered
‘all nations,’’ collectively, in the passage in Acts 17 : 26?
Let it be remembered that this is the only instance of the kind
in the New Testament, and contravenes its established use of
language. (xaroixew it nav ro npoownoy tis y7s): this clause
is rendered, ‘‘to dwell upon all the face of the earth.’’? In
that sense av would be superfluous; the face of a thing is ne-
cessarily its whole face. Let it be remembered that the noun
(yq) as often means a country or section of the earth’s surface,
where the sense requires it, as it does the earth itself.2 The
word (xav), here occurs again in the singular, qualifying a
noun that may be used in the plural; as there are many differ-
ent countries or portions of the earth presenting different faces
or physical characters. This language is fairly susceptible of
being rendered, every face of country, or variety of clime, if
necessary to the sense of the passage. The verb (xaroixtiy)

one born [of the spirit].” John 3: 8. av «dna, ‘every branch.” John
15:2. éxovri navri, ‘to every one having,” &c. Matt. 25 : 29. ads yap dairwv,
‘“cevery one asking,” &c. Matt. 7: 8. av devdpov ayabov, ‘* every good tree,
&c. Matt. 7: 17. 06 mas o' Acywr, ** not every one saying,” &c. Matt. 7: 21.
mason 7H Xriosi, ‘to every creature.” Mark 16: 15. &is macdy moniv, * into every
city.” Luke 10:1. xavvé rd micrevovri, ‘* to every one believing.” Rom. 1 :
16. On the other hand, in the plural it is rendered all, collectively.
rast rois £0vectv, [** shall be called] by all nations.” Mark11:17. és raara
ra vn, [‘* shall be led captive] into all nations.” Luke 21: 24. mavra ri
én, [‘* suffered] all nations.” Acts 14:16. vn énra, ‘ seven nations.”

Acts 18:19. xdé ravra ra ZOvn, ‘* and all nations.” Acts 15:17. avOpwmois:

nasi, *‘all men, &c. Acts 17: 80. xpos navras avOpwrors, ** to all men.” Acts
21:15. rxavra fn, ‘all nations.” Rev. 18: 28; also 17: 18; 14: 8.

But the same rule, generally, is observed by the learned Seventy in the -

Septuagint. See Gen. 1: 25; 29: 2, 5, 16.

1 Wherever za; denotes all collectively, the noun is not used in the plural,
as nav vocov, all manner of sickness, &c. Matt. 4: 23.

2 Destroying seven nations, He divided [rmv yav] their country. Acts 13 :
19. See also Lex. Lidd, and Scott, Don. et al. Behold, thou hast driven
me out this day [amc’ mpoownoy rijs yiis] ‘* from the face of the earth,” but that
could not be the entire face of the earth, but only his native clime. Gen.
4:14. This phrase is certainly here used to denote some particular sec-
tion of the earth’s surface, then why not in Acts 17: 27? See Septua-
gint, Gen. 2: 6; 19: 4; 14: 10, 5, 8; 10: 11, 12; 18: 9; 18: 185 20:1,
et passim.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 155

here means to inhabit or dwell in some place; and the noun
(xarovxias), from the same root, according to the philosophy of
language, must mean the place inhabited: the one is the exact
measure of the extent of the other. If, then (xav ro xposwnov
tis vis), the place or places inhabited, means the whole face of
the earth collectively (xarocxias), or the habitation must be co-
extensive with it, and would not be susceptible of (épodeocas)
boundaries; but all nations, collectively, would have but one
habitation, viz., ‘‘all the face of the earth,’’ collectively.'
Hence, in view of the other clause, and-applying the philosophy
of language to that of things, we deem our construction legiti-
mate. dpicas mpoterayuévors xaipovs, xai Tas Spobectas 77s xaraor xLas
avtay: “ And hath determined the time, before appointed, and
the bounds of thetr habitation.’’ This resembles a translation
of the Latin more than of the Greek of this passage; it is, to
say the least, extremely doubtful and obscure. To a proper
understanding of this text, it is necessary to consider the sub-
ject-matter upon which the Apostle was here treating. He
stood before the assembled wisdom of Greece, the most august
tribunal in the known world, to whom he was presenting the
majesty, wisdom, and power of the one living and true God,
the creator of all things, as displayed in his works. In the
26th verse, the one under consideration, he comes to speak of
the origin and distribution of the races of men. In this, he
shows the evidence of Divine wisdom and power, in that the
earth had not been left to be peopled by chance. He had not
only made each nation or race from one original, but he had
distributed them into appropriate localities, and marked out the
boundaries of the region that each should inhabit. In all this
he traces the hand of creative wisdom and power; surely He
dwelleth not in temples made with hands. The beauty and
elegance of the language is appropriate to the sublimity of the
subject and the magnitude of the occasion. Paul knew they
called him a babbler, that they looked upon his doctrine as fool-
ishness; if this could have prompted him to his master effort,
he proved himself fully equal to the occasion.

1 But such is not the meaning of the passage; it means the distributing
the nations into different countries, separated by boundaries. Gen. 10:
5, 25; 11:9. Deut. 82.8; 2: 5, 9, 10, 12,19. If God made the races
to inhabit every clime, or ‘‘ all the face of the earth,” would he have created
them all in one man and left them to find their way by chance into the
different parts of the earth? No; if he made the nations to dwell in dif-
ferent parts of the earth, he must have adapted them to the several
climes; there is no other meaning in the language; xaroixeiv is a verb in
the infinitive mood and governed by 260s, meaning that the races were
fitted to dwell in, or inhabit every variety of clime.

156 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

But what would these learned Greek philosophers have under-
stood from the English version, ‘‘ hath determined the times
before appointed??? What times? What connection has this
with the main chain of ideas here advanced ?

Some commentators say, ‘‘ the times,’’ here, mean the sea-
sons of the year; others, the number of men’s days, in reference
to the passage in Job, 15:5. Others, again, that they refer
to the moral and political aspect of nations, their rise and fall,
and the measure of their political existence, as in Luke 21: 24,
where it says, that ‘‘ Jerusalem shall be trodden down by the
Gentiles, until ‘the times’ of the Gentiles be fulfilled.” In this
passage, xatpovs is evidently used with reference to the political
and moral condition of nations or races, without reference to their
physical situation ; but this is the only instance where this word
is used, in that sense, in the New Testament, unless it be where
it speaks of the ‘‘signs of the times.” It is true, the noun
xatpos, in the New Testament, is rendered time or times; but
it never means the past, the present or future, or any measure
of duration. In such instances, the noun xpovds, or some other
word, is used.! Kacpos is generally used, in the New Testament,
to denote the fit, appropriate, or allotted time; and means, an
opportunity, emergency, crisis, or fit season, without reference
to date or duration.? It is a word of various shades of mean-
ing, which must always be determined from the context. It is
used by profane writers as nearly synonymous with the Latin
word modus, and the English word measure. Hence, it means,
the most fit or appropriate time, situation, opportunity, or oc-
casion ; and, in Greek literature generally, is as often used with
reference to place, as to time.* When used with reference to

1 En’ ecxarév trav xpovav, **in the last times.”? 1 Pet. 1: 20. Xpovovs ring
ayyoias, **times of ignorance.” Acts 17: 30. Kai ag reccapaxovraeri xpovor,
‘for about the space of forty years.” Acts 13:18. ‘O érepais yeveats,
‘‘which in other ages.” Eph. 8: 5. Mera rocotrov xpovov, **after so long a
time. Heb. 4: 7; also 9: 27; Acts, 15: 21. "Ori xpovos ot torai éri, **that
time shall be no more.” Rey. 10: 6.

2 Tév Kaipov riig exicxonns ood, ‘*the time of thy visitation.” Luke 19: 44.
‘O kaipos & Enos ovmw mapecriv, ‘¢my time is not yet come.” John 7: 6, 8.
Od yap ijv Kaipos ovxdv, ‘for the time of figs was not yet.” Mark 11: 13.
‘Eidores rév xaipov, ‘‘and knowing the time,” i.e. the hour. Rom. 13: 11;
see also 1 Cor. 7: 29; 2 Cor. 6: 2; Eph..5: 16; Col. 4:5. “Ori ddjtyor
katpov éxet, ‘he hath but a short time.” Rev. 12: 12; Matt 11: 25; 12:
1; 14:1. Snypeta rwv xaipdy od dvvacdc, ‘cannot discern the signs ef the
times.” Mat. 16:3. Axor mAnpwOwoi xatpoi ¢6vdv, *¢until the times of the
Gentiles be fulfilled.” Luke 21: 24.

3 YrepBaddwv rov xaipov, ‘overshooting the mark or proper place. Plut.
Kaipds d’ ent ndotv apioros, “ the best situation for all. Hes. Op. 692; Theogn.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 157

place, it means, its fitness in size or suitableness of locality.
As it is used with reference to their moral and political aspect,
so it may be with reference to the physical situation of nations.
In the former sense, it is used but once in the New Testament.
Why, then, may we not render it once in the latter, if the mean-
ing of the other clauses of the passage require it ? The subject-
matter of this verse is, the physical history of the races, as to
their origin and distribution. The chain of ideas seems to be,
that they were created, distributed into appropriate localities,
and their boundaries set between them.' To render xacpovs
‘<times,”’ here, seems not at all congenial to the sense: it seems
to be a wide digression from the obvious chain of ideas in the
author’s mind. We should have no objection to the rendering,
but for the difficulty of fixing upon its meaning. What does
the word ‘‘tiémes’’ here mean? Does it mean, the moral and
political aspect or condition of nations, as Cicero did by the
gravissima tempora —as when he exclaimed, O tempora! O
mores |! — or as in speaking of the témes with reference to any
period of history —as, the time of Elizabeth, &c.? That I
cannot believe ; for, in that sense, God ‘‘ hath?’ not ‘‘ determined
the times before appointed.’’ I cannot distinguish such doc-
trine from rank fatalism — one of the peculiar tenets of the Stoic
philosophers, whom St. Paul was addressing on that occasion ;
yet he told them, in ‘‘all things’’ they were too superstitious.
Had Paul intended here to teach them the doctrine, that God
had predestinated the times, or whatever happened to all na-
tions, he might well have reminded them of the sayings of some
of their philosophers, as he did of their poets with reference to
Omnipotence.

Again: does ¢imes here mean, the beginning, reign, do-
minion, rise and fall of empires? or, the commencement and
political existence of nations, as where it speaks of the ‘ ‘times’?

401. Kaipov mepa, ‘* beyond measure, unduly.” Esch. Pr. 507. MetSwy rov
kalpov yasrnp, *‘the greatest longing for an opportunity, as a good appetite
for dinner.” Xen. Symp. 2. 11. ‘Ecxarog xaipos, ‘extreme danger.” Pub.
Of place, it means, the right or fit place or spot. Thuc. 4. 54. 90. Also, a
vital part of the body; hence, é xaipov rumnvai, ‘hit in the vital parts or
right place. Eurip. Andr. 1120. dp redevratw xapiv xatpov éxovea, ‘having
the last favorable opportunity.” Thuc. 1. 42. Tijv dxaipeay rijv xsivov xatpov
vuerepov vonicavras, ‘* considering his unfavorable, your favorable situation.”
Demosth. Olinth. 1. 16. Ei Béiddimog \aBoi cad’ hywv roiovrov xaipov, ‘if Philip
should seize upon such an opportunity against you.” Id. Tatra noinoai
kaipov ?xovres, ‘* these things must be done while there is an opportunity.” Id.

1 Homer uses only the adjective xa:pios, and always in III. with reference
to place, as being or happening in the right place. See Lex. Lidd, and
Scott, et al.

14

158 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

of the Gentiles?! This meaning would be equally liable to the
objection just stated ; ‘for these are but the inevitable results
of their moral and political conditions: whatever determines
the one, necessarily determines the other. Were the vast extent
of the Roman Empire, its rise, decline, and fall, and the over-
running of the nations by the Goths and Vandals of the North,
and the subsequent sway of Mohammedan dominion, all (npor?-
tayuevors?) before appointed, or forevrdained, Hy the active in-

1 Luke 21: 24.

2 Adam Clark has it mpoorerayyevovs, in four of the most approved ancient
MSS., viz., Codex Alex., Codex Vatic., Codex Basil., Codex Bez. SeeComm.
With ‘this change, the ‘clause would "read, ‘and hath designated the ap-
pointed or allotted seasons, situations, or climes, ” &e.

There are scarcely two commentators who agree upon the exact mean-
ing of this clause. The obscurity and difficulty attending the present
English version first led me to examine the original more critically; by so
doing, I became satisfied that it was susceptible of a different idea. As
to the rendering of the first clause of. this verse, I am satisfied that ours
is the only consistent and correct rendering that can be given to it; as
to the remainder, I am not so well satisfied, and I leave it for the reader to
. devise a more consistent and satisfactory one, if he can, for himself —
having presented the facts.

We expect, this, as all innovations upon the present English version of
the Bible do, will provoke the censure of all those who believe more in
the inspirations of the popes of Rome, the savans of king James, and ec-
clesiastical synods and theological professors, than in the authors of the
New Testament. But the charitable reader must pardon me for taking
the liberty, in this instance, to read and think for myself. This was a
part of my college education, that the New Testament was put into our
hands in the original. This, with the assistance of the most approved
commentators and lexicons, we were required to read for ourselves, inde-
pendent of ecclesiastical law or sectarian dictation. We were taught to
look through the mist of superstitious venerations in which any version
might be shrouded, to read and judge for ourselves, and to account
weekly to our preceptors for the proficiency we had made. Yet we are
not wholly lost to a just appreciation of the English version of the Bible.
It is undoubtedly, as a whole, the best translation that ever has been, or
ever will be made. In its literary character there is a chasteness and
elegance of style, purity of diction, and accuracy of representation of the
original ideas, unequalled by any translation of other works. In a Serip-
ture sense, there is a sacred consonance between the very language and
the ideas, that by the power of association has become a part of men’s
moral and intellectual being, as inseparable, within their mental vision,
as light and heat. There is a holy prestige pervading its very idioms
and phraseology, so inwrought into the taste, feelings, and affections of
men, that it would seem to be sacrilege to invade. Hence, no language
can now be substituted, to convey the same truths with equal power; and
it behoves all to be cautious how they tamper with this sacred treasure.
But to say that there is not a single word, or a single passage, fairly sus-
ceptible of a different meaning, is more than we are required to endorse.
But, if our rendering of this passage be not satisfactory to the reader,

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 159

terposition of the Divine Will? Is this what Paul was declaring
to the learned Greeks, as the work of creative wisdom and

and he still insists that it means all nations collectively, then we submit
whether these universal terms are not used in a limited meaning in the
text, as in numerous instances that have been and may be cited. The
frequent use of universal terms, in the Scriptures, in a limited significa-
tion, renders it unsafe to predicate any idea of universality upon them,
except from the positive requirement of the subject-matter of the text.
See quotations, above, of the word mas, p. 156, n. 1; infra, p. 163, n. 1.

The doctrine of a plurality of original creations for the human family
is by no means new. For it was believed and expounded by a learned
Rabbi of the Apostolic age, in a commentary on the Pentateuch, known
as the Targum, ‘ Relation between Scriptures and Geology,” by Rev. G.
P. Smith, p. 393. The words of the Hebrew Targum are, that God
originally created men red, white, and black. Said Dr. Morton, ‘‘I have
invariably, when treating of this subject, avowed my belief in the
aboriginal diversity of mankind, independently of the progressive action
of physical causes. I now venture to give a full and somewhat modified
explanation of their origin.” For which see ‘‘Crania Americania,”’ p. 83.
‘‘Crania /Xgyptiaca,” p. 37. ‘Distinctive Characteristics of the Abori-
ginal Race of America,” p. 86; and ‘‘Hybridity of Animals considered
with reference to the Unity of the Human Species.” Am. Jour. Science,
1847.

The passage in the Targum, above referred to, has reference to Gen. 1:
26, 27. ‘* And God said (Motjowpev avOpwnov), Let us make man,” &c., ‘and
[apxérwcav] let them have dominion over the fish of the sea,” &c. ‘*And God
(éxoincsvrév dvOpwnov) made man, &c., (dpoev rai Sidv éxoinoev airovs), male and
female created he them.”” Such language as this could hardly refer to a
single individual. Man in its widest sense means the whole human
family, and would seem to refer here to the genus homo. If it meant but
one man, the Greek text would read [kai dpxérw] and let him have dominion,
&c. But there rather seems to be a plurality of them, hence ‘let them
have dominion,” &c.; and ‘‘male and female created he them.”’ And the
Targum says they were ‘‘created red, white and black.” I have quoted
the Septuagint as the best acknowledged authority upon the Hebrew text.
The article seems to be used or omitted arbitrarily with reference to man
in the several verses of the second chapter, by the English translators.
According to the Greek text there is no possible reason for the use that is
thus made of it. ‘‘And Adam called the name of his wife Zwi [life, ex-
istence], because she was the mother of all the living,” Gen. 3: 20. But
who named Adam? he must have taken his name from the import of the
term, which means [in the Heb. Ch. Lyr. Etta. Ar.] man, primarily the
human species, mankind, &c., N. Web. ‘‘ This ts the book of the generations
of Adam,” [Greek yevicsws avOpwrov,] ‘‘and this is the book of the genera-
tions of men [instead of Adam], Gen. 5:1. ‘* Male and female created he
them ;” ‘‘and called their name ADAM” [or man, or mankind]. The name
Adam seems to be used in the Scriptures sometimes in a generic and
sometimes in an indiyidual sense: it seems to apply to created man, in
contradistinction from man that is born of woman.

People of a common stock may have had several or many origins.
Such appears to be the fact not only with men, but all the inferior ani-
mals. We are nowhere told that they were created in a single pair, but

160 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

power? Some say it means their respective seasons. This is
far less objectionable; for their seasons, as to their length,
character, &c., would result necessarily from their physical situ-
ations or climes, and differ in nothing materially from what we
understand from the passage. I think it cannot be success-
fully contended, that xacpovs does not here relate to physical
subject-matters or things; whether it be the seasons, or situa-
tions, or climes of the nations, it is of but little consequence.
Why, then, may it not be rendered, appropriate situations or-
climes — thus: and hath determined their appropriate climes,
before appointed (or allotted or set apart for each), and the
boundaries of their habitations? Here there is no digression
from the main chain of the ideas. The participle épicas is de-
rived from the root épos, which means, a boundary or limit, and
was originally applied to a field: it is here used to designate
both the xacpouvs (climes) and the dpoSeovas xaroixtas (boundaries
of the habitations). It seems to have the same meaning in
both members of the sentence, connected and continued by the
force of xav, and ras opodeovas seems to be thrown in intensively.
The wav 76 xpocwnor rus yys (every face of country or variety of
clime), the xacpovs (appropriate seasons, situations, or climes),
and the xavocxias (habitations), all seem to relate to the same
subject-matter, modifications of the same thing, and their cor-
relative significations to be essential to the continuity of the
idea. So far they seem to be convertible terms: the one mean-
ing the thing inhabited; the other, the habitation.

And, as the idea of boundaries applies more appropriately
to a region of country, or situation, or clime, than to any thing
else, applying the philosophy of language to that of things, I
conclude that the following is a legitimate construction of this
passage : —

[God] hath made of one blood each or every race or type
of men, to dwell in, or inhabit, each or every variety of clime
or face of country; having designated their appropriate sea-

rather, ‘‘Male and female created He them.” Nerig. Hist. R. i. p. 37.
Will any one pretend that the millions of millions of living calcareous
polythalmia, discovered in a single cubic inch of marl taken from the late
deep sea soundings on the coast of the United States, were created in a
single pair, or had their origin in Mesopotamia.? ‘*Les libres Juifs
n’entendent pas etabliere que leur premier homme ait été le pére du genre
humain, mais seulement celui de leur espéce privilegeé. Il ne peut con-
sequemment y avoir aucune impiété 4 reconnaitre parmi nous plusieurs
especes qui, chacune, auront eu leur Adam et leur berceau particulier.”
Berg. de St. Vincent, L’Hom. i. p. 66.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 161

sons, situations, or climes, before appointed, or allotied, and
the boundaries of their habitations.

This differs materially from the present English version.
The one, it is contended, means, that God hath made all na-
tions of men, collectively, from one original blood, or stock, or
parentage. Theother, that he hath made each nation, respec-
tively, from one blood or parentage. It is contended, that the
one teaches the unity and common origin of all mankind; the
other teaches, that there may have been a plurality of original
races, each descending from their respective originals. Which
of these theories is true, we leave for the reader to conclude
for himself, after presenting the facts.

- The Apostle, in the discourse from which this quotation is
made, was treating upon the attributes of the Deity. He was
striving to impress upon his hearers an idea of the awful
grandeur and majesty of his being; he illustrates this by
alluding to the wonderful exhibitions of power, wisdom, and
goodness, in his acts of creations ; had it been his object simply
to assert that the human race had sprung from a single source,
he might have employed fewer words and different language.
But he rather shows that the Creator had not only formed every
nation or species of men from one source, but that he had first
formed the several portions of the earth to be their habitations
and then adapted them to their respective climates and physical
-divisions, appointed them their several locations and set bounds
to their habitations.

The passage thus presents a glimpse at the great sciences of
Geology and Ethnology. The idea that he hath appointed the
locations before determined, evidently refers to the intermediate
changes and fitting up of the earth, by geological phenomena,
for the habitation of man. It seems to be intended as an ex-
position of the Mosaic account of the origin and distribution
of the human race.’ And although the construction which we
have put upon it harmonizes perfectly with known truths as
developed by modern science, yet we should be very reluctant

1Tt could not be expected that the English translators, under their royal
instructions, would presume to innovate, in rendering this passage, upon
the commonly received dogma of that day relative to the Mosaic account
of the origin and distribution of mankind. See Instructions, sup. p. 126.

If God has made from one source every nation of man to inhabit every
different portion of the earth, who can say that he did not form them into
the varieties in which they are now found in those regions? How could
they be made to inhabit them unless they were suited to the climate, and
destined for a specific mode of life?

*

L

162 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

to adopt or reject any construction of Scripture language,
simply on account of its apparent harmony or conflict with any
human theory, except where such theory is based upon demon-
strable truth. : :

In that case, from the established laws of belief, the mind is
forced to seek out some construction of the language compatible
with the demonstration, or admit that the Scriptures are incon-
sistent with themselves. To attempt to silence reason in such
a case, to draw the veil of monastic bigotry over the truth, and
to control the intellect by the terrors of hell-fire, is to do vio-
lence to the constitution of the human mind. Belief is matter
of evidence, and not of will; over which man has no more
control than he has over ‘‘the wind that bloweth where it
listeth.”” Demonstration carries with it irresistible conviction ;
and mankind are only accountable for their belief so far as they
have neglected to keep their minds justly susceptible of the
proper influence of evidence. Suppose, for instance, that Moses
had, in some of his writings, attempted some remarks upon
Geometry, in which he had said that the sum of the squares of
the two legs of a right-angled triangle was equal to twice the
square of the hypothenuse; when we come to test the appa-
rent meaning of this language, by the demonstration of Euclid,
who would deny the necessity for seeking some explanatory
construction such as to reconcile it with known truth. The per-
fect equality of these parts is a truth “from everlasting to ever-
lasting,’? unchangeable, ‘‘the same yesterday, to-day, and
forever.’’ It is a necessary existence which it is impossible to
conceive to be otherwise.’’ In this sense it is said that ‘‘ God
is truth.’? That his ‘‘ Word” is also truth, ‘‘ forever settled in
the heavens.’’ But we need not be confined to hypothetical cases
for our illustration; we may cite those of reality. Take, for
instance, the command of Joshua to the sun to stand still; by
that language the idea is apparent that the length of the day is
governed by the motion of the sun round the earth, which
brings the Pentateuch in conflict with the Principia and the
Copernican theory of the heavenly bodies, which are based upon
demonstration. Here again the mind is forced to the conclu-
sion that this language cannot be understood in its literal sense.
So likewise in the account of the six days’ creation, the recent
geological developments force the mind back through the dim
twilight of the past to a remote period in the antiquity of
nature, where reason falters as upon the boundaries of eternity,
and the light of the imagination dies away in the welkin beyond.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 163

Compared with the period actually fixed by the Mosaic narra-
tive, it is as a thousand years to a single day.

Take, again, the apparent philosophy of Moses in relation
to a ‘firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide
the waters from the waters.” (Gen. 1:6.) It cannot be
denied that an allusion is here made to the common notion of
all antiquity of a material firmament. The Greeks and Romans
believed it was made of brass; others supposed it was of
erystal. And Moses, it seems, could not satisfy the minds of
the Jews as to the rain that descended from heaven and drowned
the earth without interposing a material firmament that divided
the waters from the waters, ‘‘and the firmament was called
heaven ;’’ hence he says, “the windows of heaven were
opened,” &e.

We propose, in the remainder of this essay, to adduce facts
for the consideration of the reader, and to suggest the inquiry
whether the commonly received notion of the Mosaic account
of the origin and distribution of the human race (which is that
by the natural law of propagation the whole human family have
descended from a single pair called Adam and Eve), is not as
manifestly at variance with demonstrative truth, as either of the
instances above cited. We shall adopt no theory, assume no
position as our own, but simply present an impartial array of
facts and leave the reader to form his own conclusions. We
simply premise that we believe the diversity of species or types
of mankind is as much beyond the power of natural causes and
as much implies the miraculous interposition of the hand of the
Creator, as the origin of man itself. At what stage in the
progress of human origin and distribution, and in what manner
these diversities were formed by the Creator, it seems to be
difficult to determine in our present state of knowledge.
Whether they were formed from one original stock which was
alone created from the dust, as the various languages were
formed from one original at the ‘‘confusion of tongues,’’ or
whether they were originally created in distinct species, is
immaterial to the gist of our argument. If mankind were
formed by the direct hand of the Creator into different species,
with all the mental and physical peculiarities that now distinguish
them, and adapted by Him in their several classes, susceptibili-
ties, ranks, and gradations, to inhabit the various climes and
physical divisions of the globe, then they must haye been
originally designed for peculiar modes of life, and distinct
grades in the rank of civilization, as well as in scientific and
intellectual improvement.

164 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

The language of the Apostle above quoted, was, doubtless,
intended as an exposition of the Mosaic account of the origin
and distribution of the human family over the earth; and the
construction which we have put upon it, as we shall see, can
alone reconcile it with demonstrative truth in the ethnological
history of man.’

It may be remarked that the divine legation of Moses might
have related only to the affairs of the Jewish nation ;—that the
Jews were in his estimation the human race, par excellence,
and that his writings, in a literary and philosophical point of
view, are but a history of the origin, rise, and progress of that
peculiar nation. He was raised up by a special providence to
be their deliverer from Egyptian slavery, to conduct them
safely through the mysterious paths of the sea, to lead them
across the desert wilds of an unknown region. His history of
these events seems to be designed as a narrative of their trials
and sufferings under Pharaoh, of their miraculous delivery from
the house of bondage, and preservation through the wilderness.
Though he begins back with the history of the creation of the
world, and of all its inhabitants, it is but to trace the hand of
the Creator, and his design seems only to be to narrate such a
series of the precursory providences of God as conspired to
fulfil this promise to Abraham, the planting of Israel in the
promised land.

In his genealogy of the several generations from Adam,
through Noah and family down, he pursues them no further
than is necessary to get at the paternal ancestors of Abraham,
the founder of the Jewish nation. His object seems to be, to
trace back the origin of the children of Israel to the imme-
diate hand of God, rather than to give any general history of
the origin and distribution of the human race.* The use of

1 «Hiven Dr. Pritchard, the Magnus Apollo of the theory of the unity
and common origin of mankind, in the last page of the fifth and last
volume of his great work, gives it as his matured opinion, that the human
race has been chilliads of years upon the earth. He also admits the
deluge was but a partial phenomenon, and that no known physical
causes could have produced the existing diversities among men.”
(Morton.) But it may be that some of the blood of the defunct types
was preserved in the ark (as contended for by Mr. Fletcher), and that the
curse of Noah upon the descendants of Ham was but a declaration of
the physiological fact that they would possess the color, as well as the
physical and mental characteristics of the people of Africa: we have no
objection to such a theory.

2 Hence, in the fourth chapter of Genesis, we lose sight of Cain and of
his generations: how long he lived, where he died, or who was his wife,
we are nowhere informed; and, what is still more singular, we are left

Le i a

a i a) _—_

C= De he

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 165

universal terms in a limited sense, throughout the Scriptures
of both the Old and New Testaments, is so frequent that they
will have but little weight in the history of Moses towards
establishing its general character.’ Therefore, the history of
Adam and Eve may be understood as an account of the origin
of the peculiar type of man to which the children of Israel
belonged, and perhaps the figurative or representative idea of
the origin or formation of all other species; or, that each spe-
cies or type was distinctly formed, and suited to the region it
was to inhabit, at the confusion of tongues and the dispersion
of the races.’

It may also be remarked, that the author of the Pentateuch
always spoke after the manner of men, or, in other words,
adapted his language and observations to the knowledge and
notions prevalent in the age in which he wrote. Hence the
command of Joshua to the sun. And it will not be pretended
that the children of Israel, admitting that they were learned in
all the wisdom of the Egyptians, had any knowledge of the
remote parts of the earth from Palestine. Egypt, Arabia, a
limited portion of Northern Africa and Western Asia, circum-

in the dark as to the age, death, and burial of ‘‘ Hve, the mother of all
the living,” the most important personage in the human family.

1 «© As Jehovah thy God liveth, there is no nation or kingdom whither
my soul hath not sent me to seek thee,” &c. 1 Kings 18: 18. ‘And all
the earth sought the face of Solomon, to hear his wisdom.” 1 Kings
10: 24. ‘And the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the
world were discovered.” 2 Sam. 22: 16.

«¢And the whole earth was of one language,” &c. Gen. 11:1. Does
this include China, Lapland, Patagonia, Peru, and New Holland? ‘And
the queen of the South came from the ends of the earth to hear the wis-
dom of Solomon.” Matt. 12:42. ‘And it came to pass in those days,
that a decree went forth from Cesar Augustus that all the world should
be taxed.” Luke 2:1. ‘I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles,
that thou shouldst be for salvation to the ends of the earth.” Acts 18: 47;
Isa. 47:6. ‘Yes, verily, their sounds went into all the earth, and their
words unto the ends of the world.” Rom. 10:18. Ps. 19: 4.

2 It is well established that the different species of man cannot be ac-
counted for upon physiological principles — nothing less than a miracle
could have produced such an effect: it matters not, then, how this
miracle was wrought, whether by the transformation of mankind into
different species after their creation, or by creating them in varieties.
The confusion of tongues would be no less a miracle than such a trans-
formation. And we say that the Creator might as well have formed the
different species by suiting them to the different regions, when He dis-
persed them abroad over the earth from the tower of Babel, as to have
formed from one all the varieties of language which they should speak,
so that they would no longer understand one another. Either is a miracle,
and one quite as probable as the other.

166 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

scribed the knowledge of the earth of the Pharaonic Egyptians
themselves. And in the use of gencral terms by the writer of
Genesis, &c., as the whole world, all mankind, and the like,
this portion of the earth could reasonably be the only one in-
cluded in the remark. And hence it becomes the limits of the
geography and ethnology of the Mosaic history.

It would be wholly inconsistent with the economy of Nature,
as everywhere exhibited, to disperse abroad, from the single
region of Mesopotamia, all the different races of men and
animals to the most remote parts of the earth, and leave them
to perish, die out, and become extinct for want of adaptation
to the climate and region which they were destined to inhabit ;
or, to leave them to the slow, tedious, and destructive process
(if such were possible) of peopling the earth, by undergoing
such changes in their physical organization and mental charac-
ter as to enable them to live in the various zoological locations
in which they may now be found.?

It is a natural and fixed law of the animal and vegetable
kingdoms, that each genus, and even species, is suited to the
elements in which they dwell—both the fish of the sea, the
fowls of the air, and the trees of the forest, the plants and
flowers of the field, and beasts to the regions in which they are
found. And this analogy holds good throughout the entire
economy of Nature. So true is it, that, reasoning @ poste-
riort, the growth of the vegetation and animals of any region
being given, the climate and physical character of the country
is at once determined.’ It is an imposing zoological fact, that
the different types of mankind have each a distinct fauna or

1Such doctrine leaves the world to have been peopled by chance,
against the laws of Nature. But, in this, is it possible that the Cauca-
sian would ever have become a Negro? As well might it be said that
the noble Newfoundland dog was from the German Poodle or the Beagle.
It is said that unless all men descended literally from the Mosaic Adam,
then the great plan of redemption is defective and false: this is, how-
ever, a non-sequitur. The Mosaic narrative may be the figurative or re-
presentative idea of the origin of every type or race of men, all of whom
are sinful in their earthly nature, and all included within the pale of the
great plan of redemption. 1 Cor. 15, 45, 47, 48, 49. 2 Cor.5:1. John
8:81. Rom. 8: 29; 5: 14,

2 In certain coal deposits, and among the fossil remains of high north-
ern localities, there are found the remains of certain plants and animals
that are known to exist only in the tropical countries (such as the coal
deposit near the mouth of Mackenzie river, and the fossil remains of
elephants in Siberia and other high northern latitudes). Hence the con-
clusion of geologists, that a tropical climate once pervaded those regions,
Lyell’s P. Geol.

eens oS. | eee eee

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 167

type of animals, that may be naturally classified with them, and
limited to the same zoological location.’ Hence, it would be
as preposterous to contend that the multifarious species of the
genus horse, or cow, or dog, or any other class of animals that
may be found so widely different in different zoological loca-
tions, have all descended from a single pair, or a common
stock or blood, as to contend that this is true of the human
species.”

The anomaly in the laws of nature would be equally manifest
in forcing either men, animals or plants into a clime uncongenial
to their growth, and unsuited to their natures.

But we appeal to well authenticated facts in the physical .
history of man.

The recent developments of Chevalier Lepsius, and others,
in Egyptian researches, establish beyond a doubt, a date for
the termination of the twelfth dynasty of Egypt, at least twenty-
three centuries before the Christian era — a period, according
to the best biblical chronology, nearly cotemporary with Noah’s
flood.*

1See Essay of Prof. Agassiz, in Types of Mankind, Part First. This
fact, established by that learned professor, is one of the most imposing
in the whole range of Natural History. It leads to the inevitable con-
clusion, that the human race and the animal kingdom have been governed
by the same laws in their origin and distribution.

2 If mankind are progressive or variable in their type, what could limit
their variations? Why are they not constantly going on? Has the
human species attained to every possible variety? There has not yet
been any alteration in their varieties since the earliest glimpses of their
history: when did these variations begin, and when will they cease, if
they are not fixed facts in the physical history of the races?

8 The generations from Noah to Abraham were ten: Shem, Arphaxad,
Salah, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor, Terah and Abraham. According
to biblical chronology, Abraham was 58 years old at the death of Noah.
Noah died 350 years after the flood, aged 950 years. Abraham, then, was
born 292 years after the flood. He was 75 years old when he went up
out of Ur of the Chaldees, the land of Haran, to go into the land of
Canaan. Accordingly it must have been, according to the Mosaic account,
about 370 years after Noah’s flood that Abraham went down into Egypt;
yet he finds there no acquaintance or kindred, but, on the contrary, he
finds a great empire, composed of millions of strange people, and bebolds,
standing around him, pyramids and temples erected by this more ancient
and distinct race, with records, hieroglyphical and hieratic, written in a
language to him foreign, and dating back more than 2000 years before
his birth. Is it possible that this empire could have sprung from the
family of Noah?

‘¢Whenee that curse we call primeval sin?
*Twere Adam’s children breeding In AND 1n.”—MorToNn.

When Cain went down into the land of Nod, he must have found a wife,
neither his sister nor his niece.

168 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

Upon the monuments of this dynasty are found delineated,
in sculpture and paintings, several of the different types of
man. The same author traces these records of stone back to
the fourth Memphitic dynasty, the oldest sculptural represen-
tations of man now extant. And even here, in these remote
evidences of the first footprints of man upon the earth, are
monumental evidences of Egyptian Pharaohs striking at Asi-
atics, and perfect delineations of two distinct types of men
about five thousand years old. If there then existed two dis-
tinct types of mankind within the range of the geographical
knowledge of Egypt, five thousand years ago, or as far back
as we have any historical evidences of any kind upon this sub-
ject, and the same identical types, or their vestiges, are still
found in the same locality, there is reason to believe that there
were then as many distinct types, located in the various por-
tions of the earth, as are found in those localities at the present
day.

In the delineations of the several species of men in the relics
of Egyptian art of the twelfth dynasty, there are exhibited
four distinct types or classifications, with lineaments as widely
different and as distinctly marked as those of the living speci-
mens that now people those regions. The figures that may be
seen in plates, on a folio scale, in the great works of Belzoni,
Champollion, Rossellini, Lepsius, and others, copied from the
tombs, monuments and pyramids of Ancient Egypt, show con-
clusively that the physiognomy of the Egyptian (or Mongolian
complexion of the present), the yellow or Malaysian, the white
or Caucasian, and the black or Negro types or races, thirty-five
centuries ago, were identical with those of the present day.’
Says Dr. Nott: ‘‘I know of no Archeologist of respectable
authority, at the present day, who will aver that the races now
found throughout the great valley of the Nile, and scattered
over a considerable portion of Asia, were not as distinctly and
broadly contrasted, at least thirty-five centuries ago, as at this
moment. The Egyptians, Canaanites, Nubians, Tartars, Ne-
groes, Arabs, and other types, are as faithfully delineated on
the monuments of the seventeenth and eighteenth dynasties, as
if the paintings had been executed by an artist of our present
age.’?

If these distinct features of the four different races of men
found in Egyptian sculpture, were as manifest thirty-five cen-
turies ago as they now are, and the long period of three thou-

1 These plates may be seen in miniature in the Types of Mankind, on
folio scale, in Harvard College library.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 169

sand and five hundred years has made no inroads upon their
lines of demarkation, but left them identically the same, how
far back into the eternity of the past must we trace these lines
of descent to bring them to a termination in a single point ?

If they have run parallel for near four thousand years, what
is the geometrical conclusion with regard to their ever meeting
in the past? and what must be our: hopes, expectations, and
theory, with regard to their destiny in the future ?

But the ancient Egyptians could include in their divisions
only such nations as were then known to them; and if the
Kgyptian ethnographers, four thousand years ago, found the
same diversity of features and complexions, and were puzzled
with the same different types of men, within the limited circum-
ference of their geographical knowledge, what must we conclude
with regard to the nations totally unknown to them ?

They were not a commercial people; they were a nation
within themselves, tenacious of their own arts, government,
manners and customs, and much like the Chinese, locked up
within the limits of their own territory. They could have pos-
sessed no knowledge of the nations of the earth except within
the immediate valley of the Nile, Arabia, and a limited portion
of Western Asia. Of the great cotemporary nations, China,
Australia, Northern and Southern Asia, Central and Southern
Africa, Europe and America, the Pharaonic Egyptians knew
nothing.

If, then, climatic influences have wrought no change in the
physiology of these ancient classifications, handed down to us,
distinct and entire, from so remote a period, what must we
conclude with regard to all the other different species of men
now found scattered over the wide surface of the globe ?

If the varieties of complexion, features, and physiology, ob-
servable in the different species of mankind, is to be attributed
to climatic and other influences, as is contended by Dr.
Pritchard, and other advocates of the unity and common origin
of the human race,’ why is it that we, on the one hand, find
such vast scopes of country, presenting every variety of climate,
soil and production, from the frigid to the torrid zone, often
peopled by nations of a single type, presenting the same gene-
ral features and normal characteristics? In such instances,
certainly, the varieties of species do not correspond to the va-

1 Natural History of Man, by Dr. Crowls Pritchard, the acknowledged
orthodox authority upon the unity and common origin of mankind, for
the last half century.

170 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

rieties in climate, &c., which, according to the above theory,
would seem to be natural.

Take, for instance, the whole continent of America, as far as
it extends, from pole to pole. The aboriginal tribes of this
immense belt, equal to one-half the circumference of the earth,
were wholly unknown to the Egyptians, the Greeks and Romans;
and when the continent was discovered, less than four centuries
ago, it was found to be inhabited from the Arctic to Cape
Horn, and from ocean to ocean, by a population displaying
peculiar physical traits unlike any race in the old world; speak-
ing languages bearing no resemblance in structure to other
languages, and living everywhere among animals and plants
specifically distinct from those of Europe, Asia, Africa, and
Oceanica. Yet they possessed no aberrant peculiarities as to
one another, sufficient to distinguish them into separate species,
or types. They all, from the polar regions of the North to the
South, possessed the same complexion, facial contour, and
physical conformation. Says Dr. Morton, ‘‘All possess, though
in various degrees, the long, lank, black hair; the heavy brow ;
the small, dull, and sleepy eye; the full, compressed lips; the
salient but dilated nose;1 and, we may add, the copper com-
plexion, broad mouth, high cheek bones, and small square
heads. ’’

These characteristics are blended in the most civilized and
savage tribes, along the rivers and sea-coasts, in the valleys and
on the mountains; in the prairies and the forests; in the torrid
and the ice-bound regions; amongst those that live on fish, on
flesh, or on vegetables.’

The vast regions inhabited by the Mongolians in Asia present
instances of a similar character. That vast race of beings
known as Esquimaux in America, and under the names of Lap-
landers, Samoiedes, and Tchuktshes in the north of Asia, so
well known since the voyages of Captain Cook, and the Arctic
expeditions of England and Russia, differs widely from the
Indian of North America, the white of Europe, and the Mon-
gols of Asia, to whom they are adjacent; yet they are all
stamped with the same general conformation so as to be classed
under a single species. Again, the vast region of New Holland,
stretching from ten to forty degrees of south latitude, in its
population, animals, birds, insects, and plants, is totally
different from any other portion of the globe.®

1 Crania Americana, Morton, p. 260. 2 Types of Mankind, p. 276.
$ Essay of Prof. Agassiz; Types of Mankind, Pt. i.

—— |

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 171

‘‘The men,” says Dr. Nott, ‘‘ present altogether a very pecu-
liar type; they are black, but without the woolly heads and
other characteristics of the negroes.’’? ‘‘ Beyond, we find Van
Diemen’s Land, reaching to the 44° south, which presents a
temperate climate not unlike that of France; and what is
remarkable, its inhabitants, unlike those of New Holland, are
black, with frizzled heads, very similar to the African race.”’?

Under the same parallels, and extending even farther south,
lies New Zealand, where commence the beautiful Polynesian
race. And what is still more wonderful, they are of a light-
brown color, have smooth, black hair, and almost oval faces ;
they include, with various islands, near half:the circumference
of the globe.’

On the other hand, take, for instance, the single distinguish-
ing peculiarity of color, and we find it impossible to account
for its varieties in different species upon any hypothesis, for the
distribution of mankind, founded upon the unity or common
origin of the whole human race, and the effect of climatic and
other physical influences alleged by its advocates.

In the highest hyperborean regions where human foot-prints
can be traced, there are found colors and complexions darker
than others under the burning climes of the Torrid Zone.*

The Samoiedes and Tchuktshes of the extreme north, are
said to be much darker than the Tuaricks of Soudan in Central
Africa. Among the Mongols, also, there exist various shades,
not confined to any zone, locality, climate, or condition. In
India, also, we meet with people of all shades, from fair to
black, who have been living adjacent to each other from time
immemorial. The Rohillas, who are blonde, and situated south
of the Ganges, are surrounded by the Nepauleans with black
skins ; the Mahrattas, with yellow; and the Bengalese of a deep
brown color. And yet the Rohillas inhabit the plains, and the
Nepauleans the mountains.* The same is true of the inhabi-

1 Types of Mankind, p. 71.

2U. 8S. Exploring Expedition of Wilkes and D’Arville in the South
Pacific, 1849 and 1850. :

8 Types of Mankind, p. 64.

* Des Moulins des Races Humaines, p. 169. All the intermediate shades
from white to black are found in those races of oval faces, large facial]
angle, smooth hair, which Blumenbach ranks under the head of Caucasian,
Commence, for instance, with the fair Fins and Sclavonians with blonde
hair, and pass successively through the Celts, Iberians, Italians, Greeks,
Arabs, Egyptians, and Hindoos, till you reach the inhabitants of Malabar,
and you find these last to be as black as negroes. M. Jacquinet, Caus,
Anthro. &c.

172 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

tants of Africa; here you find every tint from the pale yellow
Hottentot and Bushman, to the dusky brown Caffir, and the
coal-black negro of the tropics and confines of Egypt.

The Iolofts of Senegambia, between the Senegal and the
Gambia, the most northerly negro nation on the western coast,
are of a fine, transparent, deep black; while the Mandingos
and the Fulahs, of the same region, are said to be of a light
mahogany color, with good features, and hair more or less
straight. They pass themselves for white people, and look
down upon their neighbors as inferiors; they resemble the
Hindoo more than the negro.

Take, again, for instance, the anatomical structure of the
head, the facial angle, and comparative anatomy of the several
races ; the same difficulties arise to the adoption of any pre-
conceived notion as to their origin and distribution, predicated
upon their universal equality, relationship, or common origin.
The learned researches of modern science in the catacombs and
upon the monuments of ancient Egypt, have traced these
anatomical peculiarities and varieties to the earliest foot-prints
of man upon the face of the earth. It appears thus to have
demonstrated the great truth that climate and mode of living
have no influence in radically changing or assimilating the
varieties of the human species. Destroy them it may, and
does, but it cannot change the physical or mental peculiarities,
or convert them into different types.

Where, then, do we find the physical or mental evidence of
the universal equality or unity of the races? The further we
trace back the record of the past, the more broadly marked do
we find all human diversity. In no part of Europe, at the pre-
sent day, can be found the striking notes of contrast which
Tacitus describes, still less those represented in the more ancient
pages of Herodotus.’

No climate or condition can radically diversify or assimilate
the different races in their comparative anatomy, any more than
in their color. The Fuegians of Cape Horn, the Hottentots
and Bushmen of South Africa, and the people of Van Diemen’s
Land, are the varieties that, under similar parallels of latitude,
differ most. Such differences in races are also found in the
tropical regions, as seen in the Negro. in Central Africa, the
Indian in America, and the Papuan in Polynesia. In the
temperate zones, in the Old World, the Mongolians and Cau-

1Godberry. See all authorities cited in D. Eichthal. Types of Man-
kind, p. 188.

2 Knox, Races of Man, Philda. ed. p. 30.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 173

casians, and the Indian in America living in similar climates,
yet wholly dissimilar in themselves. '

Where, then, shall we look for unity and universal equality
in the creation and intellectual endowments of men, and their
universal capability of rising in the scale of civilization, the
development of the sciences and the progress of the arts?
How stand the facts in history, as opposed to the oft-mistaken
theory of the Declaration of Independence ?

From the vast field that is laid open before us, we shall
select but a few instances, to illustrate the truth that is pre-
sented in answer to this question.

Student of American history! look at the past and the pre-
sent, and say, upon any principle of human probability, what
must be the future and final destiny of the numerous tribes of
aborigines that once peopled their cheerless realm in the wilds
of the New World? How stand they affected to the habita-
tions of civilized man? Where now are the contemporaries
of Columbus, the adorers of the children of the sun? Where
now are the kind recipients and friends of De Soto? the cap-
tors of John Smith? the descendants of Powhatan? and the
numerous tribes that once ranged along the southern Atlantic
coast? Where now are the brave Pequods and the hostile
Narragansetts that once chased the fleet deer over the hills and
inhaled free the mountain air of New England? Where now
are the scenery and landscapes of their hunting-grounds, and
their wigwams, hung around with the trophies of war? They
have all vanished from their native hills and plains, like scenes
of mirage upon the Egyptian deserts, that float upon the wings
of the wind. Where now are the once-powerful Chickasaw,
Cherokee, and Choctaw nations? Are they not fast fleeing
before the light and progress of civilization, and gradually
fading away in the far West, like the waning shades of night
before the opening eyelids of the morning? Nature has pre-
seribed the final limits of their zoological location, and destined
them for a specific mode of life. They can live only as the
unsophisticated sons of the forest. As their hunting-grounds
are gradually taken from them, nothing but the stern and hope-
less alternative of extermination awaits them. Their lungs
cannot breathe the air of civilized man; their eyes cannot
endure the light of science and the progress of arts. Like the
elk and the bison, they skulk from the view, and hide themselves
in the deep shades of the wilderness. What does their history
teach us but mental and physical inferiority? and that the less

: 1 Types of Mankind, p. 77.
15 *

174 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

intellectual races are doomed to eventual extermination in all
those climes where the higher groups of the fair-skinned family
can permanently exist? The entire race of the Gaunches, at
the Canary Islands, was exterminated by the Portuguese during
the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries — not a living vestige
remains to tell the tale.

Some of the pre-Celtic inhabitants of Britain, Gaul, and
Scandinavia seem to have shared a similar fate. Sixteen mil-
lions of aborigines in North America have dwindled down to
two millions, since the landing of the Mayflower at Plymouth
Rock; and their congeners, the Caribs, have long been extinct
in the West India Islands. The mortal destiny of the whole
American group, like the sands in Time’s hour-glass, seems to
be fast running out. Of the four hundred thousand inhabitants
of the Sandwich Islands, far less than one hundred thousand
survive, and these are daily sinking heneath the influence of
commerce, civilization, and rum. In New Holland, New
Guinea, many of the Pacific islands, in Africa, and other parts
of the world, the same consequences are following the labors
of proselytism and the influence of civilization! |

The ancient Moors fled from their former habitations over
the waters of Gibraltar, and were long known only as roving
corsairs upon the Barbary coast. On the other hand, where
now are the august colonnades that towered along the banks
of the Tiber, and adorned the ancient seat of Roman great-
ness, upon its seven hills? Where are now the lights of Athens
at the zenith of her glory? Argos with its hundred eyes, and
Thebes with its hundred gates? The crescent has supplanted
the cross over the eastern empire of ancient Rome; ‘‘the tur-
baned Arab has trod in mockery over the tombs of the Scipios,
and the enervate Ottoman blasted the fairest fields of Grecian
art.”?

And why have these ancient lights, like Pompeii, slumbered
in the darkness of ages? Shall we be told that nature has put
an interdict on their revival in the present physical character
of these ancient seats of literature and learning? The same
salubrious clime now breathes its sweet gales over Greece that
did in the age of her classic days; the same lofty hills and
verdant plains now adorn and beautify her scenery that did in
the days of her poets and philosophers; yet the eloquence of
Demosthenes is no longer heard in her country, no gods dwell
in Parnassus, nor ‘‘the nine longer hallow her helicon springs.”
The names of her heroes, poets, and philosophers, are known
only in her history and ancient song.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 175

~The same breeze, too, still blows over Rome that wafted
Sabean odors and spicy gales over the imperial city ; the same
moon and stars now look down upon her that saw the rise and
fall of her mighty empire; but all else how changed! No
Cincinnatus now commands her arms, no Cicero now watches
over the destinies of the Republic; but these ancient trees of
knowledge have sown their seeds broadcast upon the world,
from which, like the fabled teeth of the dragon, will spring up
armed men, to strike for their homes, the land of their sires ;
to disentomb the birthplace of heroes, poets and _ philosophers,
from the grave of centuries, and call up their slumbering ghosts,
like the Pheenix spirit, from their own ashes. Genius is pro-
gressive, and the natural course of the human mind is upward
and onward in all nations where the intellectual predominates
over the animal. To what, then, can be attributed this retro-
gradation in the progress of society, but to the intellectual
inferiority of the present dominant race.

Turn now to benighted Africa! Take a stand upon some
summit of the central highlands that intersect the contineut,
or upon the high table-lands of Abyssinia; lift the sable cur-
tain and look out to the south upon this dark corner of the
earth. . Behold the fifty millions of human beings that skirt her
borders and roam over her plains. Behold them polluting with
the blood of heathenism and despair, the most exuberant soil
under the sun; staining with the smoke of human wretchedness
the sweetest scenery ever eye reposed on; and tainting the
most salubrious clime with the incense of degradation and woe.
How long have they been thus brooding in the region and
shadow of death? When will the blackness of darkness that is
lowering in gloomy clouds over the land be scattered away ?
And when will the dawning light of a brighter day beam upon
her? We may light up the dark picture with the distant twi-
light of faith ; we may cast upon its dark scene the faint glim-
mering of religious hope; but, alas! how soon they vanish in
the dark chasm that is yawning before us!

Let us pause, for a time, to dwell upon the condition of this
mysterious people. It is contended by the advocates of the
common origin of mankind, that Africa was peopled by Asiatic
emigrants into Egypt; that these wanderers passed on, step by
step, across the deserts, over the mountains, through the
marshes and plains, gradually changing their physical organi-
zation under climatic and other local influences, until the whole
continent, from the Mediterranean to the Cape of Good Hope,
became inhabited by the various races and tribes that are now

176 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

found scattered over the various faces of the country. But it
seems never to have occurred to them, that those distant lati-
tudes, south of the great desert, could not have been reached
by sea; for the compass, and nautical skill necessary for ex-
ploring this yet unexplored ocean, were yet unknown to the world ;
neither, that Central and Southern Africa could not have been
explored by caravans from the Mediterranean coast, prior to
the introduction of camels from Asia, through Egypt, into
Barbary—and this epoch is well ascertained to have antedatéd
the Christian era but a short time. Yet it is asserted by Lep-
sius, and others, whose researches have demonstrated the fact,
that the negro races existed in these regions more than two
thousand years before Christ. They existed here, too, in de-
spite of natural barriers that could not have been passed by
any means previously known. Besides, it is shown that all the
four African races have, from the earliest epochs, spoken lan-
guages radically different from every Asiatic tongue. Lin-
guistic researches have established, that prior to the introduc-.
tion of Asiatic elements into the lower valley of the Nile, the
speech of the ante-monumental Egyptians could have borne no
affinity to the latter. Lepsius, De Rogue and Birch, our
highest philological authorities on this question, concur in the
main principle that the lexicology deduced from the earliest
hieroglyphics exhibits two elements, namely, a primary or Afri-
can, and a secondary or Asiatic superimposed upon the former.
It is also shown, that if the Syro-Arabian engraftments were
deducted from the present Nubian and Berbec vernaculars,
spoken above and westward of Egypt, these languages would
be as purely African now as must have been the idioms uttered
by the Egyptian ancestry of those who raised the pyramids of
the fourth dynasty, five thousand and three hundred years ago.?
The region, now called Cape Colony, lies between 30° and
35° south latitude; it rises as you recede from the coast into
high table-lands and mountains, and possesses a most delightful
climate. The tints of vegetation are of a deep and brilliant
dye ; it resembles that which skirts the mountain-sides, receding
to the north-east, till they reach perpetual summer at the equa-
tor. The forests are clad in a foliage that never sears, and the
shrubs and flowers decorate the landscape upon the plains with
their tinctured shades of evergreen. Yet, in this delightful re-
gion, we find the lowest grade, perhaps, of the human species.”
All travellers agree, that the Bushman and Hottentot are
1 Types of Mankind, p. 182.
2 «« Africa and the American Flag,” by Capt. Foote, U.S. N., p. 69.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 177

but little elevated above the ourang-outang. Their complexion
is compared by travellers to that of a person afflicted with
jaundice, a yellowish-brown, near the hue of a faded leaf. |
They have woolly heads; diminutive stature ; small, ill-shapen,
crania ; very projecting mouths; prognatheous faces, and badly
formed bodies. They are described by travellers as bearing
the strongest resemblance to the monkey tribe. Their common
objects of pursuit, for a subsistence, are serpents, lizards, and
grasshoppers. They have no fixed habitations, but sleep in
holes in the ground, or under the branches of trees, wherever
night overtakes them. They are short, lean, and, in appear-
ance, weak in physical strength, yet capable of enduring great
fatigue. Their sight is acute, but their taste and sensations
feeble. They do not form great societies, but wander about in
families.1 The next race we encounter, after leaving the Cape
Colony to the north-east, is the Kafirs, or Caffres. They range
along through the Orange River Sovereignties and Caffraria,
even beyond the interior. They are thus deseribed by Lichten-
stein, a celebrated traveller among them, whose descriptions
we shall principally follow, as already quoted above :—

“The universal eharaeteristic of all the tribes of this great
nation consists in an external form and figure, varying exceed-
ingly from the other nations of Africa. They are much taller,
stronger, and their limbs are better proportioned. Their color
is brown; their hair black and woolly. Their countenances
have a character peculiar to themselves, and which does not
permit them to be included in any other race. They have the
high forehead and prominent nose of the European; the thick
lips of the negro, and the high cheek-bones of the Hottentot.”’

‘‘Taking our departure from the Cape,’’ says Dr. Nott, ‘‘if
we continue our examinations along the coast, easterly or west-
erly (the interior being unexplored), as far as the transverse
belt of highlands, just above the equator, that separates the
two great deserts, northern and southern, we find a succession
of well-marked types seemingly indigenous to their respective
localities.”? Along the eastern coast we find the various tribes
inhabiting Inhambane, Sabia, Lofala, Botonga, Mozambique,
Zanguebar, &c., each presenting physical characters more or
less hideous, and almost, without exception, in not only a bar-
barous, but a superlatively savage state. All hopes of eventu-
ally improving them, or reclaiming them from their brutish
habits, must be given up; even the slaver has always rejected

1 Lichtenstein (Types of Mankind, p. 182, 183). Researches, ii. p. 44.
M

178 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

them as untractable and beyond hope of redemption.t Yet,
they live in the finest country in the known world. Hear the
testimony of Mr. James Macqueen, who had devoted a large
portion of his life to the interests of Africa, given before the
British House of Peers in 1850 :—

‘There is scarcely any tropical production known in the
world that does not come to perfection in Africa. There are
many productions peculiarly her own. The dye-stuffs and dye-
woods are superior to any which are known in any other quar-
ter of the world, inasmuch as they resist both acids and light,
things which we know no other dye-stuffs, from any other quar-
ter,cando. There is the article of sugar that can be produced
in every part of Africa to an unlimited extent. There is cot-
ton, also, above all things — cotton of a quality so fine that it
is finer than any description we know of in the world. Com-
mon cotton, in Africa, I have seen, and had it in my possession,
which was equal to the finest quality of American cotton.
Egyptian cotton is not so good as the cotton away to the South; -
but the cotton produced in the southern portion of Africa is
peculiarly fine.

‘‘ Africa is a most extraordinary country. In the eastern
horn, which you think to be a desolate wilderness, there is the
finest country and the finest climate I know. I know of none
in South America equal to the climate of the country in the
north-eastern horn of Africa. It is a very elevated country ;
and on the upper regions you have all the fruits, flowers, and
grains of Europe growing; and in the valleys you have the
finest fruits in the torrid zone. The whole country is covered
with myrrh and frankincense; it is covered with flocks and
herds; it produces the finest grass and grains in abundance.
Near Brasa, for instance, on the river Webbe, you can purchase
as much wheat for one dollar as will serve a man for a year.
All kinds of European grains flourish there. In Euarca and
Kaffa the whole country is covered with coffee; it is the ori-
ginal country of the coffee. You can purchase an ass-load
(200 lbs.) of coffee in the berry for about a dollar. The greater
portion of the coffee that we receive from Mocha is actually
African coffee produced in that part.’?? Again, if you were
to pass from the Cape Colony along up the western coast, you
would meet with another equally, diversified series of negro
races inhabiting Cimbebas, Benguela, Angola, Congo, Loango,
Matimbas, and Guinea, where you have passed the equator to
10° north latitude. |

1 Types of Mankind, p. 184.
2 «¢ Africa and the American Flag,” by Capt. Foote, U.S.N., p. 69.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 179

Through these provinces the negro type is but little removed
from the Hottentot. ‘‘ The whole of Africa,’’ says Dr. Nott,
“‘south of 10° north latitude, shows a succession of human
beings with intellects as dark as their skins, and with a cephalic
conformation that renders all hope of their future amelioration
a Utopian dream.’’' ‘It is from this region on the western
coast, that most of the slaves have been purchased by modern
nations engaged in the slave-trade. Cruelty and oppression
everywhere prevail. It is estimated that one-sixth of the popu-
lation own and enslave the balance of the entire population.’’
‘Tt is not easy,” says a modern traveller among them, ‘‘ for us
to conceive it possible that a human being can be moulded to
the unhesitating submission in which a negro subject lives; yet
such it is, that it becomes a source of satisfaction to him to live
or die, suffer or rejoice, work or play, eat or fast, just as his
sovereign wills. Nor is it easy to offer any probable reason
for the eagerness to share in cruelties, which glows in the
negro’s bosom. Like the ferocious tiger, the appalling scenes
that most gratify his lusts, consist in the amount of blood shed,
rather than in the studious prolongation of pain. He offers, in
this respect, a most bloodthirsty contrast to the cold demoniac
vengeance of the North American savage.’’?

But the conscience, the favorite genius of the Abolitionists,
lifts her unerring voice in justification of the horrid, loathsome
and disgusting forms of superstition and idolatry. Human
sacrifices have been, and still are, common almost everywhere.
Our author again tells us that ‘‘the mouths of the victims were
gagged by knives run through their cheeks ; and captives among
southern tribes were beaten with clubs to prevent resistance ;
or to take away their strength as the natives expressed it, that
they might the more easily be hurried to the hill of death.”
Among other superstitions is that of often paying reverence to
the spirits of their forefathers.

The custom of saturating their graves with human blood, leads
to great enormities.* ‘‘ Men of rank, at their death, are pre-
sumed to require attendants and to be gratified with the com-
panionship of their friends; for this purpose their wives,
children, and slaves are murdered in great numbers to afford
them suitable companions and attendants in another world.
From this superstitious notion, the utmost horror is felt at

1 Types of Mankind, p. 185.

2 Africa and American Flag. Travels of Bayard Taylor in Central
Africa. Perkins’ Three Years in Abyssinia, Xe.

8 Opera cit., also Expedition of Bowditch, Forbes, Duncan, and others,

180 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

decapitation, or the severing of limbs from the body after
death. And hence revenge makes them eager for the skulls and
jawbones of their enemies ; so that to perpetuate the memories
of their victories, in a royal metropolis, its walls, floors and
thrones are everywhere lowering with the hollow and ghostly
eyes of the dead. These sad, bare, and whitened emblems
of mortality and revenge present a curious and startling spec-
tacle clustering and festooning the red clay walls of Kamassie,
the Ashantee capital.

‘All along the coast from the Equator to the north of the
Gulf of Guinea, they did not eat without throwing a portion
of their food upon the ground for the benefit of the dead. To
attempt to describe minutely the customs of the numerous tribes
of this section, and to wade through the horrid and revolting
scenes of bloodshed, cruelty, filth, and pollution that charac-
terize their adoration for man, beast, bird, fish, serpent, reptiles,
and the like, would require a volume of itself and carry us far
beyond the design of this treatise upon this subject. We shall
therefore present but a few remarks upon the two principal
nations on the western coast, Dahomey and Ashantee. These
two nations are acknowledged by all travellers to be far in
advance of all the surrounding nations and tribes in their
habits, manners and customs, and mode of living. And we
invite the careful attention of the reader to their comparative
condition, and then ask him to say in the honesty of his con-
viction, whether the children of these nations and their posterity
have been degraded by their condition and treatment in
America. ‘‘The people of Dahomey and Ashantee,’’ says a
modern traveller among them, ‘are acknowledged to be con-
siderably in advance of all others living upon the western coast.
They have some agricultural implements, such as the hoe, and
cultivate the ground tosome extent; they also manufacture some
coarse goods from cotton, and live in villages. ”’

Mr. Bowditch, of the British Exploring Expedition to Africa,
in 1819, describes them as follows : he says ‘‘that the Boor-
noos were, at that time, the most numerous nation of Africa.
Timbuctoo was inferior to Houssa, and not to be compared
with Boornoo. The Moorish influence prevailed, but was not
predominant ; the king of Boornoo was a Moorish negro, called
Billabahada ; he had a few double-barrel guns which he fired
on great occasions ; but gunpowder was as scarce as gold dust.
He was acute, capricious, and severe, but not totally devoid of
humanity ; and had become exceedingly unpopular by limiting
the number and extent of human sacrifices too much.’’

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 181

- “The Ashantees are also quite a large tribe in the west of
Africa. Among this tribe they are much given to the belief in
witchcraft ; and those who are accused of it are tortured to
death.’’ (A custom that once prevailed in the early settlements
of New England.) .

‘The master here may kill his slave with as little fear or
compunction as his dog. They believe in a paradise of
sensuality and luxury for the nobles and better class. Hence a
large number of cooks, butlers, and domestics of - various
descriptions are sacrificed at their funerals and on their tombs.
They believe that a higher class of gods preside over the
destinies of the white man than over that of the black; and
hence their jealousy, prejudice, and dread of the whites. The
most horrid of all their customs is the sacrifice of human beings,
and all the horrors preparatory to that event. These take
place at all their principal festivals, and there are not less than
one hundred victims immolated at a time, and sometimes five
times that number. Besides, at the death of every person of
rank a large sacrifice is made; and these are repeated at every
anniversary of the death for years afterwards. Sometimes they
are renewed monthly for a long time. On the occasion of the
death of his mother, the king butchered three hundred slaves.
The funeral] rites of certain great captains were repeated
weekly for twelve weeks; and two hundred slaves immolated
at a time, making in all twenty-four hundred human beings for
each one.’? He gives a most horrid description of a sacrifice
that he witnessed, too horrid to relate; yet it was all conscien-
tious and to them seemingly right, and the victims submitted
with astonishing fortitude to their direful fate. ‘‘They have
no implements of agriculture but the hoe. The tropical fruits
all grow spontaneously. The great obstacle to cultivating
commercial intercourse with these African chieftains by the
Europeans, is the fact that they have rejected the slave trade,
which constituted their main inducement to treat with other
nations. The continuance of this trade by the Spanish, keeps
up a constant interchange of commodities between them.’’? He
says, that during his stay there, more than one thousand slaves
left for two Spanish schooners lying off the coast. Commander
Forbes, of the British Navy, in 1850, the latest visitor to that
country, tells what he saw. He says: ‘‘ There is something
fearful in the state of subjection, in which, in outward show,
the kings of Dahomey hold their highest offices; yet when the
system is examined, these protestations are merely keeping up
of ancient customs. Although no man’s head, in Dahomey,

16

182 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

can be considered warranted for twenty-four hours, still the
great chief himself would find his tottering if one of these were
omitted. They were preparing for the ceremonies of watering
the graves of the royal ancestors with blood, during which the
king also presents some victims as a royal gift to his people.
This merely means that they are knocked down in public, and
their heads cut off amidst trumpeting, clamor, and jesting.”

‘‘ With much ceremony,’’ we read, ‘‘two large calabashes,
containing the skulls of kings, conquered by the Dahomans,
ornamented with copper, brass, coral, &c., were brought in
and placed on the ground. There was a great display of the
skull-bones of enemies. Some formed the heads of walking-
sticks and distaffs; while those of the chiefs and men of war
ornamented drums, umbrellas, surmounted standards, and deco-
rated doorways; they were on all sides, by thousands. ”’

‘‘There was much to disgust the white man in the number
of human skulls and jawbones displayed ; but can the reader
imagine twelve unfortunate human beings, lashed hands and
feet, and tied in small canoes and baskets, dressed in clean
white dresses, with a high red cap, carried on the heads of fel-
low men? These and an alligator and a cat were the gifts of
the monarch to the people— prisoners of war.’’ ‘‘ When car-
ried round the court they bore the gaze of their enemies with-
out shrinking. At the foot of the throne they halted, while
the Mayo presented each with a head (bunch) of cowries, ex-
tolling the munificence of their monarch, who had sent it to
them to purchase a last meal, for to-morrow they must die.’’

‘*But of the fourteen now brought on the platform, we, the
unworthy instruments of Divine will, succeeded in saving the
lives of three. Lashed, as we have said, these sturdy men met
the gaze of their persecutors with a firmness perfectly asto-
nishing. Not a sigh was breathed. In all my life before, I
never saw such coolness so near death. The victims were held
high above the heads of their bearers, and the naked ruffians
thus acknowledged the munificence of their prince.” ‘‘ Having
called their names, the nearest one was divested of his clothes,
the foot of the basket placed on the parapet, when the king
gave its upper part an impetus, and the victim fell at once into
the pit beneath. A fall of upwards of twelve feet may have
stunned him, and before sense could return his head was cut off,
and the body thrown to the mob, who now, armed with clubs
and branches, brutally mutilated and dragged it to a distant
pit.’??

1 Africa and American Flag, -p. 67.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 183

The women of Africa are everywhere slaves, or the slaves of
slaves; all the burdensome labor falls on them. In Dahomey
a considerable portion of the king’s troops consists of armed
and disciplined females.t The institution of marriage is un-
known to the nations and tribes of which we are now speaking.
When a chief or noble is announced as having so many wives,
it signifies that he has so many female slaves. There does not
appear to be any tribe in Africa, in which it is not the rule that
a man may have as many wives as he can procure. Hence,
there is no such thing known to them as conjugal attachment
or parental affection, any more than what is common to the
brutes. It is asserted by travellers that the children, at the age
of seven or eight, are actually banished from the care and pro-
tection of the parent, not to return, under pain of death.

But little progress has been made towards the suppression
of the slave trade, by the co-operation or consent of the native
chiefs ; they cling to it as to life, as a time-honored custom of
their ancestors, and their main source of revenue.

Frequent negotiations have been had with them by English
missionaries, but hitherto with little effect. The reasons for
perpetuating this traffic, on the part of the natives, are set
forth in glowing colors in a speech of the King of Dahomey
at a conference of this kind with Captain Winniet, in 1849.

After professing his devotedness to England, he says: ‘‘ The
form of my government cannot be suddenly changed without
such a revolution as to deprive me of my throne, and preci-
pitate my kingdom into anarchy. I and my army are ready,
at all times, to fight the Queen’s enemies, and to do anything
the English may ask of me, except to give up the slave trade.
No other trade is known to my people. Palm-oil, it is true,
is engaging the attention of some of them, but it is a slow
method of making money, and brings only a very small amount
of duties into my coffers. The planting of cotton and coffee
has been suggested, but this is still slower. The trees have to
grow, and probably I shall be in my grave before I reap any
benefit from them. And what am I to do in the mean time?
Who will pay my troops? Who will buy arms and clothes for
them? Who will buy dresses for my wives? Who will give
me supplies of cowries, ram, gunpowder and cloth for my annual
‘customs’? I hold my power by the observance of the time-
honored customs of my fathers. I should forfeit it, and entail

1 They are called the Amazons. Queen Victoria has recently sent a
thousand ornamental caps to them as a present to the King of Dahomey.
Af. and Am. Flag, p. 84.

184 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

on myself a life full of shame, and a death full of misery, by
neglecting them. The slave trade has been the ruling principle
of my people. It is the source of their glory and their wealth.
Their songs celebrate their victories, and the mother lulls the
child to sleep with notes of triumph over an enemy reduced to
slavery. Can I, by signing such a treaty, change the senti-
ments of a whole people? It cannot be.’*?

What a chapter is here presented, in this short speech of
this intelligent, open-hearted and ambitious barbarian, upon
the infallible dictates of conscience! He was as conscientious
in his plea as the very pious John Newton, of England, who
was for a long time engaged in this traffic, or the celebrated
President Edwards, who dedicated one of his masterpieces of
logic to the defence of the same.

The urgency, however, to which the King of Dahomey was
subjected, ended, at last, in 1852, in his yielding his assent to
the treaty. Partly overawed by the terrors of the British
eannon, and partly bribed by the influence of British gold, he
reluctantly put his seal to the document.

A few other like treaties have been established by a like
forced assent, principally with the chiefs or powers whose terri-
tories have fallen under the influence of the Republic of Liberia
and Cape Palmas. These have been fostered, maintained and
preserved from reversion into native barbarism by the force of
the British and American fleets cruising on the coasts of Africa.
But it is the opinion of the best-informed upon this subject,
that the trade can never be finally suppressed, except by the
entire conquest and subjugation of Africa.”

One of the most potent influences for the final suppression,
is that of the recaptured slaves, and their descendants, return-
ing to their native lands, elevated in character and capacity
by their associations with the whites, and by the instructions
which they have thus received. They are carrying some im-
provements in agricultural, and other pursuits, where they
settle; and thus rendering slave labor more valuable at home,
they will turn thousands into employment that would else be
shipped for a foreign market. Three thousand of them are now
settled among their brethren of the Yoruba tribe, near the
mouth of the Niger.®

In Dahomey, also, says Duncan, there is some improvement

1 Africa and American Flag, p. 82.

2 See Expedition of Richardson, Barth, Overway and Vogel, to Central
Africa, by authority of H. B. M. 1850-1-2-8, Lond. ed. 1854.

3 Africa and Am. Flag, p. 76.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 185

in agriculture, traced to the return from the Brazils of a few
who had been trained as slaves in that empire.

Thus, as seeds of certain plants are thought to be transported
by birds of passage to distant climes, so these returning pil-
erims, of Africa’s sons, carry back with them the germs of
civilization and improvement to their benighted brethren.
Who, then, shall say that they have been degraded by. their
pilgrimage in the land of canes ?

It is only by the transportation of these germs from the ele-
ments of civilization, that they can ever be redeemed from their
present degradation, if they are capable of such redemption.
But it seems to be a physiological fact, well settled with regard
to the real Negro type, that they have not the mental capacity
ever to rise above a barbarous state of existence; and this fact
is confirmed by their history, in all ages of the world. Mea-
sured by the size, weight, and capacity of the brain, they are
inferior to the race of aborigines of America.” And they have
nowhere, in the history of the world, when left to themselves,
attained to so high a rank in the scale of civilization as some
of these tribes.

As we descend from the table-lands of Abyssinia along the

1 Africa and American Flag, p. 92.

2 «Craniorum inquam quibus ad gentilitias varietates distinguendas et
definiendas nulla alia humani corporis pars aptior videtur, cum caput
osseum (preeterquam quod anime domicilium et officina, imo vero inter-
pres quasi et explanator ejus sit, utpote universe physiognomiz basin et
firmamentum constituens) stabilitati suze maximam conformationis et
partium relative proportionis varietatem junctam habeat unde characteres
nationum cerlissemas desumere licet.”” Blumenbach.

The peculiar expression of the Negro physiognomy depends upon the
difference between the horizontal measurement of the circumference of
the head from around the crown downwards: the number of inches
around the crown is less than around the forehead, and that still less
than around the nose and ears, showing a constant increase downwards
from the crown. This is owing to the narrow, flat crown; the low,
slanting forehead; the projection of the upper edges of the orbits of the
eyes — a formation that contracts the intellectual lobe of the brain, and
enlarges the back and lower portion, generally acknowledged to be the
seat of the animal propensities. In the Caucasian race, these measure-
ments will all be found equal, or, if there is a slight variation, they decrease
downwards from the crown. The equality of these lines is the standard
of a model head.

Dr. Wyman, in his post-mortem examination of the head of Daniel
Webster, found the internal capacity to be 122 cubic inches, with a cir-
cumference of 23} inches; while the mean internal capacity of Negro
crania, as far as ascertained by Morton, is only 82 cubic inches; but
there are many heads of Anglo-Americans much larger than Mr Web-

ster’s.
16 *

186 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

waters of the Nile, flowing to the south, we lose sight of the
real Negro land, and all traces of the true Negro type. We
have met with another race of beings, wholly distinct, in their
physical conformation, character, and condition, from those we
have been contemplating. It is here we first meet with the
pure Ethiopians, who have been very improperly confounded
with negroes. '

Dr. Pritchard, in describing this race of Africans, has taken
much pains to prove that they, together with the tribes of the
eastern basin of the Nile, down to Egypt, inclusive, not only
are not Negro, but were not originally Asiatic races, display-
ing somewhat of an intermediate type, which is nevertheless
essentially African in character.’

‘‘This autochthonous type,’’ says Mr. Gliddon, ‘‘as we shall
prove, ascends so far back in time, is so peculiar, and withal
so connected with a primordial tongue presenting but small
incipient affinity with Asiatic languages, about thirty-five cen-
turies before Christ, as to preclude every possible idea of an
Asiatic origin for its aboriginal Nilotic speakers and hiero-
glyphical scribes. ’?*

On the northern coast of Africa, between the Mediterranean
and the Great Desert, including Morocco, Algiers, Tunis, Tri-
poli, and Bengazi, there is a continued range of highlands
which have been included under the general name of Atlas,
anciently Atlantis, now Barbary States.

‘‘This immense tract,’”? says Mr. Gliddon, ‘‘in no very
recent geological period, was an island, with the ocean flow-
ing over the whole of Sahara, and thus cutting off all com-
munication between Barbary on the Mediterranean, and the
remote plateau of Nigretia, or Negro land.’?‘

Throughout this northern region of Africa are found quite
a different and distinct group of races, subdivided into many
tribes of various shades. At the time of Leo Africanus, the
ancient Berber was the language of all Atlas. These ancient
Berbers are the Numidians and Mauritanians of classical wri-
ters, by the Romans termed genus insuperable in bello. To
these belong the white Tuarics who have penetrated to the
oases in the deserts. Here, then, seems to have been another
centre of creation and distribution, like that of Southern Asia,
described in the tenth chapter of Genesis.®

The countries of these more northern races of Africa lay

1 Physical History of Man: Pritchard. Types of Mankind, pp. 173-4,
2 Opera cit. 3 Types of Mankind, p, 194.
4 Opera cit. p. 204. 5 Types of Mankind, p. 205.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 187

accessible to the Asiatic and European nations, by whom fre-
quent conquests were made upon them, and several colonies
founded among them and in their territories, at an early day ;
from whence arose those infiltrations of foreign blood in their
veins, and those engraftments of exotic idioms upon their
original languages. And to this cause must be attributed the
diversified tribes, and variations in their more modern dialects.
The Christian and European captives sold in the maritime cities
throughout the privateering principalities, have blended every
type of man that could be kidnapped around the Black Sea,
the Mediterranean, and eastern Atlantic, by the corsairs of
Barbary.

Yet these people, like the other branches of the family, the
Abyssinians, Nubians, and Egyptians, have preserved enough
of their original characteristics, both in their physiology and
language, to prove conclusively to all the most celebrated tra-
vellers among them, that they are a race (including all their
several branches) distinct from all others, and indigenous to
the zoological locations that they inhabit.'

We next approach Egypt — Egypt, the cradle of arts and
the ancient seat of civilization. Listen to the voice that she
sends up from the grey years of antiquity! It comes like the
stirring of the breeze upon the mountains; it floats in majesty
like the echo of thunder; it breathes solemnity like a sound
from the tombs. Let the nations hearken, for the slumber of
ages is broken, and the hurried voices of centuries speak
again from her magnificent ruins! Roll back the tide of five
thousand years! ‘Towering along upon the banks of the sacred
Nile, stand her gigantic monuments and all the magic display
of her arts. The scathing billows of Time come surging over
them like the heavings of the mad ocean; and, merged in the
gloom of the past, Egypt, with all her grandeur, becomes a
land of seared mummies and mysterious tombs.

Ages roll on—silence, darkness, and desolation hang over
the face of her ancient splendor. Her pompous mansions,
temples, and catacombs are tenanted only by the embalmed
skeletons of those who once laid the vast foundations of her
former greatness. So, other generations have lived above
these, and trampled upon the dust of her long-lost glory, till
the slumber of their dreamless abodes are nigh forgotten.

But she now beheld a resurrection. As summoned by the

1 They are an indomitable nomadic people, who, since the introduction
of camels, have penetrated in considerable numbers into the deserts, even
as far as Nigretia.

188 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

blast of the final trumpet, she has shaken from her beauty the
ashes of centuries, and once more speaks to the world in the
hieroglyphic language of the builders of her citadels. There
stand her gigantic ruins, with utter desolation perched upon
their dilapidated walls. Egypt, mouldering relic of a former
world ! — strange redemption from the sepulchre ! — how vivid
are the historic memoirs that cluster around her! Her loneli-
ness is rife with tongues, for the shadows of many ages are cast
upon.her walls. Man treads her desolate and forgotten streets,
and is lost in the dreams of other days. Venerable and eter-
nal relic! The storied urn of a nation’s memory! A disen-
tombed and risen witness from the dead! Every stone in the
walls of her tombs and her monuments is immortal !

When we cast around for a spot on which to locate the first
traces of human existence upon the earth, with their magic
signals they point to the banks of the sacred Nile. Egypt’s
proud pyramids, if we credit the Champollion school, elevates
us at least one thousand years above all other profane traces
of nationality. ‘‘And what is most remarkable,’’ says Mr.
Gliddon, ‘‘when Egypt first presents herself to our view, she
stands forth not in childhood, but with the maturity of man-
hood’s age, arrayed in the time-worn habiliments of civiliza-
igon 7?)

It has been a source of much speculation and animated
controversy as to the origin of the ancient Egyptians, and the
race of mankind to which they belong. It has been said by
one school of naturalists, among whom, of the ancients, was
Herodotus, and of modern archeologists, Prof. Rosselini,
Champollion, Figeac Champollion le Jeune, and others, that
they were of Ethiopian descent, and that Egyptian civilization
descended from Ethiopia down the Nile. Others contend for,
their Adamic and Asiatic origin —— among whom are the names
of J. G. Wilkinson, long a resident of Egypt; also the learned
hierologist Samuel Birch, of the British Museum; and the
great naturalists Blumenbach, Cuvier, and many others.

Again, it is contended, in the progress of discoveries and
of knowledge, that the ancient Egyptians were of a race swt
generis, the aborigines of their ancient habitations, and indi-
genous to their own central creation and zoological location
—the connecting type between the Negro proper and the

1 But for the deciphering of Egyptian hieroglyphics, and the recent
developments from their tombs and monuments, the world must have
remained in ignorance of one of the earliest and most important periods
of its history.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 189

Asiatic races. Among the advocates of this theory is to be
found the name of the late celebrated Dr. Morton: it is also
advocated by Nott and Gliddon, in a very learned and forcible
collection of facts and authorities in their joint work, entitled
“«Types of Mankind.”’

But the proper limits of our remarks, in a treatise of this
kind, will not admit of a statement of this controversy, in
detail, or any extended review of the arguments of either
party. It is not our purpose to enter into any minute discus-
sion of the great question of the origin and distribution of the
human races: guided by such lights as we have before us, we
have made a few general remarks upon this subject. For the
benefit of those who may be curious to pursue this interesting
subject more extensively, some reference to the most approved
authors may not be improper.’

We remark, further, that the late extensive researches in
Egyptian arts, as well as craniology, have delineated the dis-
tinct type of a race, from the earliest ages, so dissimilar to the
negro type proper, as to render it just as improbable that the
ancient Egyptians descended from the negroes, as it would be,
in a physiological point of view, that the present inhabitants
of the United States were the descendants of the Aborigines
of America.

The celebrated Dr. Morton, whose researches were, in some
particulars, the most extensive, and whose writings are perhaps
the best authority upon this question, made the following re-
mark: ‘‘ From the preceding facts, and many others that might
be adduced, I think that it may be safely concluded that the
complexion of the ancient Egyptians did not differ from that

1 At the head of this list we would place the first part of the ‘‘ Types
of Mankind,” by Nott & Gliddon: Phila. ed. 1854. This is the latest
book upon this subject, and a work of great learning and research, em-
bodying a vast amount of valuable information, collected from the most
authentic sources. ‘‘ Natural History of Man,” in five volumes, Lond.
ed. 1848, by Dr. Pritchard; also ‘ Varieties of Man,” Lond ed. 1851.
*¢ Knox’s Races of Men,” Phila. ed. 1850. The great work of Jaquinot,
‘‘Considerations Générales sur lAnthropologie Zoologie,” 1846. The
works of Charles Pickering, Naturalist to the U. S. Exploring Expedi-
tion. ‘The Researches of Lepsius, an explorer sent out to Egypt by the
Prussian Government, in 1842-3—the translations of which may be
found in Bohn’s Library. Also the great works of Champollion, Belzoni,
and Rosellini, with their plates, copied accurately from the Egyptian ;
which may be seen, on a folio scale, in Harvard College Library. ‘‘Cra-
nia Aigyptiaca,” by Dr. Morton, Phila. 1844; also ‘‘Crania Americana.”
‘‘Otia Aigyptiaca,” by G. R. Gliddon, a collection of facts from twenty
years’ residence in Egypt.

190 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

of the Caucasian races in the same latitude ;—that, while the
higher classes that were screened from the action of the sun,
were fair, in a comparative sense, the multitude and lower
classes, like the modern Arabs, Berbers, and Moors, presented
various shades of complexion even to a dark and swarthy tint,
that the fair-skinned Greeks regarded as black, in comparison
with their own.’’?

He said, also, ‘‘that negroes were numerous in Egypt, but
their social condition was, in ancient times, the same as now,
that of slaves.’’

Again, he says, speaking of the MS. preparation of a new
edition of his ‘‘ Crania AXgyptiaca: ‘‘In this work I maintain,
without reservation, that the human race, as a whole, has not
sprung from one single pair, but from a plurality of centres ;
that these were created, ab initio, in those parts of the world
best adapted to their physical characters, that the epoch of
creation was that undefined period of time spoken of in the
first chapter of Genesis, when it is related that God formed
man from the dust; male and female created He them. That
the deluge was a mere local phenomenon; that it affected but
a limited portion of the then inhabited globe. These views
are consistent with the facts of the case as well as the analogi-
cal evidence. ’’

Again, he says, ‘‘ You allude to my altered views in Ethno-
logy, but it all consists in regarding the Egyptian race as the
indigenous people of the valley of the Nile.’??

A volume of similar quotations might be cited from other
authors to this effect; but these are sufficient to show the views
of those great masters of this science who have devoted their
lives to this subject.

But it is really a matter of no great importance to the ques-
tion of the original unity and equality of the human races,
who the people of Ancient Egypt may have been, or from what
source they emanated. The most imposing and important fact
disclosed by the revelations of their history, is that they found
the several types of mankind as varied and distinct as those of
the present day, and that they have preserved a record of this
from so remote a period.

1«Crania Adgyptiaca,” Morton. An ancient writer, Ammianus Mar-
cellinus, speaks of the Egyptians as follows: ‘‘Homines autem Algyptii
plerique subfusculi sunt, et atrati magisque meestiores, gracilenti et aridi
ad singulos motus, excandescentes controversi et reposcones acerrimi.

Erubescit apud eos si quis non inficiando tributa, plurimas in corpore
vibices ostendat.”—Rerum Gestarum, lib. xxxii.

2 Types of Mankind, p. 232.

.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 191

Even admitting that Egypt, if it were possible, was the
great artery through which portions of Africa were peopled by
Asiatic nations, as is contended; suppose even the poor de-
graded Bushman, forming for himself, from sticks and grass, a
lair among the low spreading branches of the Protea, or nest-
ling, at sunset, in a shallow hole, amid the sands of the desert,
with his little ones, like a covey of birds, sheltered by some
ragged fragments of skins from the chilling dews of heaven,
has an ancestral relationship to the builders of the pyramids
and colossal temples of Egypt. How long will be required
for him to retrace his wandering steps through the several links
of gradations along upon the eastern coast of Africa, till his
present beastly and prognathous features shall be merged in the
type of the ante-monumental Egyptians, and the low, guttural
‘‘eluckings’’ of the Hottentot shall rise to the lofty idioms of
the ancient Berber ?!

And how long a time will be required from him to roll back
the wave of oblivion that has passed over this ancient seat of
Nilotie civilization; to turn back the tide of five thousand
years, and recall from the dark abyss of the past the long-lost
arts and sciences, all traces of which have nearly aded from
the memory of man; to reconstruct and readorn those ancient
and modern wonders of the world whose gigantic ruins have
withstood the dilapidating scourges of time for more than five
thousand years? Is such a dream within the range of human
possibility? We answer, no: nothing but a miracle can ever
produce such an effect.

But if this genealogical theory would account for the Hot-
tentots and Bushmen, to what source shall we trace the normal
features and signal characteristics of the real negro race?
Whither shall we retrace their steps from the low marshes and
sunderbunds of the Gaboon and Congo rivers, where the aber-
rant peculiarities of the negro type seem to be most strikingly
developed, and the central highlands of the more interior and
northern nations? Can any retrograde pathway be found
across the trackless and impassable desert, or through the un-
known ocean that will also carry them back to the land of the
Pharaohs, and identify them by marks of kindred blood with the
builders of the Pharaonic pyramids, and the sacred tenants of
their tombs? Are they, too, to be gathered under the wing of

1 “Tf the great branches of the human family have remained distinct
in separate types for the lapse of ages, with their characteristics fixed
and unalterable, we are justified in the conclusion that mankind are divi-
sible into distinct original species.” — Jacquinot, Zol., 2, p. 86.

192 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

their Libyan family as a branch of the same parental stock ?
If so, how long will be required for them to exhibit the physi-
cal and mental proofs to entitle them to such ancestral relation-
ship ?

The social, moral, and political, as well as the physical his-
tory of the negro race bears strong testimony against them ;
it furnishes the most undeniable proof of their mental inferiority.
In no age or condition has the real negro shown a capacity to
throw off the chains of barbarism and brutality that have long
bound down the nations of that race; or to rise above the com-
mon cloud of darkness that still broods over them.

In no quarter of the globe have the energies of the human
mind been so long locked up in the dungeon of despair. While
in. other nations its elastic energies have burst up like the heav-
ings of a volcano, sundering all obstacles to its rise, progress,
and developments, the barbarous negro nations of Africa have
quietly rested in their unalloyed barbarism for thousands of
years, exhibiting no more evidence of a capacity for native
born advancement than the baboons and ourang-outangs that
people the forests.’

Every other nation, from China to Mexico and Peru, have
respectively advanced from a savage to a barbarous, semi-bar-
barous, half-civilized, to a civilized and an enlightened state.
The wealth, magnificence, and power of the Celestial Empire
is the result of native genius and energy. Those mysterious
landmarks of art, science, and civilization in the ancient do-
mains of the Inca and Toltecan Family, are undeniable proofs
of an intellectual capacity and mental endowment far superior
to any traces of the kind within the whole range of the prime-
val negro nations of Africa.’

The glory of ancient Greece took its rise from a tribe of
savages that at first fed upon nuts, roots, and herbs. Rome,
too, first sprang from the urned ashes of a few Latin exiles
cast upon her shores. Yet, lifting herself, like the serpent in
the wilderness, she stretched her broad wing over half the cir-
cumference of the globe. Her course through the earth was
like a comet through the heavens; yet how beautiful are the

1 The snake’s poison arms their weapons, and her body is eaten.
Throughout all the deserts, as in ancient times, the grasshopper is used
as an article of food.—A/frica and Am. Flag, p. 92. It is said that slavery
and oppression have been the cause of their present degradation. But
what other nation has not been weighed down by the same incubus?

2 Yet the Africans live in similar latitudes, and in some of the finest
climates in the world.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 193

stars that she left in her trail! Great Britain was once peopled
by a race of Cannibals, once tributary to the great Roman
Conqueror, and her sons fit only to be the slaves of Romans.
Yet, by the commingling of a five-fold race there has grown up
a mighty nation, who claims to be master of the sea, and upon
whose empire the sun always shines.!

What were the Celtic, Germanic, and other nations of West-
ern Europe in the days of Tacitus? They scarcely excelled
in arts and civilization the wandering tribes of Aborigines in
America, yet they have all lived through the dark passage of
the middle ages, seen the revival of literature and learning, and
are now like cities set on a hill, disseminating their light to the
world.’

Revolutions and the conflict of passions, like throes in the
depths of nature, have thrown up nations in the fields of the
past, like isles in an ocean of darkness. Hermes, with his
magic rod, has waved the flag of commerce over their shores,
and civilization, literature, and art have sprung up and flou-
rished in his footsteps. But the oldest state of negro society
continues unchanged. With the exception of a few civilized
vices, civilized arms, and some amount of civilized luxuries,
borrowed from other nations, life upon the African coast is pre-
cisely the same now that the first discoverers found it. Intel-
lectual inferiority and incapacity for any native improvement is
stamped by the hand of his Creator upon the negro’s brow,
written in his features, and re-written in his social and politica
history.* :

Unfortunate and unjust as it may seem, still, wherever he
may go, the mark of Cain is yet upon him; the first impulse ,
of nature, in the bosom of his superiors, responds everywhere
to this truth, in their contempt for his person and aversion to
his society. In the very heart and hot-bed of the professed

1 And she carried along with her, from her earliest history, the worst
form of slavery. (Vid. supra.)

2 They have all advanced with the incubus of slavery hanging to the
car.

8 We would not decry or discourage missionary labors among them, if
they can by any means ameliorate their condition. We bid them God
speed ina noble work. But we fear that they are ‘‘casting their pearls
before swine.” What have their efforts availed with the North American
savage? Nothing; every real tawny son of the forest is still the same.
What have they, and what will they avail with the African savage? Alas!
experience ‘hurries us back to despair.”

* See remarks of Chief Justice Taney in the Dred Scott case, 19 How.
Rep. p. 416, et seq. They are there held to be an inferior race of beings,

17 N

194 ‘ THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

negro philanthropists or Abolitionists, he is an outcast from all
society, and the furthest removed from many of the most pre-
cious privileges of a citizen and a social being.. In the State
of Massachusetts, even in the city of Boston, the social condi-
tion of the free man of color is more degraded than in the
State of Louisiana —a fact which completely negatives the oft-
repeated assertion that slavery has been the cause of the con-
tempt and social degradation under which they live. The cause
lies rather in a general want of moral, intellectual and personal
excellence in the negro, to render him companionable and an
object of interest and an equal, rather than of aversion and of
inferiority.’

Human history cannot be a mere chapter of accidents. The
fate of races and nations cannot be always regulated by chance ;
their intellectual philosophy, literature, science, art, wealth,
religion, language, laws and morals cannot be the result of mere
accidental circumstances.

These truths, practically held and universally acknowledged,
have elicited a more diligent inquiry into the comparative ana-
tomy and physiology of the negro race. These investigations,
with reference to the theory that there is a necessary connection
between the cephalic conformation and the leading features of
mental structure, and, consequently, between the size, propor-
tional divisions, and relative capacity of each section of the
brain, and the intellectual, moral, social and political condition
of every race of men. In this chapter of experimental philo-
sophy, induction has confirmed what was but a preconceived
hypothesis. The result has been the solution of the great pro-
blem, that the real cause of the negro’s inferior character and
condition is seated iu his physical organization. .

The late celebrated Dr. Morton, formerly President of the
American Academy of Natural Sciences at Philadelphia (to
whose writings we refer with the utmost confidence, as the best
authority upon this subject extant), established, by numerous
observations, tests and admeasurements, a mean internal capa-
city for the negro crania, of both African and American born,

who are not classed as citizens or members of the body politic by the con-
stitution, not capable of being entrusted with the rights and duties of a
sitizen in the United States.

1 Their inferiority and unfitness for companionship with the whites has
often been made a matter of legislative enactment, by prohibiting mar-
riages between the two races, and in excluding them from all the highest
functions of citizens and social beings with the whites. See collection of
legislative enactments upon this subject in the opinion of the Supreme
Court of the United States in the Dred Scott case, 19 How. Rep. p. 415,

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. - 195

less by twelve cubic inches than that of the Anglo-Saxon race,
besides a variety of peculiarities of form, among the most im-
portant of which are the low, flat and slanting forehead, and
the depressed or flattened summit or crown of the head —a
conformation that necessarily contracts the capacity of the cere-
brum, the seat of the intellectual faculties, elongates and en-
larges the cerebellum, dethrones the intellect, and renders the
acknowledged seat of the animal propensities the principal
volume of the brain.

Prof. Agassiz has also asserted “that a peculiar conforma-
tion characterizes the brain of an adult negro. Its development
never goes beyond that observable in the Caucasian in boyhood.
And, besides other singularities, it bears a striking resemblance,
in several particulars, to the brain of an ourang-outang.’’

One of these particulars is the excess of the animal over the
intellectual portion of the brain.

These peculiarities characterize the negro type; they have,
from the earliest ages, remained the same; they are, and must
of necessity be, a fixed fact in physiology; as much so as the
peculiar form of the hand, the foot, the relative position of the
spine, the form of the ribs, or any other marks of peculiarity
that distinguish the negro from the other types of mankind.
The doctrine of the plurality of original types or races of men
has been denounced as anti-scriptural, and tending to infidelity ;
but, in truth, the danger lies upon the other side of the ques-
tion. For if the physical organization of the animal kingdom
is progressive, and one type of man or beast may, from exter-
nal causes, gradually approximate, and finally lose itself in
another, higher than itself, the skeptic has but to seize upon
the retrograde course, and he finds no stopping-place till he
reaches the mineral kingdom. It puts a magic wand into his
hand, that enables him to smite the whole framework of natural
theology and it falls into chaos, to overturn the foundations of
the universe, and resolve the whole pantheism into an endlessly
revolving system of things.?

No man will deny, who is able to form an opinion from ob-
servation, that the average size of the head around the crown
of any promiscuous number of African, or American born
negroes, will be found less than the size of the same number of
white population of English descent, by from one to two inches.

Mr. Hamilton Smith states: ‘‘We have personally witnessed
the issue of military chacos (caps) to the Second West India

1 He may thus run the race out into a monad. See “ Vestiges of
Creation.”

196 THE-MORAL ATTITUDE OF

regiment, at the time when all the rank and file were bought
out of slave ships, and the sergeants alone being part white,
men of color, negroes from North America, or born creoles.
And it was observed that scarcely any fitted the heads of the
privates, excepting the two smallest sizes; in many instances,
robust men of the standard height required padding an inch
and a half in thickness to fit their caps !””? And this, too, not-
withstanding the excess of the thickness in the crania of the
negro.

These analyses of the size, form, and anatomical structure
of the negro’s head, we frequently meet with in treatises upon
anatomy and physiology. But it remains yet for the philoso-
pher and the moralist to analyze his mental structure, and show
a corresponding development of intellectual and moral cha-
racter. Upon this metaphysical subject we have not the means
of ocular demonstration accessible to the physiologist; we can
only reason from facts established by the most extensive and
authentic sources of observation.

From what we have seen of the negro race in their native
country, and what may be correctly observed of their posterity
in all parts of the world, it must be admitted, by all of exten-
sive observation, that the preponderance of the animal propen-
sities is a general trait in their character. This predisposes
them to moral insensibility, intellectual stupidity, indolence and
gluttony. Beyond a few childish amusements generally, the
height of his aspirations is to satiate his appetite, then to
lounge, sleep, sweat and steam in the sun, like the moping alli-
gator upon his log by the river bank.

Like some of the more gluttonous and greedy species of ani-
mals, he is a perfect slave to desires, and often becomes a mono-
maniac upon the subject of the gratification of his appetites.
Hence his adoration for certain beasts, birds, fishes, insects,
serpents and lizards; and not unfrequently he alone, of all the
known species, falls into the grovelling and beastly habit of
eating dirt.”

The insatiable passion for stimulants, such as tobacco, whis-
key, and the like, that shows itself, even in the early childhood
of the negro race, and the abject slavery to which it reduces
its subjects, is another evidence of the predominance of the
animal inclinations. Who has ever travelled through any
neighborhood of the slave-holding States, and not been fre-

1 Types of Mankiod, p. 453.

2 There may be some very rare instances of this in the higher species,
from some local cause, but with the negro it is quite common as a habit.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 197

quently accosted by the little curly-headed urchins, from seven
to ten or twelve years of age, with ‘‘ Massa, gimme chaw
bakker, please sir??? And generally, even at this tender age,
they will devour large quids of tobacco, and. drams of whiskey,
with as great a gusto as the white toper and tobacco-chewer of
mature years—things at which the more delicate organs of the
Caucasian youth would sicken antl revolt. This is not habit;
it is nature; it is born in him, and continues with him to his
grave.

All the social attachments, sentiments and feelings of the
negro. are imperfect, and savor rather of animal instinct and
impulse, than of intellectual and moral sensibilities. Even
those of conjugal attachment and parental affection are not
natural to the unsophisticated African negro, to a.much greater
extent than is common to the brute. In their native country,
the relation of husband and wife, parent and child, have but a
nominal existence. In their association with civilized society,
they imbibe these feelings to some extent by the force of imi-
tation and habit.

The very many instances of remarkable fidelity and attach-
ment to their masters, a characteristic quite common among
them, are founded not so much upon any high intellectual and |
refined sentiment of gratitude, as upon an instinctive impulse,
possessed even to a higher degree by some of the canine species.

Another evidence of the ruling character of the animal
appetites and passions in the negro, is the very weak and im-
perfect development of the intellectual powers. The fact can-
not be denied by any one acquainted with the subject, that
there is almost a tota] want of imagination, of the powers of
comparison, and of originality of genius and conception,
throughout the entire negro population.

Among the plantation hands throughout the slave States,
while a few are forced by imitation and a long training, by
habit, to do some of the rough-work of the arts necessary for
those purposes, the greater majority of them have not genius
enough to make a hoe-handle, an axe-helve, or stock a plough.

During a residence of fifteen years in the State of Louisiana,
and from an extensive acquaintance and observation in both
the States of Mississippi and Louisiana, and to a greater or

1 It should be remarked, that not every black man, or even African, is
properly included in what is termed by ethnologists the negro type. A
very broad distinction has been made, as we have seen, between the negro
proper and many nations of Africa. And when I speak of the negro, I
mean of the type of the Guinea negro.

Ln”

198 THE MORAL ATTITUDE OF

less extent, in every State in the Union, except Florida, I have
never met with, or read of a real negro, possessing the pecu-
liarities of that type, either African or American born, who
evinced even an ordinary degree of originality or inventive
genius for anything.’ Nor have I ever seen, read of, or heard
of a specimen of their manufacturing in any portion of the
world, that evinced even an ordinary degree of skill; or ever
known of one being employed in the higher and more difficult
mechanism of the arts. And I shall be sustained, by every
observing mind, whose means of observation have been exten-
sive, in the assertion that the negro population could never,
upon any principle of human probability, acquire the exact
sciences to any considerable extent, or ever make any pro-
ficiency in the arts, sculpture, painting, or poetry.

In ancient Greece, slaves worked at all the higher branches
of the arts.? ;
In Rome, there was a class of highly educated slaves who
were masters of all the arts, and practised some of the learned

professions.*

It is useless to contend that the political and social condition
of the negro has always kept him back: his condition in por-
.tions of Africa has been as favorable for the development of
his powers as that of any nation of the world.

Whenever there is native talent, latent intellect and origi-
nality of genius, it must and will, at times, either accidentally
or designedly, discover itself. You might as well suppress the
elastic energies of a volcano. Neither will it suffice to attri-
bute this long chapter of blank existence in the history of the
negro race to want of opportunity and proper culture and in-
ducements : these do not lay at the root of the evil; it is seated,
as we have before said, in the structure of the brain. How
has it been with the unlettered of other nations? Wherever
there is intellect ; wherever there is genius, even in the untu-
tored mind, it has and will develop itself in various ways in
whatever condition it may be in. Look at China, Mexico, and
even the aboriginal tribes of America. Even their evidences of

1T am aware of the history of ‘‘George Harris,” of Uncle Tom’s Cabin,
and if he was even a half-breed of the real negro type, I should require
some further evidence of the fact before I should be induced to credit the
story.

2 Demosthenes’ father left sword-makers and engravers. There were
also artisans in all the workshops of Greece. See Essay on Greek Slavery,
p. 63.

8 See Essay on Roman Slavery, p. 87.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 199

intellect and of genius are far superior to anything discovered
by the negro race.

What other race of beings has ever been reduced to such
abject servitude, and so long worn the yoke of bondage with
such grace and docility as the negro race in Africa? And
what does this argue for them but inherent intellectual imbe-
cility? They are the creatures of imitation; they originate
nothing; they acquire nothing, except it be to imitate what
they see done by their superiors; their language, their manners
and customs and habits are imperfectly acquired in this man-
ner, though they seemingly take great pride in politeness and
refinement of manners.

Again: no one, who has been accustomed to notice the pecu-
liar traits of the negro character to any considerable extent,
can fail to have noticed the total want of moral firmness that
characterizes all their actions. Hence their native disregard
for the truth, for honesty, and their treacherous and unprinci-
pled character. To talk to the negro about being governed by
principle any further than those principles contribute to the
gratification of his appetites and passions, would be as idle as
to attempt to control the wind with a broken reed.

Being the slaves of imitation and habit, their characters, in
certain particulars, as far as relates to acquired traits, are the
result of accidental circumstances, rather than of any firmness
of purpose, or decision of their own. Thus they are often
found to lead lives of great devotion, faithfulness, and honesty,
to their masters; but in this they are seldom, if ever, actuated
by any higher motive than a dread of incurring the displeasure
of one who has the tact and talent to inspire them with feces
of confidence in, and dependence upon, himself.

Others, on the other hand, are often accidentally left to the
habit of absconding, theft, intemperance, and the like, which
being congenial to their natures, it is in many instances ‘impos-
sible to eradicate from their disposition.

Their whole life is comparatively but a state of pupilage and
infancy ; conscious of their own intellectual inferiority, they are
generally extremely credulous and confiding, except where it
may interfere with their vicious propensities, and easily duped
by their superiors to any scheme by the most trifling fascinations.

From a child-like simplicity and weakness, they are perhaps
the most superstitious beings in the world. They have their
family legends of haunted-houses, ghosts, and hobgoblins, and
believe in literal devils, witchcraft, and incantations of various
descriptions.

200 SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES,

These notions prevail generally, except when they have been
overcome by the influence of superior minds. All their freaks
of enthusiasm, upon religion and other subjects, often lead to
permanent mental derangement, and generally resemble fits of
intellectual hallucination more than sober rationality. In justice
to ‘‘ Uncle Tom’s Cabin,’’ we must say that the leading traits
in the character of ‘‘ Topsy”? are drawn to perfection as to all
her vicious propensities. We never wish to see a more perfect
delineation of the real type of negro character, in many par-
ticulars, than is there set forth; but we cannot endorse the
representation as a whole. The authoress could not resist the
temptation to weave into the scene some of her own peculiar
dogmatisms, that exist only in the kind and charitable misgiv-
ings of her own imagination, and which entirely destroy the
truth and beauty of the picture.

The keen susceptibility of such refined feelings, exe ised
emotions, and high intellectual endowments that she has bestowed
upon her, to the thoroughly experienced mind, are as much out
of place in the bosom of Topsy as the most costly array of
precious jewelry, laces, and finery would be in her costume.

In the whole routine of negro literature, their drama, popular
speeches, patent sermons, songs, ballads, and body of minstrelsy,
which, to be in good taste, must be a correct index to the
standard of negro intellect and character, where can be found
any strong bursts of impassioned feelings of an elevated
character? or any traces of such refined intellectual and moral
sentiments as Topsy exhibits in the reformation of her charac-
ter? It is all but a windy volume of rhodomontade, or ranting
strains of dancing, carousing, and sensual sentimentality.
From the gifted genins of —

‘**Qld Zip Coon, a wery apt scholar
’Case he kill all de coon up Possum Holler,”

to the sad misfortunes of —

* * “‘Old Dan Tucker,
Who came too late to get his supper,”

it is all negro at first, negro afterwards, and negro to the last.

The highest excellence of this species of literature consists
in the exact representations of the reality; and the world
admires and laughs most when the intellectual and moral foibles
are the most correctly delineated. Yet when we come to
analyze the subject and show the real cause of it all, we are
accused of harsh sayings upon the misfortunes of the black

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 201

man. It is true, the subject is unpleasant ; but the philosopher
can never pander to public prejudice, nor flatter popular error ;
wherever truth leads him he must go. The die is cast; nature
has assigned the condition of the negro race, and fixed the limits
of their destiny.

ESSAY VIII.
THE RELATIVE POSITION AND TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES.

No government has ever existed in the civilized world that
placed the black and the white man upon an equal footing as
to all the rights and privileges of citizens. In their political
and social condition, universally among the Caucasian race,
the negro lives under many social and civil disabilities. Lord
Mansfield said, in the decision of Sommersett’s case, that such
was the odium that existed against them among the English
people, that they could not live in the enjoyment of any social
or civil privileges in England. In France they can never
attain to the rights of citizens. The fundamental principles of
our Federal and State governments place these privileges all
beyond the reach of the negro in America. The Constitution
of the United States and that of nearly all the States, say, that
every free white male citizen, &c., shall be a duly qualified
elector ; and such only are eligible to any office of honor, profit,
or trust, or to be admitted generally to civil functions, to seats
in the churches, public schools, places of general assembly, or
private circles of society ; all intermarriages between the white
and the black races is prohibited by law. This all goes to show
that the negro race, by universal consent of the civilized world,
are considered a separate and distinct race of beings, suited
only to their own peculiar state and condition. Their freedom
is but a name, an unmeaning sound; they are by nature totally
incapacitated to enjoy the rights and privileges of freemen,
except in secluded communities of their own kindred blood,

1 These truths are set forth in a striking light in the very learned and
masterly opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States in the Dred
Scott case. See 19 Hou. Rep. p. 408-410. It is there decided that the
descendants of African slaves are not citizens of the United States within
the meaning of the Constitution, even though they be free.

9202 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

which ever have been, and ever will be, sooner or later, when
left to themselves, in a state of barbarism. Their condition
among the whites is necessarily that of pupilage and dependence.
Considerations of this kind first induced civilized nations to
purchase them as slaves. Slavery, as we have before said, had
its origin in the stern yet merciful dictates of humanity; the
very word from which they take their name in the Latin lan-
guage, indicates the act of mercy that spared their lives.’
Slavery originated from the same cause, and existed by the same
laws in Africa.? This principle of national law that governed
the whole ancient world, took effect there also; and thousands
and millions of the hapless wretches who fell into the hands of
their otherwise merciless captors, were by its benign influence
snatched, as it were, from the jaws of death. But by the
barbarous customs of the country, their blood was spared but
for a time; till the anniversary of some funeral rites or festive
occasion, to water the graves of the ancestors of their victors.
Wars and revolutions had destroyed and enslaved nations, till
one-sixth owned and held the other five-sixths of the entire
populationin bondage. The less the demand for these preserved
captives as merchandize, the less value and consequence they
became to their African owners, and even burdensome to sup-
port; and hence the greater number could be sacrificed on all
occasions, and the more shocking these scenes of carnage and
bloodshed became to glut the blood-thirsty mania of these
African savages. .
Such was the condition of all the slave regions of Africa
when the first English slave ship found its way to her coast.
She arrived there upon a mission of mercy; to be (as Com-
mander Forbes, of the British navy in 1850, tells us he was at
one of their sacrifices),? the unworthy instrument, in the hands
of Divine Providence, in saving the lives of some of these mi-
serable creatures doomed to the knife of the executioner; to
transport them from this thraldom of heathen darkness into the
light and knowledge of the one living and true God.
Humanity and Christian benevolence every where plead for

1 Serve or Servare, to preserve, not slay their captives. Inst. Just.
lib. i. t. 2. ¢. 8.

2 Wheat’s Elements of Inter. Law, p. 194. The slave trade is not pro-
hibited by the code of nations; this principle of national law is still in
force in Africa, and in all nations where it has not been abolished by
municipal regulations. Op. cit. (in loco.), Case of Diana Stowell,
1 Dod. p. 95.

8 Africa and the American Flag, by Foote.

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 208

mercy to the wretched African captive. It was originally the
same spirit that induced Moses to retain the foreign fugitive
who had escaped from a heathen master to some one of the
tribes of Israel: actuated by the noblest impulse of the human
heart, he could not suffer the stranger to be denied the blessings
that had been vouchsafed to his own countrymen, and remanded
back into a land of heathen darkness. The same motives
touched the cord of true philanthropy in the heart of Queen
Elizabeth, and moved her at first to permit, encourage, and
patronize John Hawkins and other English merchants to en-
gage in the traffic. It was the same spirit that first moved the
enlightened and philanthropic body of the British Parliament
~-to charter the Royal African, and afterwards the West India
Company, for the same purpose. It was in the Christian hope
of benefiting these wretched beings in Africa, that the pious
John Newton, of Liverpool, fitted a slave ship, and actually
commanded her for several trips in the Guinea Trade. It was
the same spirit that moved the pen of the celebrated Jonathan
. Edwards in defence of the African slave trade, and prompted
him to dedicate one of his master-pieces of logic to that object.
It also quieted the conscience of the renowned Cotton Mather
to hold them as slaves; and also that of the Rev. Dr. Styles,
one of the early presidents of Yale College, to export a barrel
of rum to the coast of Africa to buy him a slave.

This appeal for mercy in behalf of the wretched African cap-
tive, long rung through the volumes of British eloquence; long
buffeted the efforts of Clarkson and Wilberforce, and put off
the abolition of the African slave trade to alate day. And
had it not been for the cupidity, avarice, and heinous depravity
-of human nature, that soon entailed the long catalogue of
abuses and horrors upon this originally beneficent enterprise,
intended, upheld, and supported by the most pious and best
men of the age, as a precious boon of mercy for the relief of
bleeding Africa, it would have been still openly and success-
fully extending the hand of deliverance to her benighted sons.

1 It will, doubtless, be asked why they were, when rescued, still kept
as slaves. The answer is, because commerce was the only channel
through which they could be reached, and even this change was fraught
with great blessings to the slave.

‘¢Tue AFRICAN SLAVE TRADE.—The Messrs. Regis, of Marseilles, have
made arrangements for the transportation of twenty thousand African
apprentices to the French colonies; and the first vessel for this traffic has
sailed from Marseilles, provided with sea-passports by both the French
and English Governments, for the coast of Africa. The Barcelona Fenix,
which makes these statements, says that this vessel takes out a cargo of

204 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

This originally beneficent scheme of ransoming these prisoners
from destruction, and making them as comfortable and happy
in a Christian land as their character and the nature of their
condition will admit, is no more accountable for the horrid
abuses that have been consequent upon it, than the Christian
religion itself is for the oceans of human blood that have flowed
in its footsteps. And the question of suppression of the slave
trade by law at the present day is one of national policy, and
pure expediency, as to whether, in consequence of the avarice
and wickedness of mankind, it is not productive of more evil
than good to Africa, and the world at large. It is not my
purpose to enter into any discussion of this question ; but there
is a fair question that may be asked by every true philanthro-
pist, Whether these attempts at suppression do not aggravate
the sufferings of the African slaves, both in their native coun-
try and on their passage, when smuggled away for a foreign
port? It is conceded by the best-informed upon this subject,
that nothing but the entire conquest of Africa can ever abolish
this trade;' and the question may be conscientiously asked,
whether the ineffectual and fruitless attempts at present being
made at suppression are, ou the whole, productive of any
good.

Every human being with African blood in his veins, who has
escaped from this maelstrom of African slavery and of human
misery, lived through the horrors of the mzddle passage, and
is now alive in a Christian land, owes his existence, and that
of his posterity to the merciful interposition of the African
slave trade. But for this, the life-blood that now flows freely
through the swelling pulsations of his heart, and animates his
system, would have long since drenched the grave of some bar-
baric prince, or person of rank, upon a heathen soil.

The same principle of national law that permitted Abraham

trinkets of small value, which are to be profitably invested in contracting
negroes for ten years’ service, and conveying them to Martinique and
Guadalupe. The Fenix adds, that it is supposed this experiment will be
often repeated, and finds in it a means of supplying Cuba and Porto Rico
with additional labor. In connection with this subject, the Leon Espaiiol,
of Madrid, states that the Government has found the means of supplying
these islands with abundant labor, which will soon be put in operation,
without infringing the slave trade treaties with England.

‘‘Of course, this is only a revival of the African slave trade, under the
hypocritical name of apprenticeship.”

1 See Expedition to Central Africa of Messrs. Richardson, Barth, Over-
way, and Vogel, 1851, ’52, ’53, by authority of her Majesty, Queen Vic-
toria. Lond. ed., 1854.

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 205

to bring back the women, and also the people from the slaughter
of Chederlaomer and the kings: that were with him at the bat-
tle of Shaveh, to pay tithes of all to Melchisedec, the Jewish
High Priest; and to divide the spoils with the king of Sodom
and give him the people ;' the same principle of national law
that permitted the Hebrew slave-dealers under the Mosaic code
to purchase the captives of the heathen round about them; the
same principle that permitted governor Winthrop to brand the
captive Pequods on the shoulder, and send them with the ne-
groes to the West Indies for slaves, has also, from the earliest
ages, prevailed in Africa, as well as all other nations.? By this
law of captivity, the custom of sparing the lives of their cap-
tives made them their property, as it did in ancient Greece,
Rome, and all the nations of Europe. This law, as we have
before remarked, was founded in mercy; it was one step in the
progress of civilization; it was enacted in favor of human life.

In Africa, as in all nations, these captives were lawful arti-
cles of commerce; the right of the African owner to sell them
was perfect and indefeasible, and (as we shall show more fully
hereafter), has been universally so held by the judicial tribunals
of all civilized nations. Therefore, slaves were originally pro-
cured from Africa in a regular and lawful course of trade; it
was a legal commerce, carried on by many pious men, under
the permission and patronage of Christian sovereigns. As in
all other commercial enterprises, companies were chartered by
the British Parliament to promote this kind of trade with
Africa. At length, bad men engaged in the trade, perverted
its original purpose, and abused this privilege.

Origin of Slavery in the United States.

Some of the English, Spanish, and other slave ships, at
length found their way to the West Indies, and the coast of
America. Slavery was not legislated into the British Colonies
in America; it flowed in there freely as the wind that bloweth
where it listeth, for the reason that it was then a regular and
lawful commerce, and there was no law in the colonies to pro-
hibit it. New England was for a long time a great importing
emporium for African slaves; some of the principal places
along her coast owe their origin to the wealth derived from
this trade. Newport was not alone; other places contributed
their portion. Many of these slaves were retained as domes-
tics, and for other service in the New England States, but they

1Gen. 14: 12, 16. 2 Wheat’s Elements International Law, p. 194.
18

506 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

were mostly reshipped at these places for the West Indies and
Southern markets. England, France, Spain, and Portugal,
were, for a long time, and some still are, deeply engaged in
this traffic. The British Colonies in America made several in-
effectual attempts to suppress it, but were always overpowered
by the authority of the mother country.

Feeling a natural aversion to negro labor and negro society,
the colonial authorities frequently remonstrated against its in-
troduction into the colonies. But every voice was put to
silence, and every effort to remedy this evil frustrated, by the
overwhelming power of English despotism ; and the trade was
continued for years under the favor of foreign influence and
foreign power. Hence arose the numerous class of slave popu-
lation in the United States.

In Virginia, several efforts were made to prohibit the impor-
tation of slaves, but the British Government constantly checked
all their efforts. South Carolina passed a similar law, which
was rejected by the king in council upon the plea that slavery
was beneficial to the country as a source of protection, &e.
Massachusetts was the first of the colonies to participate in
this trade; yet, when she would stop, Governor Hutchinson,
acting under the direction of the Crown of England, rejected
all her efforts. The importation of slaves into Georgia was
early prohibited for twenty years, that this State might be peo-
pled with a sturdy white population, and thus become a strong
barrier of protection against the inroad of Spanish incursions
from the South.? The slave population continued to increase
during the colonial existence of the States; till, at the forma-
tion and adoption of the Federal Constitution, twelve of the
thirteen were slave-holding States.’

This class of population was forced upon the colonists against
their will in great numbers, and as they existed in all the ori-
ginal States but one, some provision necessarily had to be
agreed upon in the Constitution for their recognition and govern-
ment. The idea is held up by Abolitionists among people not
well informed upon this subject, that the African progenitors

1 Peterson’s His. Rho., pp. 22, 24.

2 Bancroft’s Hist. U.8., vol. 2, p. 17. Stephens’ Hist. Ga., vol. 1, pp.
285, 6, 7, and 8. Tuck’s Black. vol. 1, part 2d, pp. 49-51. Appendix to
Mad. State Papers, 3, 1890. Walsh’s Appeal, 827. South Carolina Sta-
tutes, 2: 526. Stephens’ Journal, 8: 281. Encl. Am., tit. Slavery, vol.
2, p. 429. Jefferson’s Corresp., 146: 2. TIlliot’s Debates, 885. Story’s
Const. U. S.; 8d, p. 208 : 182.

8 Census U.S. 1850.

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 207

of the present slave population in this country were originally
stolen from Africa; and hence their present owners and holders
are denounced as partakers of stolen property, known to be
such.

This is but one of the multiplicity of errors that lie at the
foundation of all the misguided zeal and fanaticism that pre-
vail in different States and places upon this subject.

But is not the same true of the Hast India company ? look
at the horrors and abuse of the opium trade, and others, which
will be more fully set forth hereafter. The following passage,
it is said, was originally inserted in the Declaration of Inde-
pendence, by Mr. Jefferson. Speaking of the king of England,
he says, ‘‘He has waged a cruel war against human nature
itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the
. persons of a distant people who never offended him ; capturing
and carrying them away into slavery in another hemisphere, or
to incur a miserable death in their transportation thither. This
piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare
of the Christian king of Great Britain. Determined to keep
open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has
prostituted his negative for the suppressing of every legislative
attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce.’’ In
the first place, it can hardly be said that the British nation
waged a war against human nature in permitting and encour-
aging the African slave trade; it was, as we have said, in its
real design, or as patronized by government, dictated by
humanity. In the second place, it violated no rights of life or
liberty by capturing and carrying away a distant people into
slavery ; it found them already in slavery and doomed to inevi-
table destruction in their native country. It found them lawfully
held and owned by their native masters, and purchased them in
a fair and legitimate course of trade ; capturing and kidnapping
were never sanctioned by royal authority. Neither was it “the
opprobrium of infidel powers.’’ Africa has been visited, by
the slave merchant of nearly every nation of the earth, as a
lawful commerce ; and the traffic is given up by African poten-
tates at this day, with the greatest reluctance. It is even the
source of a violent prejudice in Africa against those who have
abolished it, and becomes a great obstacle to their commerce
with those nations.

This groundless assertion of Thomas Jefferson is as unfounded
a scandal upon the government of Great Britain, as his blas-
phemous remark upon the story of the Virgin Mary was upon
the inspired author of St. Matthew’s Gospel. He finally

208 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

became ashamed of it himself, and concluded to suppress it,
from a delicacy of feeling towards some gentlemen of the South ;
and, as he intimates, from the same feeling towards some of
the delegates from the North, then engaged in the Guinea
trade. This language, at the organization of the Federal
Government, became as applicable to the government of the
United States and the framers of its constitution, as to the king
of Great Britain — since it is provided by that instrument that
the importation of African slaves shall not be prohibited by
Congress prior to the year 1808. For eighteen years then, this
nefarious war against human nature, as termed by Mr. Jefferson,
was continued under the direct sanction of the framers and
adopters of the Constitution of the United States. Thus was
this scandal of Mr. Jefferson upon not only the English but
American nation, silently yet severely rebuked by the united
voice of the American people. Thomas Jefferson himself
turns a perfect somersault in sentiment, and wages this same
war against human nature, by taking the oath to support the
Constitution as President of the United States, and that, too,
before the time of this provisional sanction of the African slave
trade had elapsed. If he was sincere in what he uttered against
the king of England with regard to this traffic, what a paragon
of absurdity does his biography here present !

Thomas Jefferson was a true patriot and a great man, but
he was extremely fond of strange eccentricities, quaint expres-
sions, glaring paradoxes, and sweeping assertions. And he
displays this peculiarity in a singular degree in some of his
expressions in the Declaration of Independence. He there
asserts that ‘‘all men are created equal, and endowed by their
Creator with certain inalienable rights,’’ &c.1 In the first place,
all men are not created at all; it is contended by some that
there never was but one man created, and by others that each
type of man had its origin in a separate creation. But if it is
to be understood that all men are born equal, its absurdity in

a literal sense is none the less apparent (as we have endeavored

to show above). In the second place, men have no inalienable
rights either naturally or politically. What natural or political
right has a man, that he may not voluntarily or involuntarily
forfeit or transfer to the body politic? It is one of the funda-
mental principles in the science of human government, that it
derives its just and full powers from the consent of the governed ;

1 In justice to the real author of this sentiment, it should be observed
that this was intended to apply only to political men, members of the body
politic ; — for to what others did the Declaration of Independence relate ?

=

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 209

and this consent consists in a voluntary alienation of a portion
for the more safe and certain protection of the balance. Hence
government becomes a kind of compromise or compact between
the rulers and the ruled; and every individual subject may
forfeit his liberty, and even his life, in various ways. He may
do it by the voluntary commission of crime, or by enlisting
into the army, &c. Again, he may involuntarily forfeit it by
such a concourse of circumstances as to render it necessary ; to
avoid a death by fire, he may jump into the ocean; the calls of
his country may require too ‘‘ the poor offering of his life, and
the victim must be ready at the appointed hour of sacrifice.”
Physical disabilities and worldly misfortunes may throw him |
upon the cold charities of the world, and confine him to the
prison limits of public alms. Mental infirmities and derange-
ments may consign him to a lunatic asylum ; what then becomes
of his inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness ?

But let us inquire into what claim Mr. Jefferson had to
originality in this particular. Alexander Hamilton, speaking
of the British colonies in America, long prior to the Declara-
tion of Independence, used the following language :

‘We are threatened with the most abject slavery. It has
been proven that resistance by remonstrance will be without
effect. Were not the disadvantages of slavery too obvious to
stand in need of it, I might enumerate the tedious train of
calamities inseparable from it. I might show that it is fatal to
religion and morality, that it tends to debase the mind and
corrupt its noblest springs of action.’’* ‘‘ That Americans are
entitled to freedom is manifest upon every rational principle;
all men have a common original, they participate in a common
nature and consequently have a common right; no valid reason
can be assigned why one man should exercise more power or
pre-eminence over his fellow-men than another, unless they have
voluntarily vested him with that right. Since, then, Americans
have not by any act of theirs empowered the British Parliament
to make laws for them, it follows,” &c.? It will not be pre-
tended that Mr. Hamilton, in the use of the above language,
had reference to any other than British subjects, or the Anglo-
Saxon race; he is speaking of their condition in America, and
assigns this as a reason why they were, and ought to be, free
and independent. He could not have intended to convey the
fantastical idea that seems to have been taken from it by the

1 Hamilton’s Works, vol. ii. p. 9. 2 Tbid., vol. ii. p. 3.
18 * ®)

210 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

writer of the Declaration of Independence, or that it should
apply to negroes, Indians,’ &c. If so, he could not have been
so inconsistent as to sit as chairman of a committee of three,
in 1788, during the existence of the Confederation, consisting
of Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Madison, and Mr. Sedgewick, who re-
ported a resolution to Congress strongly recommending the
necessity and propriety of negotiating a treaty with the King
of Spain for the restitution of fugitive slaves who escaped from
the States adjoining into his territory, to which we shall refer
more particularly hereafter. Besides, he was one of the most
lucid and logical commentators upon the Constitution of the
United States and one of the most successful advocates for its
adoption with all its pro-slavery provisions.

But Mr. Jefferson seized upon this restricted remark, meta-
morphosed it into an ecumenical proposition, and brandished it
in his usual sweeping and random manner in the Declaration
of Independence. But public opinion, in this instance, too,
gave a negative to his startling hypothesis, by adopting the
idea as it was intended by its original author; and in the sub-
sequent formation and adoption of the Constitution of the
United States, held that only free white male citizens have a
common right, and that negroes might be held as slaves, and
restored to their owners when they escaped.? The framers car-
ried out the full meaning and spirit of this much-abused and
miscons rued clause in the Declaration of Independence, in the
provisions of the Constitution of the United States, by thus
adopting its true and original meaning. It related only to the
hereditary claims to prominence and power of the Anglo-Saxon
race over one another; hence it provided that there should be
no titles of nobility, no established class, rank or religion, that
‘‘no man should be deprived of his life, liberty, or property,
without due process of law,’’ &c. This covered the whole
original doctrine of this celebrated clause in the Declaration of
Independence. |

At the adoption of the Constitution of the United States,
twelve of the thirteen were slave-holding States; and, indeed,
it might be said that all were of that character, for although
there do not appear to have been any slaves actually held in

1 The Supreme Court of the United States have recently decided that
negroes are not citizens of the United States within the meaning of the
Constitution of the U. S.; that the principles of our government do not
apply to them; that the government of the United States was designed
for the white man, and that slaves are lawful property. (Dred Scott Case.)

2 See opinion of Supreme Court in Dred Scott case.

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 211

Massachusetts, yet, as we shall see, but a short time previous
that State held many, and there never was any law there abo-
lishing it, except the force of public opinion, unexpressed by
any direct legislative enactment. There were, at that date, in
the several States, about seven hundred thousand slaves. This
number could not have been estimated at a value less than three
hundred millions of dollars. This vast amount of property had
been originally acquired in a legitimate course of trade; the
right of the owners was perfect and indefeasible by any act of
legislation without remuneration. How, then, could the sub-
ject be disposed of in the formation of the present government ?
It must be tolerated or abolished. But were the United States
able, at the close of a protracted and expensive war, with a
bankrupt treasury, to pay this amount as a remuneration to the
owners for the loss of property and damages sustained by the
abolition of slavery ?

It must, therefore, be tolerated, and its existence provided
for as a matter of right. The policy adopted by the framers
of the Constitution was (as we shall show more fully hereafter),
for Congress to abstain from all interference with this subject,
directly or indirectly, and to leave it exclusively to the govern-
ments of the several States in which it existed.

The Position and Treatment of Slaves.

_ The definition of ‘‘a slave, is one who is subject to the power
of a master, and who belongs to him in such a manner that the
master may sell him, dispose of his person, his industry, and
his labor; and who can do nothing, possess nothing, nor ac-
quire anything, but that may belong to his master.’’!

Many of the features of this definition have but a nominal
existence, without any practical effect. It will be seen that the
slave belongs to his master only for certain specific purposes.
The idea of property in his person (as we shall show more fully
hereafter) is but a fiction of law. The power to sell, alienate,
and transfer, is not only an essential requisite to the existence
of the present relation between master and slave, but greatly
enhances the value of that relation; and when not abused, it
is a source of great comfort and blessing to the slave. By this
provision of law, the master who cruelly treats his slave can be
compelled to transfer him to another master. Besides, the

1 Civil code of La., Art. 85, Domat. tom. 2, sect. 97; ff. D. lib. 1, 5, 1.
4, s. 1, et Tit. 6, 1. 1, sect. 1. This definition does not make a slave, but

presupposes his existence. A thing cannot be defined that has no exist-
ence,

912 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

slave who is dissatisfied with his master can select another more
congenial to his notion, and by requesting the change, the
master will generally find it to his interest to grant his request,
as the value of the slave’s services consists, in a great measure,
in his being contented and satisfied with his master. For this
reason, slaves are seldom sold except in families. The idea is
prevalent among the misinformed upon this subject, that no
heed is given to the desires of the slave in this particular; but
this the universal experience of every man acquainted with the -
management of slaves will contradict. Though the slave’s
right to property is not known de jure, yet it exists, and is
practically recognised de facto—as much so as the property of
a free person; and in their intercourse with the world it is uni-
versally observed and respected. Like the Roman slaves they
have their peculium, to which the master lays no claim.1 And
many a one, by industry and economy, acquires sufficient means
to purchase his freedom. But comparatively few are willing to
invest it in that way. The remark of an industrious and eco-
nomical negro man, belonging to a friend of mine, illustrates
their general ideas of freedom. It was generally supposed
that he had accumulated a considerable amount of money. I
asked him one day, in the presence of his master, why he did
not purchase his freedom, to which he replied that negro pro-
perty was so fluctuating that he considered it a poor investment,
and he was looking out for a better speculation.

This shows the utter contempt and ridicule in which the
more intelligent portion of the slave population hold the sub-
ject of liberty, accompanied with all the disabilities and disad-
vantages which the negro must suffer in all parts of the country.
He feels and realizes the fact that he enjoys all the freedom that.
the nature of his character and condition in society will pos-
sibly admit. He sees thousands around him nominally free,
but who are actually in a worse slavery than himself, and with
whom he would not exchange situations. He concludes that,
after all, this boasted liberty is but a sound, an unmeaning
thing, and that slavery is the happiest condition that the black
population in this country can enjoy.”

1 Civil Code of Louisiana, Art. 175.

2 A Returning PENITENT.—Our readers may remember an advertise-
ment of a runaway that appeared in our columns some three years since,
and excited some characteristic comments from the New York Tribune.
No information was elicited by the advertisement concerning the fugitive,
who was a very intelligent and valuable servant, that had been well
treated and well regarded. We have now before us, however, a letter
written by the servant referred to, who addresses a friend and relative,

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 213

The numerous classifications and divisions of labor peculiar
to Roman slavery, are unknown to the American system in the
United States. They are here divided into but two classes or
divisions, known as the house or family servants and the plan-
tation hands. These latter are generally under the management
of an overseer, who corresponds to the Roman villicus, having
the superintendence of all the affairs: immediately connected
with the plantation. This is a necessary regulation, and one
enforced by law where the proprietor does not reside on the
plantation. It is as necessary for the safety and peace of the
neighborhood as for the good order and regulation of the plan-
tation. From fifty to one hundred negroes dwelling together
in a single village or quarter (which is about the average num-
ber), without the immediate supervision of some white man, to
regulate them and keep them in order, would be as dangerous
a foe to the surrounding plantations, as well as their own, as a
camp of Camanche Indians to the border settlements upon our
frontier.

There are in the slave-holding States a numerous class of per-’
sons who make this a regular profession, and follow it con-
stantly for a livelihood. Their reputation and success in busi-
ness, like all other professions, depends upon their skill and
judgment in discipline and good management. Many of the
most prominent citizens of these States have commenced life by
this kind of employment, and risen from it to wealth and dis-
tinction. The duties of an overseer are those of any other
general superintendent of any particular branch of business.
He is invested with all necessary authority to secure the services
of those under his charge, and to preserve good discipline and
order in the quarter.

All those barbarous modes of punishment, such as wearing
the furca, the cross, hanging them up by the hands with weights
to their feet to be whipped, have all been done away. In tur-
bulent and unmanageable cases, corporeal punishment is still
allowed. But this, among all humane and judicious managers,
is resorted to with reason and discretion, and not unfrequently
with great reluctance.

The instrument generally used for inflicting this punishment
is a soft buckskin thong, from four to six inches in length, and

enclosing an appeal to his mistress, and begging permission to return to
servitude and safety. He addresses earnest and emphatic assurances of
penitence and regret to his ‘‘ dear mistress,” and begs her to receive and
permit the return of her ‘dear servant.” The New York Tribune will
notice, of course.—Charleston Courier.

914 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

from a half to an inch in width, attached to the end of a com-
mon whip. All excessive punishments are discountenanced ;
the greatest dissatisfaction is generally felt by the owner at the
breaking of the skin in the course of such punishment; and,
should it happen, not unfrequently the manager is discharged
for the violation of this fixed rule. Confinement in the stocks
is also sometimes resorted to in the most desperate cases, and
for certain criminal offences. The idea generally held up by
the Abolitionists, that the slaves are all brutally beaten and
whipped without discretion or mercy, is false and unfounded.
Nothing is a more certain source of dissatisfaction, on the part
of the owner, than the cruel treatment or neglect of his over-
seer to his slaves. That instances of cruelty and neglect, from
brutal and unprincipled managers, do sometimes occur, cannot
be denied; but these are rare, and generally meet with the
severest rebuke from public opinion, and, if possible, are visited
with the penalty of the law. There is no object of human
sympathy upon which it is more keenly alive, in the Southern
States, than that of neglect and cruel treatment to slaves.
Their helpless and dependent condition renders them peculiarly
the objects of sympathy in this particular.

Their tasks of labor must not be beyond their strength, their
constitution, and ability to perform ; if humanity, law, and the
force of public opinion should all fail to regulate this matter
within its proper bounds, pecuniary interest, always the last
and most sordid appeal to the motives of the master, would
restrain him from over-working his slave.

The plantation hands generally reside in a little hamlet or
cluster of cottages, apart and some distance from the master’s
residence, when that is on the plantation; this is called the
‘‘quarter.’’ It consists of a group of cabins numbering in
proportion to the number of inhabitants, arranged in rows at
some distance apart, with a yard or play-ground intervening,
generally beset with large shade trees. This little cluster, when
adorned with its usual hues of snow, ensconsed beneath and
within the verdant shades of some retired grove, looming out
with its glimmerings of white through the green boughs of the
trees, presents a scene to the view of the traveller approaching
the distant heights of the back-ground, that, were he not ac-
customed to the optical illusion, he might mistake for a respect-
able New England village. The hands leave the quarter in
the morning at the ringing of the bell, and are in the field in
the busy season as soon as daylight will enable them to work.
When the distance from the quarter will not admit of their re-

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 215

turning to their meals, they are carried to them in the field.
They continue at their work till towards noon; when it is time
to feed the teams, the plough-boys then return to the stables for
that purpose, and the balance, commonly known as the hoe-
hands, take from one to three hours’ recess according to the
heat of the weather and the condition of the crop. During the
hottest part of the summer it is common for them to take three
hours’ recess in the middle of the day. This time they spend
in lounging and sleeping in the cooling retreat of some adja-
cent grove or shade trees upon the borders of the field; after
which, they again resume their labors and continue till dark ;
when they return to the quarter, get their suppers, and retire
for the night. Such is the regular routine of their daily labors
during the planting and busy season for the week till Saturday
noon; then, if the condition of the crop will admit of it, they
are discharged from labor till Monday morning. This portion of
the day they usually spend in cultivating their small ‘‘ patches’’
for themselves. And those of the men who are too indolent to
improve this opportunity, as many of them are, they are com-
pelled to it by their managers. The women spend their time
thus allowed them in washing and repairing their clothes, and
preparing to resume their labor on the following week. It is
a privilege commonly given to those of the men who will im-
prove it, to plant and cultivate small portions or ‘‘ patches”’
(as they term them) for themselves. From these they not un-
frequently realize from thirty to fifty bushels of corn; this, with
the fodder that they can save, they can sell to their masters,
their neighbors, or haul to a neighboring town, for from thirty
to forty dollars. They also have the privilege of raising poul-
try and of selling their eggs, chickens, ducks, and turkeys, be-
sides all they can realize from odd jobs and over-work, for
which they are as regularly paid as hired laborers. I know of
many plantations where book accounts are kept with the slaves,
and every item, that belongs to their debt and credit, is as
formally and regularly entered as in the account-books of coun-
try merchants.*

On the plantations fronting on the rivers and navigable

1 One or THE “Horrors or Stavery.” —The Norfolk (Va.) Herald
states that, a few days ago, several free negroes were put up at auction,
in Norfolk County, and sold to labor for a term sufficient to liquidate their
taxes. Singular to relate, four of them were purchased by a slave in
Portsmouth, who felt quite proud of the distinction, and made known
his determination to get the full value of his money out of them, or
know the reason why. This is a development under our “ Institutions”
which the apostles of free society would do well to make a note of.

216 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

streams, the slaves are usually allowed a portion of time in
which they may cut cord-wood for steamboats. This is a very
lucrative business; and, where opportunities are favorable,
both the master and slave realize great profits from the sale of
their wood. Any hand can, in a favorable situation, who is
kept at ordinary industry, realize from five to six hundred dol-
lars per year for his master, and from fifty to one hundred for
himself.

Thus, any slave, who has been well disciplined and enured to
habits of industry and economy, who will improve his opportu-
nity, may actually save as much for himself, besides the service
that his master claims, as the majority of laborers in the free
States, who labor for from ten to fifteen dollars per month,
clothe themselves, and sustain all losses from sickness, want of
employment, &c.

Where can there be found a class of agricultural hirelings
who actually save, on an average, more than from fifty to one
hundred dollars, annually, for any number of years from their
earnings ? On the other hand, how many thousands are there
who but just live and support their families from hand to mouth
by their daily labor, without being able to save one dollar at
the year’s end; —a class who must be constantly weighed down
with cares and anxieties for the welfare of themselves and fami-
lies in sickness and other misfortunes.

The slave is relieved from all this oppressive burden of trou-
bles; he is comforted by the pleasing consolation, if he has
any thought for his family, that they have a sure support, in
sickness and health, in infancy and old age. He is relieved of
all those dark forebodings of the future that so weigh down and
depress the spirits of the poor laborer of the free States.’ All
that the slave makes is his own; he has nothing to pay out for
the necessaries of life, though in strictness of law all that he has
belongs to his master; yet this is but a nominal provision ; it is
all included, like a wheel within a wheel, in his possessions.
But he is the proprietor of his slave’s peculiwm only as his re-
presentative, guardian, and protector, to see that he is not
wronged, and that he does not apply his means inconsistent
with his duties as a servant. It is given in charge by the law
to the master for the same reason that the slave’s person is, and
that is because he is incapable of managing it himself.

1 Although the negro race are naturally more disposed to idiocy and
insanity, yet among the slaves of the South, the like are almost wholly
unknown, an evidence of their happy state of mind. For statistics on
this point, see Essay on Political Slavery, post, p. 367.

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 217%

' As to their food and clothing, it compares well with that of
any class of free laborers with whom I have become acquainted.
They are generally allowed plenty of the most substantial and
wholesome articles of diet. It is generally estimated that it
requires as many barrels of mess-pork, of two hundred pounds
each, as there are slaves, big and little, to furnish them with
meat for one year. It is true, that the planter is not always at
the expense of purchasing that amount, for the reason that he
has other sources of supply ; but the amount of meat annually
consumed, on Suey. well-managed plantation; is equal to this
estimate.

For breadstuffs, an allowance is made of a bushel of meal,
per month, for each slave. In addition to this, they generally
have sweet-potatoes and milk; besides, all the poultry, vegeta-
bles, and other articles which they may raise, or purchase them-
selves. They have also privileges by which they are enabled
to supply themselves with sugar and coffee; their tobacco and
molasses are furnished for them by their masters. For clothing,
the general rule is two suits a year, one for summer and one
for winter. ‘Their winter suits are made of heavy goods manu-
factured from cotton and wool, called jeans; they have, also,
for winter, one blanket, over-coat, and flannel under-shirts.
They wear a kind of wool, or glazed hat; they have, also, two
pairs of shoes, or, more frequently, a pair of shoes and a pair
of boots. Their summer suits are made of a kind of cotton
goods called Osnaburgs, or Lowells. These keep them well
clad for their labor during the year; they have separate suits
for Sundays, for which, and the few articles of luxury that they
buy, they generally spend their savings during the year.

It is now Christmas; the cotton-picking season is over; the
slaves have finished their year’s work, and are now enjoying
their holidays. They have a week to themselves before resum-
ing the labors of another year. While I sit penning this chap-
ter, the town is thronged with hundreds of the black people
from the neighboring plantations. ‘They have come to town to
sell their ‘‘truck’’ (as they term it), which they have raised
during the year, and to buy articles of family luxuries, and fine
clothing, as they may fancy. They spend this week in visiting,
feasting, frolicking, dancing, and such other amusements as
they most enjoy. When it has passed, they cheerfully make
preparations for another crop.

The house slaves or servants have nothing to do with the
plantation ; they are retained as waiting servants, and their
duties are confined to the more immediate wants of the family.

19

918 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

One has charge of the sleeping-rooms, and the various apart-
ments of the house; others of the culinary department ; others
of the laundry ; others again, of the horses kept for family uses,
and pleasure carriages. This class of servants have their houses
usually in the back yard, or somewhere near the family resi-
dence, and eat at what may be called the second table, after the
white members of the family. Like all white servants through-
out the free States: in all families of respectability they are
kept neatly clad; and often for a Sunday garb, or ball dress,
put on what would, in a Quaker village, be called a rich and
extravagant costume.

No traveller of observation can have failed to notice the
dashing glitter of gewgaws and finery in which the colored
servant girls promenade the streets of the principal towns of the
South, in going to, and returning from church; and the fine
broadcloths and kid gloves of the colored gentry who aecom-
pany them. There is no happier class of laboring people in
the world than the family servants, generally, at the South.
Their labors are light; what in a New England family would
be put sometimes upon the wife and mother alone, or upon one
or two of the daughters, or where help is hired, upon one poor
Trish servant girl, with a compensation seldom more than from
a dollar and a quarter to a dollar and a half per week, would
in all families of any considerable wealth be divided between
from three to five servants.

It is asserted by Abolition writers and speakers that the
slaves enjoy no religious privileges. This is another one of the
numerous popular errors resulting from ignorance and misrepre-
sentation, that help to fan the flame of popular fanaticism that
pervades the Abolition crusade of the North against the South.
By the rules of church discipline, slaves are admitted as, and
actually become, members of all Evangelical churches through-
out the slave-holding States. In all towns and neighborhoods
where there is regular preaching they are generally privileged
to attend, and one exercise of the Sabbath is usually devoted
to their express benefit. Plantations and settlements remote
from these privileges, are generally supplied by itinerant
preachers either of the Methodist Episcopal Conference, or by
those appointed by the several denominations to take charge
of the different stations of the African Mission. Not unfre-
quently, settlements support local preachers for the benefit of
the colored population. It is true, some masters object to
having preaching on their plantations, and to their slaves

' TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 919

attending church; but such men are not peculiar to the slave _
States.

Child-like in their intellectual capacity, predisposed to super-
stition, credulity, and imitation; confiding in their superiors,
without reason or reflection, they become the most willing and
ready pretenders to religious notions, But these have very little
practical effect upon their moral character. They are generally
the most zealous and enthusiastic converts of the faith; but
their zeal, unfortunately, is not according to their knowledge.
This misfortune, however, is not peculiar to the slave popula-
tion. They are more passionate and flaming in their pretensions
to religious observances, than scrupulous and exact in the dis-
charge of their practical obligations; more vehement and
boisterous in their devotional exereises, than penitent and
humble for their remissness of duty. But we fear that even
these remarks cannot be confined to the colored population.

Marriage rites and ceremonies are as strictly observed among
them, and the relation of husband and wife, parent and child,
as firmly protected, generally, as their character and condition
will possibly admit. These are essentially under the supervision
and direction of the master, for without the influence of his
immediate interposition.and regulation, such relations could no
more exist among African slaves in America, than in their
native country. The proper regulation of the matrimonial
connection, is the cause of more difficulty, trouble, and anxiety
to the master, than perhaps any other subject connected with the
management of his slaves. Upon this subject the males and
females are mutually unfortunate and ill-adapted in their nature
to the security of family tranquillity. We hear much prating and
rhodomontade among anti-slavery writers and speakers, about
female virtue ; much about the heavenly boon guaranteed to all
females in the protection of their chastity. And when they
preach and write about enlightening the South upon the evils
of slavery, they would have us believe that this is dearer than
life to the female slave; that it is the pearl of great price, and
pure as the driven snow. ‘They would also teach us that it
may be involuntarily prostituted to open shame by the wanton
authority and control of the master with impunity. But this
is the result of ignorance and bad philosophy. This is the most
indelicate and objectionable part of our subject; yet with the
high precedent of the modern Sto(we)ic philosophy before us,
we need feel no qualms of delicacy or self-reproach in entering
upon a brief consideration of the subject.

The relation of master and slave puts the latter in his power

220 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

only for certain specified purposes; and he cannot, by virtue
of that relation, exercise any more power or control over the
slave than is implied as necessary to secure the object for which
the servant has been intrusted to the charge of the master.
Hence nature, law, and public opinion, all cry out and remon-
strate with an unwavering voice against the usurpation of any
illegitimate and unnatural authority over the slave for dissolute
and abandoned purposes. Nature has wisely regulated the
government of the passions in both man and beast, with a view
to the protection of the weaker sex. And when the master
approaches even the negro wench for the purpose of improper
familiarity, nature disarms him of all superiority over her; and
he must not only meet her upon grounds of equality, but humble
himself at her feet. And thus conscious of his own guilty
position, like the cowardly thief in the night, he loses all courage
for the exercise of authority or resistance, and if she has but
the disposition, she may, with perfect impunity, spurn his
proffered kindness with contempt. And the master, so far from —
entertaining feelings of revenge, would value the slave higher
and praise her the more for her strict adherence to virtuous
principles. Every slave-holder knows, if not, he will soon learn
by sad experience, that just in proportion as he practises or
permits and encourages dissolute habits among his slaves, he
loses the confidence of the males as a master, and the reverence
and respect of the females as a superior. And these are the
only effective sources of authority and good government over
them. The man who would violate his trust and prostitute his
authority to overcome the chaste and virtuous habits of a
helpless and defenceless female slave, is as much a monster in
human shape, as he who is guilty of incest within the circle
of his own domestic fireside. And though violations of the
natural, civil, and moral law, in both these instances, may, and
do, sometimes occur, yet they show the offender equally as
unfit to have charge of the personal subjects of the outrage in
one instance as in the other. They are both alike responsible
to the law, responsible to public opinion, and above and beyond
responsible to their God and the tribunal of their own bed and
board. This last responsibility, when all others fail, operates
as the chief of terrors to all such evil-doers. We hear it said
that in the case of the slave there is none to avenge the wrong ;
but the culprit can never escape the horrors of a guilty con-
science or the dread of exposure. In most cases he would call
upon the rocks and the mountains to fall upon him, and hide
him from the day of wrath and the terrible revelation of house-

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 991

hold vengeance that awaits him in a day of retribution. Thus
the injured female servant feels conscious of the protection of
the domestic tribunal to which she can safely resort for redress.
And this is an arbitress that, it is universally acknowledged, in
matters of this kind, ‘‘ beareth not the sword in vain.’’

What evils are there, then, in this particular, peculiar to the
relation of master and slave? or that do not apply with equal
force to the condition of hired servants? We shall, perhaps,
be told that one has redress at law, while the other has not;
but what privilege is that to the destitute servant girl, who is
struggling, as it were, between life and death, with the task of
three slaves imposed upon her, for the pitiful compensation of
one dollar and a half per week —a sum not sufficient to keep
her in decent clothes, to say nothing of her liability to sickness
and other contingent expenses—without friends, without money,
and liable, at the least displeasure of her employer, to be
turned out upon the cold charities of the world, and there to
incur the uncertainty and difficulty of obtaining another situa-
tion, or go to the almshouse for a support. No such fears, no
such dread or anxiety operates upon the mind of the female
slave; she knows that she has a protector, to whom she can
resort with impunity. But does the law afford no protection
to the slave in this particular? I answer, yes; the culprit is
just as amenable and liable to its penalties, for any violence or
outrage, in the one instance as in the other. The female slave
has as strong inducements, and as much encouragement to lead
a virtuous life, as the hired servant girl, if she had the disposi-
tion; and she has quite as strong a shield of protection thrown
around her, both by nature and by law, if she chooses to avail
herself of the privilege. But the predominance of the animal
passions superinduces the loose, easy and reckless habits, in this
respect, natural to the negro wench. Her character, in this
particular, forms a striking contrast to the deathly tenacity of
her virtue, peculiar, of all savages, to the Indian squaw.

The same animal propensities that produce the lax and dis-
solute vices of the females, produce the jealousy and disaffection
of the males. Jealousy, the invariable concomitant of a weak
and dissolute mind, is the enslaving sin of the black man. He
is naturally the most jealous of all creatures, and comes nearest
to @ monomaniac upon this subject of any being in the world.
This is a constant source of family bickerings, broils and diffi-
culties, that sometimes end in tragical scenes of blood. Hence
arise the difficulties and trials of the master in preserving the
proper discipline and government of the quarter. It therefore

19 *

222 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

becomes a matter of paramount interest, and the imperious
duty of every master to inculcate and enforce the most rigid
adherence to virtuous habits and conjugal fidelity among his
slaves.

The animal impulses and vices of this kind, peculiar in de-
gree to the negro and some other savage races, from their phy-
sical organization, must for ever be one of the most destructive
elements to the existence of organized society among them.
And but for the influence of civilization, and the rigors and
restraints of domestic discipline, they would lead to promis-
cuous intercourse, or keep them in constant anarchy and con-
fusion, and thus hasten their degeneracy into their original
savage state. Wherever they are brought under this influence,
and subjected to this discipline, by the force of habit and imi-
tation they may, and do, in a degree, overcome these wayward
propensities, and attain to some degree of elevation in their
condition and character.

Again, we hear of long and windy appeals to the sympathies
of anti-slavery people, about the horrors of separating man and
wife, parent and child, as though this was necessary to the rela-
tion of master and slave, and peculiar to that institution. Here
is another of those popular errors blazoned forth by ignorant
and malicious brawlers, to inflame the prejudices and excite the
hostilities of one section of the Union against the other.

To the native African, a wife or a child, as to any of those
cares, anxieties, and tender regards that exist in the bosom of
civilized man, is wholly unknown. By the force of habit and
imitation, they imbibe these feelings to some extent in their
connexion with civilized society; yet even then they often
cherish a morbid insensibility to all ties of family and kindred
that is truly derogatory to human nature. Horrid as the idea
of an owner and master may seem to the Abolitionist, the poor
wife is often glad to appeal to his merciful protection against
the cruelties and brutal treatment of her husband. So also is
the child against the neglect and abuses of the mother. The
authoress of Uncle Tom’s Cabin has kindly informed us that
emotions of parental and kindred attachment are ardent and
strong in the hearts of the negro race, but my experience and
observation have led me to form a very different conclusion
upon that subject. Lust and beastly cruelty are the strong pas-
sions that glow in the negro’s bosom. ‘‘ There is no flesh in
his obdurate heart; it does not feel for man,’ or beast. I have
often witnessed scenes of his cruelties to animals, that would
make the heart of civilized man bleed at every pore. This is

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 293

natural to his race in their native country; it results from the
peculiar physical conformation of the head, and the consequent
predominance of the animal passions. All travellers agree in
bearing testimony to the truth of this fact. But it is the inte-
rest, as well as the duty of the master, to improve the character
of his slaves in this particular, as the value of their services
will be greatly enhanced thereby.

Though the slave, like a minor, cannot marry without the
permission of those under whose authority he may be, yet no
control is exercised by the master over their choice of a com-
panion. When married, each family has its separate house or
apartment, where they are required to live together decently
and faithfully as man and wife. These houses, as we have
before said, are situated together in clusters of cottages in some
pleasant and retired situation. In building them, they are
generally raised from two to four feet from the ground to give
a free circulation of air under them, and thus render them as
cool and comfortable as possible. These cottages are gene-
rally frame buildings (though sometimes of brick and sometimes
of logs) of one story in height, and two rooms from sixteen to
twenty feet square, finished with a view to health, convenience
and comfort. We often hear of their living in miserable huts,
with no floor but the earth, without bedding, &c. It is true,
there are instances of this kind, as there are in every commu-
nity where poor, destitute and improvident people can be found.
But why should these exceptions be heralded forth to the world
as one of the evils of slavery? With the same plausibility
might such facts be urged against the present organization of
society. ‘‘ The poor ye have always with you.” No traveller can
pass through the laboring communities of the Northern States,
and observe the condition of thousands of the poor and des-
titute, without seeing and feeling the inconsistency and injustice
of such slanderous imputations upon the condition of the slave
population of the South. But more of this anon.

Whoever has passed through the channel from Lake Erie to
Lake St. Clair, and observed the soldiers’ quarters at Fort
Malden, has a very correct idea of the external appearance of
a Louisiana negro quarter. This the author observed to a
large number of passengers while passing that place in the
month of October, 1854. Indeed, the whole Canada shore,
along the channel, might easily be mistaken for the Louisiana
coast, at a moderate height of the water of the Mississippi.

It is for the interest, as well as the duty of the master, to cul-
tivate the tender sensibilities, and improve the character and

994 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

condition of his slaves in this respect, as the value of their ser-
vices will thereby be greatly enhanced. Interest, then, as well
as humanity and duty, plead against the separation of husband
and wife, parent and child, and the breaking up of families.
This sentiment so pervades public opinion, that such instances
but seldom occur. Observe the list of notices of the sales of
negroes throughout the Southern States, and almost universally
you will see the specification that families are not to be sepa-
rated. It may be boldly asserted, in the hearing of all South-
ern men, and those best acquainted with the system, that such
is the law and the state of public opinion, that there is not a
slave-holder in the country, of respectable standing in the com-
munity where he lives, who would consent to sell a family of
slaves separately. And I venture to say, further, that you may
travel from Pittsburg to New Orleans, and from Baltimore to
Corpus Christi, and try every man in both routes, and not be
able to purchase a child under ten years of age without its
mother, if alive.’ But are the laws of slavery the only laws
that permit the separation of husband and wife, &c.? I ap-
peal to maritime and martial laws, the regulations of the army
and navy, commerce, Oalifornia gold, and the Mexican and
foreign wars, for an answer to this question. Why is it, then,
that this system is alone singled out as the peculiar object of
calumny and vituperation ?

If there is one spark of true philanthropy, if there is one
sincere emotion of friendship and kind regard for the welfare of
the slave, known to the Anglo-Saxon race, that exists in its
greatest purity and most unalloyed state in the benevolent heart
of the Southern master. JI have become convinced of this
truth from a somewhat long and familiar acquaintance with
real facts. The many instances of kind- regard and mutual
attachment that I have witnessed between masters and super-
annuated servants, who have long passed their days of useful-
ness and profit, and become helpless, have satisfied me that the
truest friends to the black man are those who have been raised
by, and among them, and best know his character and condi-
tion, and best understand his interests and his wants.

When age and infirmities have rendered them unfit for the
daily duties of regular hands, the men are assigned some light
task about the garden or the quarter, suited to their ability ;
and the old women are left to attend to the children, knit, sew,
or spin, and sometimes, when they are able, to cook. ‘They

1 The law prohibits it.

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 295

are generally spoken to by all the white members of the family
in terms of kindness and due respect, generally addressed by
the epithet of uncle or aunt. I have known of great devotion
and regard for the welfare of these aged and helpless people;
and by all masters of good breeding they are kindly treated.

Jack was a faithful old patriarch of the neighborhood ; he
had lived to see three generations, and was looked up to by all
his fellow-servants for counsel and advice; he was an heredi-
tary servant, and had already passed to the second generation
in the family ; he was the body-servant of his elder master, and
had helped to raise his young mistress from her cradle. He
had seen her grow up from her infant gambols and childish
sports to a pious and devoted young mother, with a group of
interesting children around her. Jack loved them all better
than his own, and they all respected Jack; he had been a
faithful, and was still, as far as he was able, a worthy and de-
voted servant. He was, of course, a great favorite of his
young master, who always treated him with the greatest kind-
ness and attention; and Jack felt more than the interest of a
father in his young master’s welfare. His master always per-
mitted the most free and familiar conversation to Jack, and to
humor and gratify his good wishes, often took counsel and ad-
_ yice with him upon matters of importance.

But Jack’s days were numbered ; a sudden change to a cold
December wind, had prostrated him upon a bed of sickness to
rise no more. Then came the test of the sincerity in their
friendship and kind feelings for poor Jack. And never was
kindness more sincerely manifested ; all felt the deepest anxiety
and concern ; his master scarcely left his bedside, day or night,
till death laid his icy hand upon him, and poor old Jack was
numbered with the congregation of the dead. And when the
news was announced to the household that this time-honored
servant of a former generation was no more, a sadness and
solemnity cast its shade over the countenances of all, as though
a vacancy was felt in the ranks of the family circle. This is
but one instance, similar to thousands that might be mentioned,
to show that it is natural to the human heart, when possessed
of kind and benevolent feelings, or even of the common sym-
pathies of humanity, to cherish sentiments of gratitude and
compassion for the helpless condition of those who have spent
faithful lives in devotion to the service and welfare of their
masters.’

1 We find in the census that of the free negroes there are 24,160 over
the age of sixty. Who shall provide for these decrepid men and helpless

P

226 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

We often see striking manifestations of a kindred sentiment
towards even the animal creation; some faithful old dog or
horse, that has long since passed his days of usefulness, is
long nurtured by the kind and compassionate attention of the
owner, not for what he may hope from them in future, but in
gratitude for the good they have done in the past. This ex-
ample is not instanced to compare man with beast; but to show
that it is but the natural impulse of the human heart, when
thrown into long association with man, or even beast, to con-
tract feelings of attachment, of kindness and compassion for
their misfortunes. And when those feelings are not repulsed
and eradicated by the vicious and refractory character of the
negro slave, they beget for him a friendship and compassionate
regard for his welfare, that can be found nowhere so sincere
and so warm as in the heart of a kind and benevolent Southern
master. In confirmation of this truth, instances by thousands
might be enumerated of the heroic devotion of masters and
mistresses to the health, safety, and comfort of their slaves,
even at the hazard and loss of their lives in times of great pes-
tilential peril. But our limits will only permit us to mention
but few. An instance of this kind, often related to me, and
of which there are many living witnesses, now occurs as suita-
ble to give as an illustration. It is an account of the heroic
devotion of a distinguished lady who lived in the parish, and
near the place where the bloody scene of Uncle Tom’s death
was laid. It occurred during the terrible ravages of the cho-
lera through the Red River country, and the different parts of
the South, in 1833.

Already it had stricken down its thousands in and around
this section of the State of Louisiana. Already its bloody
footprints might be traced high up upon the banks of this
stream, and wide over the face of this devoted section of coun-
try ; it sped its course bearing a trail like ‘‘ the destroying
angel that walketh in darkness and wasteth at noonday.’’ At
length, it broke out in the numerous household of the subject
of this narrative ; her husband was absent; its victims were
falling thick and fast around her; moved by compassion for the

women? Left to the cold charities of strangers, they linger out a misera-
ble existence: not so with the slave; of these, we have 114,752 over the
age of sixty; yet are they, for their faithful services, kindly treated by
their masters. The free States, in 18,000,000, have but 5,641 over the
age of ninety; while of the slaves, in 3,200,412, there are 4,109 over
that age, which is indisputable evidence of their kind treatment. (See
post, p. 367.)

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. ots

suffering and helpless condition of the servants in her charge,
this heroine left the family residence, and a group of darling
children smiling around her, and rushed, as it were, into the
jaws of death, to try to administer to the comfort and relief of
her distressed slaves. There she continued her labors of mercy
among them, night and day, till in turn, she herself fell a vic-
tim to this deathly scourge and a martyr to the benevolence and
magnanimity of a true Christian heart.

Among a thousand others, I will mention but a single in-
stance of the kind that fell under my own personal observa-
tion. 7

In 1850, this same deadly plague, the besom of destruction,
swept through the land nearly in the same broad pathway of
its former range; again came this messenger of fate among us,
shaking pestilence and death from his gory locks; again, the
grim angel of death hovered near, flapping his dark wings
over the fairest portions of the Pelican State. Thick and fast,
like the leaves of autumn, were the slain falling on our right
and on our left. The sounds of lamentation and sorrow rung
along her coasts, echoing over her prairies and through her
plains. The sable moss tresses hung like funeral palls upon
the lofty cypress, waving their sepulchral drapery in the breeze
as the mourning vesture of the forest; and all nature had put
on its garb of sorrow.

At this critical juncture, a young friend of mine, with one
hundred slaves in his charge, set out from the mouth of this
same Red River to locate them upon his plantation up some
distance in the interior of the State, hoping, by this means, to
get beyond the reach of the pestilence. During the second
day on his journey, it broke out in all its fury among them.
Did he flee for his life, and abandon them to their fate? Let
the keen pangs of grief that wrung the life-blood from the
heart of his wife and children, let the tears and sorrows of a
large circle of acquaintances and friends, and the lamentations
of his own faithful servants, answer the question.

Like the heroic pilot upon the burning ship, tossed upon the
high and giddy wave, he bravely kept his post to the last.
One by one, to the number of some eighteen or twenty, in the
space of a few days, he carefully consigned them to the dust ;
till his own choice spirit, glowing with the warmest sympathies
for suffering humanity, took its flight, and his weeping servants
in turn sorrowfully bore a kind and humane master to the gates
of the grave.?

1 It is commonly supposed, by the Abolitionists, that the slaves of the

228 THE RELATIVE FOSITION AND

What would have been the fate of these unfortunate beings
had they been in the boasted land of freedom? Who would
have cared for them had they been conveyed by some subter-
ranean railroad scheme to the heart of an abolition community ?
Ye boasting philanthropists, read the following facts, and weep
tears of blood over the truth ! )

‘‘ SINGULAR AND HORRIBLE STATE OF FACTS.—A correspond-
ent of the Cincinnati Commercial, writing from Franklin Coun-
ty, Ohio, relates the following: A relative of his named David
Ward, who made his home with Thomas Ward, was taken with
the cholera and died, having two negroes to wait upon him
during his illness, there being none of the neighbors who would
go to the house. After his death, two men went from Frank-
lin to Ward’s house, dressed the corpse, and put it into a cof-
fin. One of the negroes who had waited on David lived on.
Thomas Ward’s farm, and had a wife and three children. -He
was taken ill with the cholera, but was in a fair way of recover-
ing, when his wife and one child died. At this he got out of
bed and ran off. He was found dead a few days after lying in
Clear Creek, with one of his arms broken. An undertaker
had the bodies of his wife and child decently buried. The
negro man who had waited on David Ward, and the two re-
maining children, were, at that time, at Thomas Ward’s. The
man was taken with the cholera, when Tom Ward sent him to
the woods to die. One of the negro children being also taken
with the cholera, Ward led it out into the woods, and laid it
beside the sick man, where it died in a few hours. Ward dug
a hole at some distance, threw a long rope to the sick negro
and ordered him to tie it round the corpse of the child, which
being done, he dragged the body to the hole, pulling at the end
of the rope; and then made the sick negro drag himself to the
edge of the hole and push in dirt until he covered the dead
body of the child.’’?

All this revolting scene occurred in the heart and hotbed of

South have no affection for their masters and mistresses; but how mis-
taken would they find themselves could they but witness their lamenta-
tions and sorrowings frequently at the death and burial of those who
have long kindly and carefully watched over them! While masters and
mistresses will peril their lives for their servants, they, in turn, are as
‘faithful and devoted to them as their own children in time of sickness.
This is abundantly proven by the numerous instances of self-sacrifice and
heroic devotion of the slaves to their masters and mistresses, recently
shown in Portsmouth and Norfolk, Va.

1 Who would not rather be the fictitious Simeon Legree than the real
Thomas Ward?

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 999

the Abolitionists; in the neighborhood of Aunt Rachel Halli-
day’s. But where was Senator Bird, Honest Old John Van
Trompe, Simeon Halliday, Phineas Fletcher, Giddings, and
Senator Chase? Perhaps they had adopted the Scripture
motto to ‘‘ Let the dead bury their dead,’’ and were at this:
very time employed in the more imperious Christian duty of
transporting Eliza and her little Harry, by underground rail-
road, to Canada.

Need I refer to the shocking scenes of suffering that necessa-
rily occur among the free population, in all large cities, that
have not the means to secure their own comfort during the
prevalence of these terrible epidemics ?—a state of things that
gives rise to the various bodies of charitable associations for
their relief. How much better in this respect, as well as in all
other helpless situations, is the condition of the slave! This
feeling of confidence and assurance that he will be provided for
in all times of need; that in all times of trial he can fall back
upon the sympathy and compassion of a benevolent master, like
a child upon a parent, is a great source of comfort and conso-
lation to the slave. It renders him always cheerful and happy.
No anxieties and troubles about himself or his family, no dark
and fearful forebodings of the future, weigh down and depress
his spirits. He is never subjected to such fits of gloom and
despondency as we often see depicted upon the countenances
of thousands in the land of liberty. A gloomy and depressed
state of mind is altogether unnatural to a negro slave. With
perfect deference to your position, with perfect confidence in
your sympathy, kindness, and compassion towards him, he will
always approach you with a smile of familiarity, freedom, and
cheerfulness, totally unknown to the privileges of a negro in
any other part of the country. None of that arrogance of
superiority, none of that stern and relentless scorn peculiar to
the people of the free States, in their intercourse with the negro
race, ever finds place in the chivalric heart of a Southern
master.

The cause of this is in the different relation and relative
position in which the parties are placed with regard to one
another. Ever conscious and ever taught to feel his inferiority
in both eapacity and condition, the slave regulates his manners
and intercourse with his superiors accordingly. He always.
appeals to their generosity and magnanimity of soul, not to do
him a wrong or an injustice, in his comparatively helpless and
defenceless condition. This cannot fail to win the sympathy
and compassion for his misfortunes, of every ingenuous heart.

20

2930 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

On the other hand, the negro of the free States pretends to
no inferiority. With a bold, defying, and arrogant air, he
attempts to intrude himself upon the white man upon perfect
grounds of equality; a sentiment utterly abhorred by the
nature, the morals, politics, and religion of the Anglo-Saxon
race in all parts of the world. And hence their entire want
of social sympathy; their cold, distant, and repulsive feeling
for the negro race in the free States. This will be found uni-
versal in all those States and in Europe, except in instances of
hypocritical and dogmatical pretensions, by a few misguided
enthusiasts, as a false pretence to consistency. There is no such
friendly intercourse, no such sympathy for their welfare and
social familiarity existing between the black and white popula-
tion of the free States, except in the instances above cited, as
there is between the Southern slave-holder and the well-behaved
free colored people around him. The secret of it all is that
these people are less assuming in their manners, and less arro-
gant in their pretensions.

In Louisiana, the better class of the free ooLee people fre-
quently attain to great wealth and comparative respectability.
They live side by side with the white people, and are good
neighbors together; and in some instances upon terms of great
intimacy and friendship, except in some of the more reserved
social and family intercourse, in regard to which there always
exist mutual and friendly concessions.*

Whoever wishes to see the most striking instances of the
mutual feelings of regard that exist between the master and
slave, should take a trip down the Mississippi river in company
with a number of Southern planters returning from a summer
tour at the North, and witness their meeting after a long
absence. See them as they drop out at their several plantations
along upon the river bank, first met by a group of jubilant
slaves, with joy sparkling in their eyes and beaming from their
countenances, each impatient for his turn to greet him with a
welcome ‘‘ How dy, Massa?’’ and a fond shake of the hand.
One on witnessing such scenes cannot but be reminded of the
strange spectacle that would be presented in the streets of
Philadelphia, New York, or Boston, to }see some aristocratic
millionaire beset by a crowd of dirty negroes, each waiting an
opportunity to shake him by the hand.

Much of the misapprehension and the wrong impressions of

1 In many instances, these free people of color hold hundreds of slaves,

and are universally the most cruel and oppressive masters; but these are
mixed bloods, or not of the real negro type.

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 231

those not well-informed upon the subject in regard to the true
character of slavery, or slavery as it really is in America, arise
from a wrong idea of its fundamental precepts. All anti-slavery
agitation is predicated upon the hypothesis that the slave-holder
and the slave, are naturally of equal rank and capacity, as in
the case of Hebrew, Greek, and Roman slavery ;—that slavery
is an obstacle to the rise, progress, and improvement of the
slaves. But every one familiar with the subject knows that the
very reverse of this hypothesis is the truth. Instead of prevent-
ing the slave’s improvement, it has converted him from a savage
to a state of partial civilization; instead of obstructing his
improvement, it prevents him from degenerating into his native
barbarism, as he has universally tended when left to himself.?

The history of the present and the past proves that the con-
dition of the American slave is the happiest one that he is
capable of enjoying. In no age or nation have the same number
of Africans attained to so high an elevation in their character
and condition. Nowhere else have they enjoyed so many of the
blessings of Christian society and the privileges of civilized
life. They are well fed, well clothed, well cared for in sickness
and in health, in infancy and old age. MHnjoying religious
privileges in common with the free white population, they are
wholly devoid of cares and anxieties for themselves and their
families.

The gayety, hilarity, and joy often manifested by these people
while at their labor, or at their dwellings, present scenes truly

1 <A Canpip ConreEssion. —The British Governor of Jamaica, in his
address at the opening of the Provincial Legislature, recommends the trans-
portation of the fugitive slaves from our Southern States, who have taken
refuge in Canada, to the island of Jamaica, for the following reasons:
‘The people who may, if matters be properly represented to them, be
induced to come hither from America, are precisely the sort of industrial
population we require ; besides, they are admirably adapted to the climate
of this island. Bringing with them an amount of civilization far higher
than that of the generality of the laboring population of this island, and ac-
quainted as they are to a much greater extent with agriculture and
mechanical arts —two of the greatest desiderata in Jamaica — the black
and colored people of America are not only admirably calculated to
develop the innumerable resources of the island to a far greater extent
than the natives are at present capable of, but they will, to a certainty,
if brought here, be the means of improving our native peasantry, by con-
tinually presenting, to a people so imitative, examples worthy for them to
follow.’

* This is a striking testimony, as the New York Express justly remarks,
to the humanizing and elevating influences with which the African is
surrounded in the United (Southern) States.”—Richmond ( Va.) Dispatch.

232 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

romantic to the traveller as he approaches a well-managed
plantation upon a pleasant evening of spring. His advent is
first noticed by some one or more huge mastiffs occupying the
position of the Roman janitors at the gate of the castle. Their
loud barking gives note of the approaching stranger. He is next
observed by a group of curly-headed young urchins who
scamper away to their hiding-places, or some more distant and
safe retreat, to stand and gaze at what they deem a lawless
intrusion upon their premises. The sun is reclining towards
the western ocean of forests, the earth is clad in her verdant
mantle, and vegetation elows in tints of living green. The
herds and flocks are grazing upon the open fields, and the birds
are making melody through the groves with their evening song.
The yard teems with every species of ducks, geese, turkeys,
chickens, goats, cats, and dogs of various sizes, castes, colors,
and descriptions. In the distance he hears the merry song of
the plough-boys and hands that ‘stalk afield,’’? and the shrill
tones of the k-e-s-o-0-k! k-e-s-o-0o-k! of the old stock-
‘‘minder,’’ at the sound of which a hundred forest grunters
come squealing and growling up from the adjacent woods to
the accustomed spot of rendezvous to receive their daily rations.
A ceremony repeated from evening to evening, to enable this
faithful old patriarch and feeder of flocks and herds, to ascer-
tain if any lawless marauder or prowling vermin have invaded
their ranks and diminished their number. But should the
traveller be belated and not reach this rural village till after
night, frequently, as he approaches, he hears the far-off echoes
of music, and the sounds of jubilant voices in dancing, rejoicings
and merriment, as though they were celebrating some festive
occasion. Where can there be found a class of agricultural
laborers so independent of the world, so bountifully supplied
with all the comforts of life? Where can there be found a
class of hired laborers of this description whose families are
furnished with one barrel of meat to each member per year, and
one bushel of meal to each per month ? and besides this from
fifty to one hundred dollars of their wages saved for their con-
tingent expenses. It may be safely asserted that such a class
of hired laborers cannot be found within the territory of the
United States, and much less in Europe. And every man who
has experienced the hardship of supporting a family from his
daily labors will respond to the truth of the assertion.

The negroes, as we have seen, never have, and never can, as a
people, attain to equal rights ‘and privileges with the whites
without a miracle ; they can never live upon grounds of equality

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES.’ 933

with them in the same community. Inferiority is the position
in which nature has placed them; and so long as they are in
the same community with the whites, laws and institutions
necessarily have been, and must be adapted to them in that
condition. It is not the statute law that creates the slavery,
but it is rather an adaptation of itself to the previous condition
in which it finds the slave. All statute law upon that subject
in its very provisions presupposes the condition of slavery, and
is designed only for its good government and regulation. This
we have seen, and shall see, is true from the nature, history,
government and laws of the institution. Each sovereignty ever
has been, and ever will be, its own arbiter of its own govern-
ment and laws upon this subject. Slavery is always anterior
to all its statute laws; and its very existence is always the
cause and gives rise to the necessity of all political interference
and regulations of the institution. This point we shall illus-
trate more fully hereafter. But we are told that slavery is a
sin; that the very institution is a malum in se, a great moral
and political evil; that the very relation of master and slave is
necessarily wrong in itself; and that no government can legis-
late to uphold a sin, &c.

After what we have said upon the connexion of the consti-
tution and laws of the Jewish nation with Hebrew slavery, of
the relation of those laws to that institution, and their force
and effect upon the same, we think we might justly leave this
question between the modern Stoic philosophers and the Author
of the Ten Commandments.

We sometimes hear of the sin of slavery in the abstract, but
the idea is beyond my comprehension. Slavery in the abstract,
to my understanding, is a perfect contradiction in terms.
Slavery is but a relation, and that can never constitute an ab-
stract idea, except it be between two abstract ideas or exist-
ences. But, in this instance, the relation is between two mate-
rial and positive subjects, without which it has no conceivable
form, and is therefore necessarily an idea in the concrete.

Its moral character, therefore, must always depend upon the
condition of the subjects to which it relates, and the circum-
stances under which it exists. The slavery of one man to ano-
ther may be wrong in one instance, and right in another; there
can be no general principle of universal application to determine
its character. In what, then, does the sin consist? In the
forcible subjection of one man to another, says one, and the
compulsion to labor without compensation. In depriving the
slave of his natural rights, says another. But this definition

20 *

234 THE RELATIVE POSITION AND

of the evil would condemn civil government, and all its coercive
measures. Besides, the idea of laboring without compensation
supposes an impossibility ; the food and raiment necessary to the
existence of the slave is an essential compensation. Its adequacy
has no reference to the definition. Therefore we must seek for
some other definition of the sin of this relation. It consists,
says another, in unjustly depriving the slave of his liberty ; but
this is but another form of the same idea, and in part the peti-
tio principit. The question of justice or injustice in depriving
any subject of his liberty, is one to be determined with refer-
ence to the rights of all parties, and the end and object of all
government. But, says another, its sin consists in degrading
the slave to a chattel, and making him liable to be bought and
sold as an article of merchandize. But who is responsible for
this? We have shown that government and law do not place,
but find him in that condition—a condition, in many instances,
from which they are incapable of extricating him, as in case of
the negro in the Slave States. But this point we shall con-
sider more fully hereafter.

If slavery in America is an evil, it is a necessary one, result-
ing from the peculiar character of the negro race, the condi-
tion of the country, and growing out of the imperfections of
human nature. Civil government, with all its penal laws,
prison discipline, and system of coercive measures, is in viola-
tion of the natural rights of man, and, in that sense, may be
called an evil; but it is a relative one, and relates to the simple
fact that mankind are as they are, rather than as they should
be. If the world was perfect, penal laws would be unknown.

It will perhaps be said that government, on the part of free-
men, is a voluntary surrendering of their natural rights; that
they are parties to the compact, and may, therefore, justly incur
the penalties of its laws: but that the slave has no voice, part
or lot in the matter, except unconditional subjection and obe-
dience. This is true, but it arises from his presumed incapacity
for civil functions, as in the case of minors and women. In
neither case does the law create the cause of their disability,
but ever strives to adapt itself to their condition.

The same principles that would abolish the relation of master
and slave, and remove all restraint imposed by that relation
upon the liberties of the entire mass of the slave population in
this country, would also, if carried out to their necessary results,
abolish all restraint imposed by penal codes, prison discipline,
and poor laws, upon the balance of the population. These
restraints, in both instances, arise from the same cause, are

TREATMENT OF THE NEGROES. 235

founded upon the same reasons, and exist from the same neces-
sity. One of the principal reasons that sustains them, and
renders them both alike necessary, is the peace, prosperity and
safety of society; or, in other words, the greatest amount of
good to the greatest number. To this end all governments
have a right, and it is their leading object, to shape their laws.
All governments have the right, and it is their object, to secure,
first, their own permanency, preservation and perpetuity; and
second, the best possible state of society in the best possible
manner. They must, therefore, be their own judges of the
manner in which this end shall be obtained, and have the right
to employ the most expedient measures to secure the same.
Hence, the right of any independent government to regulate
and uphold the institution of slavery, so long as it may be
deemed expedient, and conducive to the common defence and
general welfare of the State, is indisputable.

This relation imposes reciprocal obligations and duties upon
both the master and slave. It is the duty of the master, im-
posed upon him by the law of the land, as well as that of hu-
manity, to refrain from imposing excessive labor and from cruel
treatment; to protect the objects of his trust, in sickness and
in health, in infancy and helpless old age; to clothe the naked
and feed the hungry, and to treat them, under all circumstances,
with as much kindness and compassion as the welfare of society,
his own interests and safety, and the disposition, character and
position of the slave, will safely admit. In the words of St.
Paul, to ‘‘ give them that which is just and equitable. ’’

On the other hand, it is the duty of the slave to ‘‘obey his
master with fear and trembling,’ 7. e. with a high sense of
reverence for their superiors; and ‘‘with singleness of heart,”
7. e. with a willingness and sincerity ; ‘‘as unto Christ,’’ 7. e.
they owe, in a degree, the same faithful obedience, reverence
and devotion to their earthly, that they do to their Heavenly
Master; ‘‘not with eye-service, as men-pleasers, but as the
servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart ;’’
“with good will doing service as to the Lord, and not to men.”

The doctrine of Christian resignation and obedience here
inculeated by St. Paul, must for ever stand opposed to the
teachings, preaching and practice of a class of the false and
_ pretended friends of freedom in our sister States. It is a
chapter direct upon the duties of servants and masters; it
teaches them to be reconciled, sincere and faithful. ‘‘Art thou
called to be a servant, care not for it.”’ And though it exists
not in the form of a statute law, yet I trust it is equally as im-

236 THE ABOLITIONISTS :

perious and as important as a statute. And though we weep
over the remissness of these Christian duties, both by the mas-
ter and the slave, yet surely we will not, for this reason alone,
rashly dissolve this Gospel relation between them, and thus put
for ever beyond the power of either to do ‘‘the will of God’’
in that capacity.

ESSAY IX.
THE ABOLITIONISTS.—CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS, &c.

Tuis Essay will be confined to that school of Abolitionists
who pretend to confine their labors to moral and religious
means. ‘Their political aspect will form a distinct topic, to be
considered hereafter.

The fundamental principle in the creed of this class of “latter
day’’ reformers, is, that the relation between master and slave
is an usurpation of unjustifiable power, wrong ab initio, and
ought to be abolished, irrespective of consequences.

It is wrong, say they, because it deprives its subjects of their
natural rights. But so do civil government, penal codes, poor
laws, and lunatic asylums. It is wrong because it denies the
slave the means of religious instruction. This is a misrepre-
sentation of facts; they enjoy these in common with the free
population. It is wrong because it permits the vilest monster
of a man to have as many slaves as he can get, and abuse and
maltreat them with impunity. This is also a misrepresentation 5
the law protects the slave against cruel treatment (as we shall
show). But the law also permits this same monster to have a
wife, and as many children as may be added to his family, over
whom he has as much control as he has over his slaves.

But slavery is wrong because it has a deleterious influence
upon the moral and religious character of the community
where it exists; and it should, therefore, be condemned. But,
from what we have said in another place in this book, it would
seem that the Founder of the Christian religion, and his Apos-
tles, had the misfortune to differ with these ‘‘ latter day saints”’
upon this subject. At best, such a position can be but a mat-
ter of opinion ; as is true of the influence of great cities; great
manufacturing communities; large collections of people for ex-

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. : 237

tensive public works; the army; the navy; the marine laws
and regulations, and a thousand other collections and associa-
tions that might be mentioned. To be consistent, these fasti-
dious conservators of public morals, who believe in their dele-
terious influences upon morals and religion, should wage the
same war of extermination against them all.

But slavery is condemned by the golden rule, ‘‘ Whatsoever

e would that men should do to you do ye even so to them. ”’

his, we have endeavored to show, imposes no obligation upon
the master to liberate his slave, but directly the reverse. But
it denies the slave all means of education and hope of improve-
ment, and thus puts an interdict on his advancement. This
position is one of the fundamental errors in the creed of the
Abolitionists. The relation of the slave to his master, and his
association with civilized life, instead of denying him the
sources of education and means of improvement, is a constant
source of education and means of improving his character and
condition; instead of interdicting his advancement it prevents
him from degenerating into his native barbarism.?

But slavery is wrong because it reduces men to things, and
allows them to be bought and sold. ‘This is also a misrepre-
sentation, from which an egregious error pervades public opi-
nion throughout the free States. The idea of property in the
person of the slave is an absurdity, which we shall explain
more fully hereafter.”

But slavery must be wrong from the scenes of cruelty and
incidents of abuse of the murderous treatment of the slaves,
that are so frequently paraded before the public. But if the
relation of master and servant is to be condemned on this
ground alone, consistency calls for the condemnation of all the
individual relations of persons whence arise abuses of authority
and cruel treatment. And why is slavery singled out as the
special object of calumny and vituperation for this reason? If
abolition is the work of love, charity, and Christian benevo-
lence, why is it that all the most revolting scenes of cruelty,
misery, and wretchedness, arising from other relations, always
escape their notice? If they condemn slavery for this, why
not condemn those also ?

The same reason would abolish the relation between husband

1 Compare the condition of the negro in America with that in Africa,
and tell me what has been the cause of the difference. Or, compare the
condition of the American slave with that of a St. Domingo freeman, or
an emancipated slave of Jamaica, and answer the same question.

2 See Essay on the Political Aspect of Slavery, &c., post, 312, et seq.

938 THE ABOLITIONISTS:

and wife, parent and child, guardian and ward, tutor and pupil,
master and apprentice, and every other instance of the indivi-
dual authority of one person over another. No honest philo-
sopher can fail to see the analogy of these relations in this
particular. It is said, that in the association of husband and
wife, and parent and child, there is a natural guarantee for the
discharge of reciprocal duties and for kind treatment in the
incentive for conjugal and parental affection, that is unknown
to any other relation. But this conclusion, it will be readily
seen, rests upon false premises. The relation itself furnishes
no more assurance in one instance than in the other of the dis-
charge of these reciprocal duties. On the contrary, where the
domestic relation is unfortunate, the very reverse of this is
true.

History is full of instances to show that misery is often the
result of matrimonial connection. We all sympathize with
Socrates in his trials with Xantippe and the Greek sophists.
Juvenal tells us that those Roman matrons who had no affec-
tion for their husbands, kept their hired miscreants to torture
their slaves. The greatest source of grief to the creator of the
Lady in Comus was his misfortunes in his domestic relations.
And thus was the Laureate of Eve enabled to write the best
treatise on divorce. The face of one of England’s earliest and
best linguists is reported to have exhibited crimson marks,
traced by loving fingers; and Greek, Hebrew, Latin, and
English, must often have met and run together in his brain, as
he reeled beneath the confusing ring of a fair hand knocking at
his ears. Look at the helpmates of Whitelocke, Bishop
Cooper, and Addison; they were tempestuous viragoes, en-
dowed with a genius for scolding and trouble that constantly
haunted the midnight visions of their husbands. The wives
of Rousseau, Moliére, Montaigne, Dante, Byron, Dryden, and
Steele, were acute vixens, with tempers composed of vinegar
and saltpetre, and tongues tipped with lunar caustic and as
explosive as gun-cotton. Their husbands might as well sit to a
bundle of lucifer-matches; for, at the least rub, they would
ignite into a flame of hell-fire and blue blazes that would scorch
their earlocks till they were glad to beat a retreat and make
their escape. Some betook themselves to their gin-cup and
club meetings, and others spent their lives in tears, solitude,
and repentance. But how many modern Mrs. Caudles, whose
‘* Curtain Lectures’’ are suppressed, and forever kept a secret
from the world, while their poor submissive husbands are buf-
feting the storms of their household eloquence with hearts

~

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 939

cheered by its pleasing consolations, and sleep sweetened by
its soothing accents. And these miserable beings, with no
source of earthly comfort left, in attempting to drown their
sorrows, drown themselves in that liquid current, that is sweep-
ing millions to a premature grave.

Were one willing to prostitute his pen to the capacity of a
moral scavenger, and gather up the dregs that float only in the
filthy sewers of society, and parade them all into a tale of the
cares and misfortunes of matrimonial connections, he might
present a picture that would put to the blush, and shame even
the seared face of the author of Uncle Tom’s Cabin. He
could not only vary its figure with scars and stripes, but he
could dye the ground-work of the picture crimson, with human
blood.

But we forbear; we will present but few instances of the
fruits of matrimony that have, in the last few weeks, come
under our notice, as an offset to the fictitious parts of Uncle
Tom, which, according to the modern Stoic and Abolition phi-
losophers, are just grounds for condemning the institution.

‘¢ A MONSTER IN HUMAN SHAPE. — A German, named Jacob
Brenigar, is now awaiting his trial in Wyoming County, Va.,
charged with a series of offences that surpass in horror any of
the tales which old wives tell bad children to keep them quiet, of
giants that lived “once upon a time.’’ This Brenigar was
formerly a Baptist PREACHER in North Carolina. While re-
siding there, he attempted an outrage upon his own daughter.
His wife made the fact known, and Brenigar, with his family,
moved over into Wyoming. There he made another attempt
at a rape upon his daughter. Shortly after, being desirous of
obtaining his license to preach, which had been taken away
_ from him in North Carolina, he applied to his wife to retract
the charge she had brought against him, and admit that she
had sworn falsely. ‘This she refused to do, notwithstanding he
inflicted frequent and severe beatings upon her. At last, find-
ing neither persuasion, threats, nor beatings, would have any
influence, one night he pulled his wife from the bed and dragged
her over a piece of new ground full of stumps, so that she died
in a short time after giving premature birth to a child. Mrs,
Brenigar, at first, refused to tell the mode of receiving her in-
juries, but, finding that death was inevitable, made some of her
neighbors acquainted with the facts. The husband was arrested,
but released on bail. While under bonds he made an attempt
to decoy his niece, a married woman, into some woods at the

240 THE ABOLITIONISTS:

back of her residence, but she told her husband, who pursued
the ruffian, and would have killed him, but his gun missed fire.”
— Abington Democrat, 1854.

‘¢SrnguLtarR Case. — Rev. Joseph Johnson is on trial at
Kingston, Ulster Co., N. Y., on a charge of having murdered
his wife and child. The evidence thus far tends to prove that
the Reverend gentleman was in love with some other woman
than his wife, and he got rid of the latter by drowning her in
order to marry the former, which he did a few months ago.
This miscreant escaped the just penalty of the law for a time
by a defect in the indictment.’’ — Times, July, 1854.

“Mysterious; Shocking Burial of a Body without a
Coffin. — The neighborhood of Cheltenham, out on the Pacific
Railroad, has been much excited within a few days past by some
disclosures which show that a man, whose name we suppress
for the present, living in that vicinity, buried the dead body of
his wife, who died the previous day, in a hole in the ground,
without placing it in a coffin or in any other manner enclosing
it from contact with the earth. He dug a hole in the ground
about two and a half feet deep, in which, he remarked to a
neighbor who asked him about it, he intended to plant a tree.
On the night after the death of his wife, with the assistance of
a man in his house, he took the body, dropped it in the hole,
and covered it up with dirt.

“The Coroner receiving information of the fact, went out to
the place for the purpose of exhuming the body and holding an
inquest, but on reaching the spot and conferring with some of
the neighbors, he concluded not-to disturb the remains. The
husband is at this time out at Franklin, on the railroad. It is
impossible to conjecture an adequate cause for such inhuman
and shocking treatment of the remains of a wife by a husband. -
The only cause we have heard assigned, is that the man was
too penurtous to go to the expense of procuring a coffin.

‘‘The Coroner procured the names of all those who knew
anything of the affair, intending to lay the matter before the
Grand Jury, to see if some action may not be taken by that
body in the case.

‘‘ Surely the atrocious affair demands investigation, and the
punishment of the perpetrators. We conceal the husband’s
name for the present, for he yet may not be altogether guilty.’’
— Missouri Democrat.

‘Toran Depravity. —The Evansville Journal contains an
account of a brute in human form, living in that place, who left

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 241

his house early one Monday morning, and went sporting in the
woods with his gun and dog, leaving a wife and child locked up
in the house, both of whom were dangerously sick, without food
or drink of any description within their reach. The inhuman
wretch remained away all day, and until nearly 12 o’clock that
night. About 10 o’clock in the evening some of the neighbors
were alarmed by the groans of the woman, and the crying of
the child— heard cries for food, water, &c., &c. The doors
were forced open, and a horrible sight presented itself. The
woman was in the last agonies of death, the immediate cause
of which was undoubtedly neglect and starvation. She died in
about one hour after being discovered. ‘The child, about a
year and six months old, was cared for by the neighbors, and
exhibited painful symptoms of hunger, disease, and most
wanton and brutal neglect. The wretch of a father returned
before his wife died, but could give no excuse for his unpardon-
able absence, or for leaving his family in such a destitute con-
dition. ’’— Louisville Democrat.

‘Mrs. GuILpHor, a feminine fiend, attempted to destroy her
three step-children by poison, near Neelville, Ohio, last week.
It appears that she was a servant to the first wife of her hus-
band, and when she died this woman was chosen to supply the
vacancy. She soon commenced tyrannizing over the helpless
children, and finally concluded her malignant cruelty by admin-
istering poison to them. The youngest died, but by the timely
application of remedies, the other two survived.”

Whoever heard “of sorrows like these,’’ of misery in such
grim and horrid forms, among the slaves? One would suppose °
that consistency would arm the whole Abolition host in the
panoply of war against the institution whence such scenes arose.
And we see that the women, always the most sincere and guile-
less followers of consistency, are beginning to take action in
this matter ; they are about getting up an insurrection of spirits
and others to abolish the abominable institution of marriage.
It would seem, by the following extracts, that their present
head-quarters was at Hope Dale, Milford, Massachusetts.

‘“Woman’s Ricuts CoNnvENTION. — A notice of the forth-
coming Annual Convention for the consideration of Woman’s
Rights, will be found in another column of our paper, and we
call attention to it, hoping that some of our readers will thereby
be induced to attend it. It is an important movement, this
‘Woman’s Rights’ movement — one of the most important of

Q F

949 THE ABOLITIONISTS :

the age—and all who feel interested in the welfare of the whole
human race, should seriously consider the subject. Many
women—as well as men—are not conscious of the necessity of
it—not now —not feeling wronged by popular usages, having
favored positions, or being content to be the mere appendages
of men, if not their slaves. Into some women’s souls, however,
the iron has entered, and here follows a record of wrongs
endured by a few which we take from Tue Una for the present
month. They are extracts from letters addressed to Mrs. Davis,
whose editorial comments follow them.’’ W. H. F.

“ Letter No. 1.— Please do not send the ‘ Una’ any more—
I cannot receive it. My husband tore the last one from my
hands and burned it. Oh, for an hour of peace, of rest! A
blessing which I shall never again enjoy, till I hear ‘the songs
of angels round the Throne.’ Sometimes I wish my ears were
duller than they are, I hear so many heart-grieving, wrath-
provoking things; but patience, patience, says my proud, firm
heart. ‘To bear, is to conquer our fate.’

“‘ No. 2. — It is evident to me, my dear Madam, that the
iron has never entered into your soul. You have never felt
yourself a dependant, a slave in your husband’s house — not
daring to use one cent of money without his knowledge; and, |
at the same time, knowing he will not permit you to do, even
with your own, what you desire. I brought my husband twenty
thousand dollars. I have been three months trying to get one
dollar to send you for your paper. My children, born in this
relation, are a curse; for their inharmonious organizations are
constantly a reproach to me. They are ill-looking and sickly,
while we both have excellent constitutions.

‘* No. 3. —I would send you the pay for your paper if I
could, for it comes like a ray of hope to my weary heart. If
shall be a mother again, soon. Ah, what a terrible thing it is
to have children, to die so early! Just as my heart begins to
have a little joy in them, they pass away, and I am again without
life or love, which is the same thing toa woman. * * *

‘* No. 4. — A man may beat his wife, maltreat his servants,
and ruin his children; that is nobody’s concern. Society
regards those things that are injurious to it, but meddles in
nothing else, so it says. Do you not think, if society had any
true regard for itself, it would prevent nine-tenths of the mar-
riages, simply that criminals might not be born. I am quite
certain that no circumstances can so ruin a good organization,
_that it may not be redeemable. While in these loathed, hated
unions, good ones cannot be produced. I know I am a slave,

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 243

and Mr. is my lord. Hecan bind my body, tie my hands,
but with my will he can do nothing. Do you ask why I am in
this position? I was educated to get a husband—and was
flattered and urged into a marriage at seventeen, that was
thought to be very advantageous, and I thought that I loved.
But I now see that misplaced affection differs as much from a
right state of feeling, as truth from falsehood ; and the living a
lie is terrible. You have seen me always immersed in gaiety,
but I felt that you looked below the surface and saw that this
was not sufficient for me. I shall be a devotee when I am
passé. Dorcas Societies, Ragged Schools, Boriaboula Missions
anything to kill time, and make me forget my degradation ; for
I am a legalized — bah —I cannot write the word. God help
us, for there is no other ‘arm mighty to save.’

‘* No. 5. — My heart is breaking; but, alas! how long it
takes to kill! My last child is dead, and I am alone. I have
food and clothes. Ah! yes, my bed is of down, and my
clothing ‘silk and purple, and fine linen,’ but the veriest slave
on a Southern plantation has more freedom than I have. More
to live for; for there is some one to love them, and they love.
I have nothing; for I cannot love fine furniture, fine dress, &c.
I must have objects that give as well as receive. There is no
help ; my husband is a drunkard; how I hate that vice!

‘* No. 6.—I am half disposed, just here, to ask your advice.
You know my infirmity. Ought this to prevent me from
marrying? I love, and am loved by one so true, so just, so
good and noble, that he would take me, deformed as I am, to
his heart, and treasure me there. I have loved him for three
years ; but my scruples have prevented an engagement to this
time. Tell me—wwill it be a sin to marry ?’?—From the
Practical Christian, Sept. 23, 1854; Hope Dale, Milford, Mass.

It may be pertinently asked why there is not more sympathy
for the cause of the poor oppressed and down-trodden women
of Hope Dale? There is not a slave on the Southern planta-
tions but that has more liberty than they ; they are struggling
between life and death to assert their rights, and to throw off
the galling yoke of matrimony, an institution upon which they
remark as follows: ‘‘ But so radical is the question of marriage
itself, so deep is the hell of the marriage institution, ‘as 7 7s,’
and so sore therefore does every body feel in relation to the
question, that the very proposition to discuss it is considered
by some as tantamount to licentiousness.”

It seems that this natural guarantee, so often spoken of for

244 THE ABOLITIONISTS :

the protection of the wife and children, fails of its object among
the ‘‘ Christian Socialists’? of Massachusetts. They are laboring
and longing for the millennium of ‘‘ Free Loveism”’ (as they
term it). The only security for conjugal attachment, fidelity, and
happiness, consists not in the respect of the relation itself, but in
the kind and amiable disposition of the parties. But will the
same cause secure no kind treatment to the slave? Whatever
secures family peace, prosperity and happiness, secures also
kind and humane treatment to him. When all other motives
fail, the slave has the security, for food and raiment, at least,
from the love of gain and pecuniary considerations of his
master, an incentive ever opposed to the claims of the wife and
children upon his clemency. Another school of Abolitionists,
in carrying out their principles to their legitimate results, lay the
axe at the root of all government and laws that forcibly deprive
men of their liberty in their administration and execution.
They stand upon the broad platform of abolition, non-resist-
ance, and the anti-coercitione regni. Among the thousand
ludicrous extracts that might be made from their publications,
we submit only the following letter of Thomas Haskell to Adam
Ballou, editor of the Practical Christian.

‘* Gloucester, September 10, 1854.

‘‘BrotHeR Bartou: —I intended to have been at your
annual meeting, but circumstances are such that I cannot con-
veniently attend ; so I will send you my thoughts upon the pre-
sent human governments. I have been thinking lately of the
complete resemblance they bear to the ‘Man of sin’ spoken of
by the Apostle, ‘who opposeth and exalteth himself above all
that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he, as God,
sitteth in the temple of God showing himself that he is God.’
Does not our Government fully answer this description? Look
at the Fugitive Slave Law, read the debates they had upon it,
and see with what contempt and scorn they treated the thought
that there was any higher law than their own enactments.
Perhaps this Government is as complete a resemblance of a
Righteous Government, as is possible for Satan to transform
himself into an Angel of Light.

‘Mankind are governed by one or the other of those two
great principles, Jove and fear. This Government, both State
and National, is founded upon the latter. We are not required
to do or not to do certain acts because they are right or wrong,
but because they are the enactments of Government, and must
be obeyed, or we must suffer certain forfeitures and penalties

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 945

for disobedience. All who willingly sustain this Government
of fear and violence, are willing slaves. They try to oppose
chattel slavery, but they are sustaining a system equally de-
grading and inhuman. What greater degradation can be
heaped upon us, than to be forbidden to give a starving brother
a piece of bread under the penalty of one thousand dollars fine
and six months imprisonment. Yet such is the institution we
are taught we must sustain to protect the weak from the op-
pression of the strong, the righteous from the tyranny of the
wicked. ”’

But if the abuse of any privilege, right, or institution, is to
determine its character, suppose one was to adopt the uncha-
ritable course of the Abolitionists in judging a tree by its fruits,
and should sketch faithfully the annals of the Church for the
last half century, write the biography of the numerous back-
slidden saints, and the dark catalogue of crimes and misde-
meanors that have stained its sacred history; and in the book
he should devote a single chapter exclusively to the clergy, and
hold all sincere Christians accountable for the black calendar
of iniquities in the lives of all the murderers and miscreants
that have invaded the ranks of this holy order, and condemn
them all as of the same type of character; and, finally, de-
nounce the Church and all its priesthood as a posthumous bant-
ling of the devil. Could he be judged less consistent, and less
charitable towards them, than the Northern slanderers and per-
secutors are towards the people of the South?

We are not of that school of moralists or logicians who
would attempt to justify one evil by the existence of another.
But we do say, that if one institution is to be condemned in
consequence of the abuse of its privileges, and the bad fruits
that thus result from it, all others must fall for a like reason.
And we repeat the question, why are the Southern people
selected as the special objects of calumny and vituperation ?
pursued, persecuted and denounced, with all the malice, clamor
and indignation of public enemies? Is human nature so per-
fect, is the world so free from cruelty and abuses to the helpless
of mankind, in every other portion, that there are no objects
of sympathy, no cause of suffering deserving of this fanfaro-
nade of Northern philanthropy, but the slaves of the South?

“Surcipe TO Avor THE CatT.—James Ransom, an able
seaman of the Valorous, 16 (paddle), Captain Buckle, in the
Baltic, committed suicide on the 5th of August last, by jumping
overboard. It appears that the unfortunate poor fellow had

a1i*

946 THE ABOLITIONISTS :

been sentenced to receive three dozen lashes for some offence.
While the gratings were being rigged for this punishment, he
pleaded hard to the captain for mercy, and subsequently to the
first lieutenant, to intercede in obtaining some other punish-
ment; but finding these officers determined to let the punish-
ment be inflicted, jumped overboard and was drowned.’’—
Plymouth (Eng. ) Mail.

‘‘CruELTy.—An American young woman, 19 years old, says
the Newark (N. J.) Advertiser of the 20th, came to the office
of the Overseer of the Poor last evening, and stated that she
had been living, since she was three years old, with a family in
Clinton township; and that on Tuesday last, the family com-
pelled her to remain in a cold shed to do her washing, refusing
her any opportunity of warming herself, so that at night her
feet were badly frozen. Yesterday, seeing that she was crip-
pled so as to be of no further service to them, they sent her to
Newark. The Overseer of the Poor bestowed all requisite
attention upon her, and this morning, after making an affidavit
of the above facts before Justice Baldwin, she was taken to the
Almshouse. Her feet are so badly frozen that is probable both
must be amputated.’’

These very people were undoubtedly loudest in their denun-
ciations of slavery, and were contributing their mite to support
the cause of the poor slave at the South.

From personal observation I can assert the fact, and chal-
lenge a contradiction by any well-informed person, that there
are to-day, May 12th, 1857, fifty thousand people in the city
of New York, and twenty thousand in Boston, whose condition,
as to the enjoyment of all the pleasures and comforts of life,
will bear no comparison to the general condition of the slave
population of the South.

The scenes of beggary, squalid poverty, and wretchedness,
that force themselves upon the sight of the traveller in all the
large cities of the Free States, forcibly remind him of the
truth of the old maxim, that true charity should always begin
its work at home.

‘«« WuiTE SLAVE.’—This is the self-assumed title of white
persons in New York. The New York Tribune contains a
letter from a person who signs herself ‘The Wife of a White
Slave.’ She complains that her husband, a glass-blower, is
compelled to work without the rest that is allowed ‘the slave
on the plantation.’ She very piteously inquires, ‘ While there

- CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 247

are so many to employ their talents in behalf of the colored
slave, is there not one to speak a word for the white?’ Alluding
to the severity of the labor of her husband and his fellow-
workmen, and the little relaxation allowed them, she inquires,
‘Who can wonder, however much they may deplore the error,
that such men should recruit their exhausted energies with an
artificial stimulus ?’

‘‘Tt is astonishing, that with such examples at their doors,
the enthusiasts restrict their efforts to schemes for intermeddling
with slavery at the South. But itis always so. Fanaticism
prefers that far-reaching sort of sympathy, which manifests
itself towards a distant people, and which can be indulged
along with that kind of pomp and circumstance which is so
grateful to its followers. They prefer that the dollar they give
should be wasted upon impracticable schemes that make a noise
in the world, rather than it should be given to the complaining
‘White Slave’ (as he calls himself) at their very doors.’

But distance seems to lend enchantment to the cause of the
Abolitionists. If philanthropy was their real motto, and humanity
their real theme, and they were sincerely toiling in its spirit,
and laboring in its hope, why do they not adopt the spirit of
universal charity and benevolence of ‘‘Him who went about
doing good,’’ and in their labors of love breathe the brotherly
spirit of St. Paul in his Epistle to the slave-holder Philemon ?
Like moral monomaniacs, there is no evil in their sight but the
far-off wrongs of the Southern slave; there is no oppression
that moves their compassion, no suffering that reaches their
sympathy, but his. ‘Thousands of their fellow-beings around
may live in the most abject poverty and wretchedness, and die
of starvation and distress, yet they have remembered not the
wants of the poor and needy in the day of their distress. And
whosoever of the Abolitionists does not clothe the naked and
feed the hungry at home, the same is a hollow-hearted hypo-
crite, a liar, and the truth is not in him.

But ‘‘a prophet is not without honor, save in his own coun-
try ;’’ therefore these Abolitionists and fomenters of disaffection
and disunion, have to look to a foreign land in hope of reward.
They must go to Great Britain for sympathy, to receive the
congratulations and praises of the oppressive and tyrannical
aristocracy of England. There are treasured up for them
erowns of glory, and honors immortal. And Great Britain
herself, with a laboring population literally weltering in their
own grim misery, starvation and despair, is sending back her

248 THE ABOLITIONISTS :

emissaries, professedly to aid in this great work of freedom and
humanity; like Satan reproving sin, to preach liberty and
emancipation to the American people.

British Slavery.

A plantation of well-fed and well-clothed negro slaves shocks
humanity, and calls down the vengeance of heaven upon the
head of the slave-holder. But a press-gang may perform its
heart-rending work in perfect consistency with the free and glo-
rious institutions of Britain. One of the most repulsive fea-
tures of the general system of British slavery is their laws rela-
tive to impressment. By these, peaceable and unoffending men
are doomed to her vessels of war to serve at the pleasure and
bidding of her naval officers. In this practice there are some
of the most distressing instances of the sundering of kindred
ties of home and friends. Here the husband is torn from the
wife, the father from the child, the brother from the sister, by
the press-gang, the kidnappers and slave-hunters of England—
a custom that never has prevailed in any other civilized nation,
ancient or modern. Anciently, some of the maritime nations
condemned men to the galleys for crime.*

After a long and laborious voyage in a merchant vessel, the
- gun-burned seaman arrives in sight of home. His wife and
children, who have long bewailed his absence, and feared for
his life, stand with joyous countenances upon the shore, eager
to embrace the returning wanderer. Perhaps a government
vessel, on the search for seamen, then sends its barbarous press-
gang aboard the ship, and forces the husband and father once
more from the presence of the beloved ones. Long protracted
years will pass away before he will be allowed to return. Then
his wife may be dead, his children at the mercy of the parish.
Yet England preaches freedom and humanity !

One of the most thrilling narratives of the scenes attending
impressment, is to be found in the romance of Katie Stewart,
published, without the author’s name, in Blackwood’s Maga-
zine. It is founded on facts, and without exaggeration. A
lengthy extract may be seen in the White Slaves of England,
by Cobden, 1853. It is truly a heart-rending tale.

Whoever wishes to see another faithful and life-like picture
of this species of British slavery, should read the novel of
Jacob Faithful, by Capt. Marryatt. Could we but follow

1 See McCulloch, Dict. Com. (Impressment), where he coolly discusses
the expediency of the laws.

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 249

the history of Jacob and Thomas, the watermen, or bring them
up to tell their own tales of the ‘‘cat,’’? and the horrors of
naval discipline aboard of British men-of-war, we might then
institute a comparison between the condition of this species of
British, and American, slaves.

Slavery is any system of involuntary servitude, by which the
time, service, and toil of one person becomes the property of
another by compulsion. This has been the fundamental requi-
site of the institution in all ages of the world. But it has ex-
isted in different forms and under modified features in different
nations and at different times. The power of life and death
over the slave peculiar to some nations, is not an essential re-
quisite to its existence; neither is the right to sell and alienate
the services accompanied by a compulsory right to control the
person of the slave in that manner (or, in other words, by a
fiction of law to sell the slave). He who is compelled to labor
without adequate compensation, without the ability to escape,
to acquire property in the soil, or representation in legislation,
is a slave! SLAVERY OF THE AGRICULTURAL PEASANTRY OF
Britain. Yet, such is the real condition of the mass of the
laboring population of Great Britain.

The land-tenant is compelled to labor, and is subject to the
will of his lord, because he fixes the price of rent, shares in the
products of the soil and the proceeds of the poor man’s labor,
ad libitum, always leaving him a scant subsistence of the neces-
saries of life. He cannot escape from this condition; ‘‘ once
a peasant in England, and the man must remain a peasant for-
ever.’/*

This is evident from the general policy of the nation upon
this subject, which is to reduce the number of land proprietors
and concentrate them all in the hands of a few who may hold
the reins of government. In the United Kingdom, the land is
divided into immense estates, constantly retained in the hands
of afew; and the tendency of the existing laws of entail and
primogeniture is to reduce even the number of these proprie-
tors. There are 77,007,048 acres of land in the United King-
dom, including the small adjacent islands. Of this quantity,
28,227,435 acres are uncultivated. The number of proprietors
of all this land is about 50,000. While the people of the

1 London Times, 1844, Said Mr. Kay, of Trinity College, Cambridge:
“Unless the English peasant has the means, and will consent to tear him-
self from his relations, friends, and early associations, and either trans-
plant himself into a town or a distant colony, he has no chance of im-
proving his condition.” See White Slaves of England, p. 14.

950 THE ABOLITIONISTS :°

United Kingdom number, at least, 28,000,000.1 What a tre-
mendous majority, then, own not a foot of soil! And such are
the policy and laws of England, that they never can, to any
considerable number, own one foot of land, but must remain
thereon, at the will and mercy of these few lords of the soil,
and subject to a government in which they have no voice, and
in which their interests are not represented.

‘‘Mankind,’’ says Aristotle, ‘‘ are divided into freemen and
slaves ;’’?? look, then, at the condition of the British peasantry,
and say if they are freemen ?

Look at the effects of the landed aristocracy in England.
The Rev. Mr. Henry Worsley states, that in the year 1770,
there were in England 250,000 freehold estates in the hands of
250,000 different families; and that, in 1815, the whole of the
lands of England were concentrated in the hands of only
32,000 proprietors !

The effects of this system are obvious, according to the old
maxim, ‘the big fish eat up the little ones,’’? which is particu-
larly true of all landed proprietors in all countries. As fast as
the smaller estates come into market they are bought up by
this landed aristocracy, the more wealthy and opulent proprie-
tors outbidding the smaller ones, and thus monopolizing land
at any cost. ‘‘ The consequence is,’’ says a distinguished law-
yer of Westmoreland and Cumberland Counties in 1849, “for
some time past, the number of small estates has been rapidly
diminishing in all parts of the country. In a short time, none
of them will remain, but all be merged in the great estates.
The consequence is, that the peasant’s position, instead of being
what it once was, one of hope, is fast becoming one of despair.
Unless he emigrates, it is now impossible for him ever to rise
above a peasant.’?? But what chance have the majority of the
peasantry of Great Britain to emigrate, when their year’s labor
is scarcely sufficient to keep soul and body together. The dis-
tressing policy of this monopoly of the British aristocracy, by
swallowing these small estates, is to turn thousands upon thou-
sands adrift upon the country without houses, or means of sup-
port. If one of the great landholders prefers the pursuit of

1 See McCulloch, Dict. Com. “ Britain.”

2 oixia dé redelog Ex dovdww Kai edevdipwr. De Rep. 1: 3. He says, in another
place, that some were born to rule and others to serve; are not the pea-
sants born to serve?

8 See White Slaves of England, p. 15. This most excellent work con-

tains a compilation of testimony and facts collected entirely from foreign
sources of the most reliable kind.

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 951

grazing to that of farming, he may sweep away the homes of
his laborers, turning the poor wretches upon the country as
wandering paupers, or drive them into the cities to overstock
the workshops, and thus reduce the wages of the poor mecha-
nic, which are now too small to afford him and his family the
necessaries of life. The country, by this means, is filled with
beggary, misery, and distress ; the poor-houses peopled to over-
flowing with helpless paupers; till, at length, the government
is driven to the desperate alternative of emptying them by
transportation to the shores of America.

But we propose to present a few of the leading sketches and
astounding facts, to show the condition of the white slaves that
remain, and of their condition, generally, under British domi-
nation.

Mr. John Fox, medical officer of the Cerne Union, in Dorset-
shire, says: ‘‘ Most of the cottages of the agricultural laborers
in Devon, Somerset, Dorset, and Wiltshire, are of the worst de-
scription ; some are mere mud-hovels, and situated in low and
damp places, with cesspools, or accumulations of filth, close to
the doors. The mud floors of many are much below the level
of the road, and, in wet seasons, are little better than so much
clay. In many of them, the bed stood on the ground-floor,
which was damp three parts of the year; scarcely one had a
fireplace in the bed-room; and one had a single pane of glass
stuck in the mud wall as its only window. Persons living in
these cottages are generally poor, very dirty, and usually in
rags, living almost wholly on bread and potatoes, scarcely ever
tasting animal food, and, consequently, highly susceptible of
disease, and very unable to contend with it.”’

Again: ‘‘Qne house, which our correspondent visited, was
almost'a ruin. It had continued in that state for ten years.
The floor was of mud, dipping near the fireplace into a deep
hollow which was constantly filled with water. There were
five in family; a young man about twenty-one; one girl of
eighteen, and another of thirteen, with the father and mother,
all sleeping up-stairs. And what a sleeping-room! In places
it seemed falling in. To ventilation it was a perfect stranger.
The crazy floor creaked under me as I paced it. Yet the rent
was ls. a week, the same sum, for which apartments that may
be called luxurious in comparison, may be had in model lodg-
ing-houses. And here sat a girl weaving that beautiful Honi-
ton lace that our peeresses wear on court-days. Cottage after
cottage, at Southleigh, presented the same, characteristics.
Clay floors; low ceilings; letting in the rain; no ventilation;

952 THE ABOLITIONISTS:

two rooms, one above, one below; gutters running through the
lower room to let off the water; unglazed window-frames, now
boarded up, now uncovered to the elements, the boarding going
for firewood; the inmates disabled by rheumatism, ague, and
typhus: broad, stagnant, open ditches, close to the doors;
heaps of abominations piled round the dwellings; and it is in
these worse than pig-styes that one of the. most beautiful fabrics
that luxury demands, or art supplies, is fashioned. The parish
houses are still worse. In each room live a family night and
day, the space being about twelve feet square. In one (says
our author), were a man, his wife, and eight children; the
father and mother and two children lay in one bed, the remain-
ing six were huddled together head and.foot, three at the top
and three at the foot, in the other bed. The eldest girl being
fifteen or sixteen, the eldest boy between fourteen and fifteen.
Is it not horrible to think of men and women being brought up
in this brutish manner in Christian England! The lowest of
savages are not worse cared for than these children of a luxu-
rious and refined country. ’’}

In Wales, the condition of the peasantry is even worse than
in England. ‘‘The cottages in which the people dwell are
miserable in the extreme in nearly every part of the country.
I believe (says our author) the Welsh cottages are but little, if
any, superior to the Irish huts in the country districts. He
says further, the people of my district are in a worse condition,
and wages are generally lower than in England.’’?

In Scotland, the estates of the nobility are even larger than
in England. McCulloch states that there are not more than
8000 proprietors of land in the whole of Scotland; and, as in
England, this number is decreasing. For some years past, the
great landholders, such as the Duke of Buccleuch and the Du-
chess of ‘Sutherland, have been illustrating the glorious bene-
ficence of British institutions, by removing the poor peasantry
from the homes of their fathers, for the purpose of turning the
vacated districts into deer-parks, sheep-walks, and large graz-
ing-farms. Many a poor, yet gallant Highland family, have
vented their curses upon the head of the remorseless Duchess
of Sutherland.?*

‘¢ Slaves cannot breathe in England,’’ said the English jurist ;

1 London Morning Chronicle, of November, 1849.

2 Report of Mr. Symonds, a commissioner, sent by government to ex-
amine the state of education in Wales. — White Slaves of England. p. 19.

8 Thid.

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 253

‘¢that moment their lungs receive our air, their shackles fall.’’
But, turn to Catholic Ireland, with her quintuple population,
in rags and wretchedness, staining the sweetest scenery ever eye
reposed on! Scenery that hath wreathed the immortal sham-
rock around the brow of painting, poetry, and eloquence. Talk
of ancient miseries in the mines of Laurian; talk of the tears
and groans of the Roman Ergastula; talk of the bondage and
chains of the Ottoman’s slave, of the degradation and suffer-
ings of the subjects of Moslem power !

But the crowning scene to this picture of human misery may
be drawn from the beautiful Emerald Isle. A people whose
very life-blood has been trampled out by the oppressive system
of British slavery; whose miseries have gone forth upon the
wings of song and in themes of eloquence, till they have kindled
the sympathies of all nations save their oppressors.

It is the universal and concurrent testimony of all travellers,
that in consequence of this system of organized oppression,
Ireland has become the home of miseries that scarce have a
parallel upon the face of the earth. ‘‘ Everywhere in Ireland
a traveller as he passes along the road will see on the road-side
and in the fields, places that look like mounds of earth and
sods, with a higher heap of sods upon the top, out of which
smoke is curling upwards ; and with two holes in the side of
the heap next the road, one of which is used as a door, and
the other as the window of the hovel. These are the homes
of the peasantry! Entering, you will find it to contain but one
room, formed by the mud walls; and in these places, upon the
mud floor, the families of the peasants live. Men, women, boys,
and girls, live and sleep together, and herd with the wallowing

ig.

: ait, ragged figures crawl out of these hovels and plant
the ground around with potatoes, which constitute the only
food of the inmates during the year, or swarm the roads and
thoroughfares as wretched beggars. But the tenure even of
these miserable hovels is insecure. The tenants are subject to
the tender mercies of the lay proctor of some absent lord, and
if they do not pay their rent at a proper time, they are liable
to be turned adrift even in the middle of the night. And they
have no appeal except to the court of heaven. Kay says, that
in 1849, more than 50,000 families were evicted and turned as
beggars upon the community.*

Here was a striking illustration of the effects of immediate

1 White Slaves of England, p. 22.
22

254 THE ABOLITIONISTS:

emancipation in all its wretchedness. Think of the heart-rending
scenes of misery and distress that must have followed the turning
out near half a million of people, pennyless, upon the charities
of Great Britain! Thousands of these poor wretches after
wandering about for a time like the ghosts of Atneas, starved
to death and perished by the road-side, the victims of the
murderous policy of the humane and benevolent landed aristoc-
racy of Britain.’

Since that time, the great landed proprietors, envious of the
lurid fame acquired by the celebrated Duchess of Sutherland,
have been evicting their tenants on the most extensive scale,
and establishing large farms and pasturages, which they deem
the most profitable appropriation of their lands. And these
miserable refugees from British slavery, starvation and death,
have been swarming as numerous as the wandering spirits upon
the banks of the Styx, along the coast of the United States
and in the large cities and towns. Thousands have escaped a
premature grave and found an asylum here; but thousands are
still lingering in their hereditary serfdom, without the means
of escaping and reaching other and happier lands.

The dearest ties of family are sundered by the force of want,
like a company of shipwrecked wanderers in an open boat, who
see no possible means of deliverance. The lot must fall upon
some to perish, that, peradventure, some may be saved. The
husband can, perhaps, pay his own passage to America, but
the wife and children must remain paupers in the land of their
hereditary misery.

But the evil consequences of British slavery do not end with
the miseries and sufferings of the agricultural laborers or tenants
of the soil. There are London, Liverpool, Manchester, Bir-
mingham, Glasgow, Dublin, and many other cities and towns,
with their crowds of slaves either in the factories and work-
. shops, or in the streets as beggars, paupers, and criminals.
There are said to be four millions of paupers in the United
Kingdom! Can such an amount of wretchedness be found in
any other country upon the face of the globe? To what cause
can this be attributed save to the oppressive system of the
landed aristocracy and the laws that favor them. How else
could there be eleven millions of acres of good tillable land
unoccupied, save for some of the pleasure purposes of these
aristocrats, and four millions of perishing paupers? It is said
that more than two millions of people were kept from starving

1 See great Speech of Sir Robert Peel, on Ireland, 1849.

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 255°

in England and Wales, in 1848, by relief doled out to them
from public and private sources.’

So scant are the earnings of those who labor day and night
in the cities and towns, that they may become paupers if thrown
out of employment a single week. Upon an average a hard-
working peasant can earn five shillings a week; two of which
must go for rent, leaving him only three shillings to buy his
food and raiment. The slaves of Great Britain are not attached
to the soil, and bought and sold with it like the serfs of Russia,
or the negroes of the United States; but far better would it be
for them were such their destiny. Then the rich landlord who
enjoys the labor of his hundred, would also incur the responsi-
bility of their maintenance in sickness, and in infancy and old
age. But they are called freemen to enable their lords to
detach them from the soil at will, and after spending long and
faithful lives in their service, till they have passed their days
of usefulness, then to turn them adrift and drive them forth to
starve, perish, or become paupers at public charge, without
incurring any penalties for their cruelties, such as the slave-
holders of other countries would suffer. The Russian, the
Spanish, and the North American slave-holder must support his
slaves in sickness and helpless old age, or suffer the penalties
of the law for his neglect. But the British slave-holder is
exempt from such a tax; he may leave them to perish by thou-
sands with impunity. His Irish slaves may be saved from star-
vation by American bounty, but neither American or any other
human law can punish the offender. Truly then did Southey
write : .

“To talk of English happiness is to talk of Spartan freedom ;
the Helots are overlooked. In no country can such riches be
acquired by commerce, but it is the one who grows rich by the
labor of the hundred. The hundred human beings like himself,
as wonderfully fashioned by nature, gifted with like capacities,
and equally destined for immortality, are sacrificed body and
soul.

‘Horrible as it may seem, the assertion is true to the very
letter. They are deprived in childhood of all instruction and
all enjoyments— of the sports in which childhood instinctively
indulges — of fresh air by day and natural sleep by night.
Their health, physical and moral, is alike destroyed; they die
of diseases induced by unremitting taskwork, by too close con-

1 How much of this was the proceeds of the slave labor of the South,
contributed as thousands were by the people of the Southern States for
the relief of starving Ireland?

256 THE ABOLITIONISTS:

finement in the impure atmosphere of crowded rooms, by the
particles of metallic ur vegetable dust which they are constantly
inhaling ; or they live to grow up without decency, without
comfort, and without hope — without morals, without religion,
and without shame, and bring forth slaves like themselves to
tread in the same path of misery.”’

Again, this same distinguished Englishman says: ‘‘ The
English boast of their liberty ; but there is no liberty in England
for the poor. They are no longer sold with the soil (as for-
merly), it is true; but they cannot leave the parish of their
nativity if they are liable to become chargeable. In such a
case, if they endeavor to remove to some situation where they
hope more easily to maintain themselves, where work is more
plentiful or provisions cheaper, the overseers are alarmed, the
intruder is apprehended as if he were a criminal, and sent back
to his own parish. Wherever a pauper dies, the parish must be
at the expense of his burial. Instances therefore have not been
wanting of wretches, in the last stage of disease, having been
hurried away in an open cart, and dying upon the road. Nay,
even women in the pains of labor have been driven out, and
perished by the way-side, because the birthplace of the child
would be its parish.’’* To follow out the various forms of
British slavery in detail would require a volume of itself. We
can therefore make but a few passing remarks upon the different
features of this organized system of oppression as it exists in
the several branches of labor throughout the British Empire.

Having presented briefly the condition of the agricultural
peasantry, we will next speak of

Slavery in the British Mines.

The mining industry of the kingdom is divided into two dis-
tinct branches; that of the coal and iron, and the mines of tin,
copper, lead and zinc. It is to the labors of colliers that our
remarks will be confined. The facts which we shall present
relative to their condition, are all taken from the Report of the
Commissioners appointed by Parliament to inquire into that
matter.

From the history of the British colliers, it would almost seem
that they were a race of beings destined by nature to lead a
life peculiar to themselves. Shut out from all intercourse with

1 Whoever has a desire to pursue this subject more in detail, may refer
to the White Slaves of England, by Cobden, or to the original sources of
information from which these facts are compiled.

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 257

the rest of mankind, little has hitherto been known about them.
Unlike the other inhabitants upon the face of the earth, they
live by rifling its bowels; and, like the children of Hrebus,
they are doomed to spend their lives in the lowest depth of her
treasures. In vain is the light in its coming; it shines only
upon their tenantless dwellings. In vain do the jubilant voices
of the morning sound through the land; in vain are the waning
seasons succeeded in their course, and nature robed in her
varying mantle; their eyes seldom behold these glowing beau-
ties, their ears seldom hear these joyful sounds. Their lot is
cast in those subterranean regions of darkness, where not a ray
of heaven’s light can penetrate their gloomy abodes. There
they toil on from week to week in darkness, scarcely at any time
beholding the light of day. Their lives are as monotonous
and mechanical as the evolutions of a tread-mill. It never
varies from the same routine of ascending and descending by
the same shaft, to and from the bottom of the same pit, to their
subterranean fields of labor. In the division of labor there,
each has his specific duties, that admit of no variation. Here
they spend their lives, father, mother, sister and brother, toge-
ther, from the cradle to the grave, without once dreaming that
they are capable of a higher and more noble sphere of action.
Indeed is English happiness like Spartan freedom, for ‘‘the
Helots are overlooked’’! We read of slavery in the mines of
ancient Greece, we read of the monuments of Egypt, the
gigantic public works of ancient Rome. We may imagine the
suffering, the toil, sweat and blood of the slaves spent in their
erection ; but it remains to contemplate the horrors of a life in
the coal-mines of Great Britain, to place the crowning scene
upon this chapter of human degradation and misery.

As soon as the children of these unfortunate parents are old
enough to render them the least aid by their labor, they are
compelled to take them to the mines to assist in making a sup-
port. Here these hapless infants, at the tender age of eight
years and upwards, are frequently chained to a coal-car by a
harness like a dog, and made to drag these carriages, weighing,
when filled with coal, from two to five hundred pounds, through
passages, in some Cases, not more than from sixteen to twenty
inches in height, where no other means of conveyance can be
obtained. ‘To do this the child even must crawl on its hands
and feet. To enable them to do this, the Commissioners say,
they buckle round their naked person a broad leather strap, to
which is attached, in front, a ring and about four feet of chain,
terminating in a hook. This hook is attached to the coal-car

22 * R

958 THE ABOLITIONISTS:

or corve, in the same manner as the negro slave hitches his
mule to the plough.

Thomas Moorhouse was brought to the notice of the Com-
missioners, and said —

‘‘T don’t know how old I am; father is dead ; I am a chance
child; mother is dead also; I don’t know how long she has
been dead ; ’tis better na three years; I began to ‘hurry’ when
I was nine years old for William Greenwood; I was appren-
ticed to him till I should be twenty-one; my mother appren-
ticed me; I lived with Greenwood; I don’t know how long it
was, but it was a goodish while; he was bound to find me vic-
tuals, drink and clothes; I never had enough; he gave me
some old clothes to wear which he bought at the rag shop; the
overseers gave him a sovereign to buy clothes with, but he
never bought any; the overseers bound me out, with. mother’s
consent, from the township of Southowrans; I ran away from
him because he lost my indentures, for he served me very bad ;
he stuck a pick into me twice.”’

Here the boy was made to strip, and the Commissioner, Mr.
Symonds, found a large cicatrix, likely to have been made by
such an instrument, which must have passed through the glutei
muscles, and have stopped only short of the hip-joint. There
were twenty other wounds, occasioned by hurrying in low
workings, upon and around the spinous processes of the verte-
bre, from the sacrum upwards. The boy continued —

‘‘He used to hit me with the belt and maul or sledge, and
fling coals at me; he served me so bad that I left him, and
went about to see if I could get a job; I used to sleep in the
cabins upon the: pit’s bank, and in the old pits that had done
working; I laid upon the shale all night; I used to get what
I could to eat; I ate, for a long time, the candles that I found
in the pits, that the colliers left over-night; I had nothing else
to eat; I looked about for work, and begged of the people a
bit; I got to Bradford after awhile, and had a job for three
months while a collier’s lad was poorly ; when he came back, I
was obliged to leave.’

Another case was related by Mr Kennedy, one of the Com-
missioners. ‘‘A boy named Edward Kershaw had been ap-
prenticed by the overseers of Castleton to a collier by the name
of Robert Brierly, residing at Balsgate, who worked in a pit
in the vicinity of Roarly Moor. The boy was examined, and
from twenty-four to twenty-six wounds were found upon his
body. His posteriors and loins were beaten to a jelly; his
head, which was almost cleared of hair on the scalp, had the

CONSISTFNCY OF THEIR LABORS. 259

marks of many old wounds upon it that had healed up. One
of the bones of one arm was broken below the elbow, and, from
appearances, had been so for some time. The boy, on being
brought before the Commissioners, was unable either to sit or
stand, and was placed on the floor of the office, laid on his side
upon a small cradle-bed. It appeared that the boy’s arm had
been broken by a blow from an iron rail, and the fracture had
never been set, and that he had been kept at work for several
weeks with his arm in the condition above described. It fur-
ther appeared in evidence, and was admitted by Brierly himself,
that he had been in the habit of beating the boy with a flat
piece of wood, in which a nail was driven and projected out
half an inch. The blows had been inflicted with such violence
that they penetrated the skin, and caused the wounds above
mentioned. The body of the boy presented all marks of ema-
ciation. This brutal master had kept the boy at work as a
wagoner until he was no longer of any use, and then sent him
home in a cart to his mother, who was a poor widow residing
in Church Lane, Rockdale.”’ And yet we hear the vaunting
of humanity and self-righteousness, that ‘“‘slaves cannot breathe
in England”?!

If the employment of boys in such a way be, as a miner said
to the Commissioners, ‘‘barbarity, barbarity,”’ what are we to
think of the slavery of females in the same abyss of darkness ?
How shall we express our feelings upon learning that females,
in years of womanhood, and in all their most delicate and
critical situations, are engaged in the same occupations as their
male companions, in circumstances too repugnant to the crudest
sense of decency. In great numbers of these pits the men were
working in a state of entire nakedness, and were assisted by
females of all ages, from girls of six years to women of twenty-
one.

“The girls ‘hurry’ with a belt and chain, as well as thurst;
there are many girls thus employed. One of the most dis-
gusting sights (says Mr. Thomas Pearce) I have ever seen, was
that of a young female, dressed like a boy, in trousers, crawling
on all fours, with a belt around her waist, and chains passing
between her legs, dragging after them cars or corves, loaded
with coal.’’

The girls associate and labor with the men, who are in a
state of nakedness, and they have on no other garment than a
ragged shift, or, in the absence of that, a pair of broken trou-

sers, to cover their persons.

260 THE ABOLITIONISTS :

Here are some of the specimens of the evidence taken by
the Commissioners :—

‘‘Susan Pitchforth, aged eleven. I have hacen in. the
mines for two years. I have a sister working with me, aged
fourteen. This child, said the Commissioners, stood before
them shivering with cold. The rags that hung about her waist
were once called a shift, which was black as the coal she
‘thursts,’ and saturated with water.”’

‘“‘Patience Kershaw, aged seventeen. I ‘hurry’ in the clothes
I have on (trousers and ragged jacket); the bald place upon
my head is made by thursting the coal corves; the getters I
work for are naked, except their caps; they pull off their
clothes; all the men are naked.”’

fs Betty Harris, aged thirty-seven. I have a belt ‘round my
waist, and a chain passing between my legs, and I go on my
hands and feet while drawing the corves.. The road is very
steep, and we have to hold by a rope, &c. There are six wo-
men, and as many boys and girls, in the pit where I work ; it
is very hard work fora woman. The pit is very wet, and the
water comes over our clog tops always; I have seen it up to
my thighs; my clothes are wet almost all day long. I have
drawn till I had the skin off me. THE BELT AND CHAIN IS
WORSE WHEN WE ARE IN A FAMILY WAY.’ My feller (husband)
has beaten me for not being ready.”’

Mary Glover tells a similar tale; she hurries with a belt and
chain; wears a shift and trousers ; is thirty-eight years old, &c.

Besides hurrying, by dragging immense loads after them, on
all-fours, like horses, they are compelled, when the way from
the wall-face to the pit’s bottom will not admit of running the
corve, to bear the coal upon their backs. It is said that fa-
thers have been known to rupture themselves from straining to
lift coal on their children’s backs. The usual hours of labor
are from five in the morning till five at night; but in many
places it is much longer. The sub-commissioner thus describes
the female child’s labor in the mines of Scotland: ‘‘ She has
first to descend a nine-ladder pit to- the first rest, even to which,

a shaft is sunk to draw up the basket or tubs of coals filled by
the bearers; she then takes her cral (a basket formed to the
back, not unlike a cockle-shell flattened towards the back of
the neck so as to allow lumps of coal to rest upon her shoul-
ders), and pursues her journey to the wall-face. She then lays
down her basket, into which coal is rolled, and it is frequently

1 See White Slaves of England, p. 40-45.

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 261

more than one man can do to lift the burden on her back. The
tugs or straps are placed over the forehead, and the body bent
in a semicircular form in order to stiffen the arch. * * Females
submit to work where no man, or even lad, could be got to
labor; they work in bad places and roads up to their knees in
water, in a posture nearly double, where they continue until
the last hour of pregnancy: they are brought to premature
graves,’? &c.

Then follows a numerous list of the names, and deplorable
condition of these subterranean inhabitants. And the commis-
sioner adds; ‘‘It is almost incredible that human beings can
submit to and undergo such employment, crawling on their
hands and knees harnessed like horses, over soft, slushy floors,
more difficult than dragging the same weights through our
lowest common-sewers, and more difficult in consequence of the
inclination, which is frequently even dangerous.’

Such is the condition of thousands upon thousands of those
inheriting the purest and best blood of the Anglo-Saxon race
in the immense coal-pit of England. Cut off from the face of
the earth and doomed to a region of endless night. The sun
may rise and set in all its loveliness, but they behold none of
its splendor; the hurricane may sweep over the land; the
thunder-storm may spend its fury above their heads, but it is
all the same to them; they still plod on in their dreamless
abode, unconscious of the world without. And when we con-
sider the nature of this horrible labor ; its extreme severity ; its
incessant duration from twelve to fourteen hours daily;. the
damp heated air and mephitie vapors that infest the atmosphere
of the mines; the tender age and sex of the worker, enduring
it all for the trifling compensation of from three to five shillings
per week, a picture is presented of deadly physical oppression
and systematic slavery that has no parallel in the annals of any
age or nation.

But, says Mr. Cobden, what did the British Government do
when the report of these commissioners was presented? Lord
Ashley introduced a bill into the House of Commons, having
for its object the amelioration of the condition of the mining
women and children. Much discussion arose, but it finally
passed the House, and was taken up in the House of Lords,
the high court of British oppression. Some of them advocated
the bill, whereupon Lord Londonderry, and some others, spoke
of them as ‘‘ bitten with a humanity mania!’’ _ Under various
modifications it was adopted. It provided that no child under
ten years of age, and no female, should work in the mines.

262 THE ABOLITIONISTS :

But what relief was this? The majority of the abused and
suffering that came to the notice of the commissioners were
over ten years of age. As to the females, though it prohibited
their working in the mines, yet it furnished them no aid, or
other means of support. They were driven there, in the first
instance, to escape from starvation. The bill prevented them
even this desperate means of escape, and, soon after its passage,
petitions were sent to Parliament, from the mining districts,
praying for the repeal of the law. There were many proprie-
tors of mines in Parliament, and their influence was sufficient
to nullify the law in practice.

Much that has been said upon British slavery in the mines
will apply with equal force to many other divisions of this sys-
tem of oppression.

The Slavery of their Manufactories.

England has been called the ‘‘ game cock’’ of Europe, and
her large manufacturing towns the toy-shops of the world.
The English people, alone, supply a large portion of the na-
tions of the earth with the products of their labor. The looms
of Manchester, and the mills and work-shops of Birmingham,
London, and Liverpool, have long been sending their articles
to every nation. Viewed at a distance, and by first impres-
sions, this gigantic system of productive industry presents
nought but a magnificent aspect to the admiring beholder.
But, upon closer inspection, and a more minute survey of its
elements, one beholds a picture of human wretchedness and
woe that turns his admiration into horror and disgust.

Allowing a just measure of glory and renown for the extent
and perfection of arts, manufactures, and commerce, the real
condition of the two millions of operatives who perform all the
labor, cannot escape the observation of the faithful historian.
Glory in war, purchased at the price of slaughtered victims,
adds but a-stained laurel to the brow of the conqueror; but
the glory of a nation in times of peace, purchased also at the
price of human blood, and human souls sacrificed upon its
altar, shows but a black spot in her national escutcheon. The
number of operatives employed in the cotton, wool, silk, and
flax manufactures of Great Britain, is estimated at about two
millions. |

Mr. Baines states that about one and a half millions are em-
ployed in the cotton manufactures alone.1 The whole number

1 White Slaves of England, p. 104.

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 2963

employed on the production of all sorts of iron, hardware, and
cutlery articles, is estimated at three hundred and fifty thousand.
In the manufacture of jewelry, earthen and glasswares, paper,
woollen stuffs, distilled and fermented liquors, and in the com-
mon trades of tailoring, shoemaking, carpentering, stone-cut-
ting, &c., is very great, though not accurately known.

It has often been asserted by travellers, and we think the
facts about to be disclosed, will bear us out in saying, that this
vast body of operatives suffer more of the real miseries of de-
gradation, poverty, hardships, and want, than the subjects of
any other system of slavery that has ever existed upon the face
of the earth.

Admitting that wages are as high in Great Britain as in any
continental country, the enormous expenses of the church and
aristocracy produce a taxation which eats up so large a portion
of these wages, that there is not enough left to enable the work-
men to live decently and comfortably. Besides, the wages are
reduced to the lowest possible degree to afford a possible sub-
sistence by excessive competition; and, in consequence, the
operative must prolong his hours of toil far beyond all healthy
limits, to earn enough to pay his taxes and support himself.
It is the struggle of drowning men for life, and what wonder
is it that so many thousands sink beneath these gloomy waves ?

When C. Edwards Lester, an author of reputation, was in
England, he visited Manchester, and, making inquiries of an
operative, obtained the following reply :—

‘‘T have a wife and nine children, and a pretty hard time we
have of it, too, we are so many; and most of the children are
so small they can do little for the support of the family. I
generally get from two shillings to a crown a day for carrying
luggage; and some of my children are in the mills; the rest
are too young to work yet. My wife is never well: it comes
very hard on her to do the work of the family. We often talk
these things over, and feel very sad. We live in a poor
house; we are not able to clothe our children comfortably ; not
one of them ever went to school; they could go to Sunday
school, but we can’t make them look decent enough to go to
such a place. As for meat, we never taste it; potatoes and
coarse bread are our principal food. We can’t save anything
for a day of want; almost everything we get for our labor goes
for taxes. I have gone home at night many times and told my
wife that I had eaten a bite at the chop-house on the way, and
was not hungry—she and the children could eat my share.
Life is not worth much to a poor man in England, and some-

264 THE ABOLITIONISTS:

times Mary and I, when we talk about it, pretty much conclude
that we should be better off if we were dead. I sometimes
wonder that God suffers so many poor people to come into the
world. ”’

But this, says Mr. Cobden, is comparatively a mild case.
Instances of hard-working families living in dark, damp cellars,
and having the coarsest food, are common in Manchester, Bir-
mingham, and other manufacturing towns. Who can read the
tale of Mary Barton, by Mrs. Gaskell, without weeping over
the sorrows and sufferings of the poor operatives in the great
manufacturing metropolis of Britain? It contains a literal de-
lineation and true picture of the trials, hardships, and miseries
of the poor laborers of Manchester ?

An historical incident is related by the author of the tale of
Mary Barton (Mrs. Gaskell, a lady of Manchester), that also
strikingly illustrates the misery and wretchedness of the poor
operatives, and the heartless indifference of the aristocracy to
their sufferings. At a season when the grim miseries of starva-
tion were staring the poor laborers in the face, when lank hunger
was preying upon their mortal bodies like an epidemic, carrying
off its thousands; when the starving multitude could not be
persuaded that the government knew of their condition, a
petition was framed and signed by thousands in the bright
spring of 1839, imploring Parliament to hear witnesses who
could testify to the unparalleled destitution of the manufacturing
districts. Nottingham, Sheffield, Glasgow, Manchester, and
many other towns, were busy in appointing delegates to convey
their petition, who might speak not merely of what they had
seen and heard, but from what they themselves had borne and
suffered. Lank, life-worn, gaunt, anxious, hunger-stamped
were those delegates. The delegates went in a body to London,
and applied at the House of Parliament for permission to pre-
sent their petition upon this subject of life and death. But how
were they received? They were haughtily denied a hearing.
What had these rose-pink legislators to do with the miseries of
the base-born rabble—the soil-serfs and slaves of their chivalric
Norman ancestors? In other nations such a peremptory
rejection of a humble petition from breadless and starving men
by their equals, would have been followed by such an outburst
of popular fury as to have resulted in a revolution. But in
Great Britain the poor laborers seem to have the inborn sub-
mission of hereditary slaves. They feel that it is impossible to

1 Tale of Mary Barton, written by Mrs. Gaskell, of Manchester, quoted
in White Slaves of England, pp. 110-114. ’

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 265

throw off the iron heel of the aristocracy upon their necks ; and
though they see their families actually starving around them,
yet they delay, and still delay taking that highway to freedom
—manly and united rebellion. According to the report of the
board of Commissioners before referred to, the laborers in the
factories are committed to the charge of overseers, who have
the full power of masters, and exercise it with the cruel sway
of tyrants. Without distinction of sex, of however tender an
age, they are subjected to the same barbarous and inhuman
treatment. We might quote a volume of the testimony of
witnesses taken by these Commissioners, to prove the truth of
the above assertion; but a few examples must suffice.

If an operative does not obey an order, he is not merely
reproved as a freeman, but kicked and beaten as a slave. He
has no alternative but submission, for if he resents it he is dis- .
missed and sent forth to starve. A more compulsory system
of labor cannot exist, for the only freedom the subject enjoys is
to choose between submission and endurance on the one hand,
and a lingering death by starvation on the other. Such being
the system under which he works, the operative has the look
and air of a degraded Helot. Most of them are unhealthy,
destitute of spirit, and enfeebled by toil and privation. The
hand-loom weavers, who are numerous in some districts, are
the most miserable of all laborers, being hardly able, by the
most excessive toil, to earn scant food and filthy shelter. This
death struggle for the bare bread to keep soul and body
together, necessarily forces the parents to send their children
at early and tender ages to the mills, to aid them in procuring
a support; and there they are often whipped, scourged, and
more cruelly treated than the most abject slaves. When the
father, no longer able to make a support, to avoid certain
death by starvation, goes to the poor-house, he has no longer
any control over his children. They are at the mercy of the
parish, and may be separated, apprenticed to all sorts of mas-
ters, and treated, to all intents and purposes, as slaves. The
invention of labor-saving machinery has brought the services
of children into great demand in manufacturing towns. Think
of the vast number of children that may be had among four
millions of paupers! They may be bought at the work-houses
at a cheap rate, and subjected to cruel masters and overseers
who may beat and maltreat them with impunity.

The following extracts, taken from the report of these Par-
liamentary Commissioners before spoken of, show the barbarous
and cruel treatment to which they are subjected : —

23

266 THE ABOLITIONISTS :

‘¢ When she was a child, too young to put on her ain claiths,
the overlooker used to beat her till she screamed again. Gets
many a good beating and swearing. They are all very ill used ;
the overseer carries a strap. Has been licked with it four or
five times. The boys are often severely strapped; the girls
sometimes get a clout. The mothers often complain of this.
. . Has often seen the workers beat cruelly. Has seen the
girls strapped, but the boys were often beat so that they fell to
the floor, in the course of the beating with a rope with four
tails called a cat. Has seen the boys black and blue crying for
mercy,” &e.

‘Killen Ferrier, aged thirteen, carries bobbins; ‘has been
three years in this mill; does not like the work because she gets
so tired from working from half past five in the morning until
half past seven, with only two intervals of half an hour each.
. . When Charles Kenedy was overseer, he licked us very bad.’

‘‘Kuphemia Anderson, aged twenty, has been three years at
this mill; has been in different mills since she was seven years
old. About six years ago she was taken ill with pains in the
legs, and remained ill for three years. ‘I was not able to stand.
Thinks it was standing too long that made me ill.? .. She
never went to school, never had muckle time; she would give
up some of her wages to have shorter hours; their usual dinner
is broth and potatoes. ’’

Henry Blincoe, once an apprentice to a cotton mill, was
examined by Dr. Hawkins on the 18th of May, 1833.

‘Do you know how old you are? Near upon forty according
to my indentures. — Do you know where you were born? No;
I only know that I came from St. Pancras parish, London. —
Do you know the names of your parents? No. . . — Have
you any children? Three.—Do you send them to the factories ?
No; I would rather have them transported. — What are the
forms of cruelty that you have seen and suffered, practised upon
children in factories? I have seen the time when two hand-
vices of a pound weight each, have been screwed to my ears at
Littleton mills, in Derbyshire ; here are the scars still remaining
behind my ears. Three or four of us have been hung at once
to a cross-beam above the machinery, hanging by our hands,
without shirts or stockings. Mind, we were apprenticed from
different parishes without father or mother to protect us. . .
Then we used to stand up, in a skip, without our shirts, and be
beat with straps or sticks; the skip was to prevent us from
running away from the strap. . . Then they used to tie ona

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 267

twenty-eight pounds weight (one or two at once), according to
our size, to hang down our backs with no shirts on.’’!

Besides the bodily sufferings of these miserable creatures from
excessive beatings and the various forms of brutal punishments,
the work is so protracted by incessant hours of toil, that the
children become exhausted, broken down, and crippled often
for life, by standing too long in unhealthy positions.

John Wright, steward in the silk factory of Messrs. Bunsby
and Shatwell, examined :

‘‘ What are the effects of the present system of labor in the
factories ? From my earliest recollections I have found it
awfully detrimental to the health and well-being . . Through
excessive labor there and confinement (in the heat, dust, and
unwholesome atmosphere of the various apartments of the mill),
there is a total loss of appetite—a kind of languor steals over
the whole frame, enters to the very core, saps the foundations
of the best constitutions, and lays our strength prostrate in the
dust. . . By protracted labors there is an alarming increase of
cripples, in various parts of this town, which has come under
my own observation.’’

‘«T have known children, says one witness, to hide themselves
in the store, among the wool, so that they should not go home
when the work was over, when we have worked till ten or
eleven. I have seen six or eight at a time fetched out of the
store and beat home. . . I do not know why they should hide
themselves, unless they were too tired to go home.’’

Joseph Badder, a slubber, deposed. ‘‘Slubbing and spin-
ning is very heavy. . . I have known them (the slubbers) work
children, from seven to twelve in age, from six in the morning
till ten or eleven at night, and give no time for meals; eat their
victuals as they worked, the engines running all the time. - .
I have seen children knocked down by the billy-rollers. It is
a weapon that a man will easily take up in a passion. . . J
have seen the children fall asleep, and they have been per-
forming their work with their hands while they were asleep ;
after the billy had stopped, when their work was done, I have
stopped and looked at them for two minutes going through the
motions of pieceing, fast asleep, when there was really no
work to do, and they were really doing nothing.”

John Fortesque, examined at his own house. ‘‘I am an
overseer in the factory. We have about a hundred hands; forty
quite children; most of the remainder are young women. Our
regular day is from six to seven. . . There are some children

1 See Memoir of Robert Blincoe and Manchester, J. Doherty, 1852.

268 THE ABOLITIONISTS :

so bad that they must be punished; a strap is used for this
purpose; beating is necessary, on account of their being idle.
We find it out in this way: we give them the same number of
bobbins each; when the number they ought to finish falls off,
then they are corrected. . . At the factory of Messrs. Mills &
Elliot ‘they go on working all night, as well as all day. I be-
lieve them to have done so for the last year and a half. (At
this moment, says our author, a respectable looking woman
entered with a petition against negro slavery; after she was
gone, Mr. Fortesque continued.) I think home slavery as
bad as it can be abroad; worst of anywhere in the factories. ”’
This young lady was doubtless breathless in her zeal, and en-
thusiastic in her sympathy for the far-off negro bondmen, in
other parts of the world, while the tears, sorrows and sufferings
of her own kindred blood, groaning in their dying struggles
with starvation, oppression and wretchedness, of an unparalleled
kind, elicits not a single emotion from her tender and sympa-
thetic soul for their condition.

' And such is the general character of the sympathies of the
advocates of the abolition of negro slavery in America. Their
feelings of commiseration seem to have a kind of chemical
affinity for negro sufferings alone. They overlook the miseries
of their own race, and give themselves up, body and soul, to
the cause of the negro, looking to England for countenance,
support, and the hope of reward for their labors in the great
work of benevolence.

Read the following extracts, and tell me, gentle reader, why
it is that such scenes excite no sympathy for the sufferings of
the Anglo-Saxon race.

“Much has been said of the black slaves and their chains.
No doubt they are entitled to freedom ; but are there no slaves
but those of a sable hue? has slavery no sort of existence among
the children of the factories? Yes; and chains were some-
times introduced, though these chains might not be forged from
iron... A.child not ten years of age having been late at the fac-
tory one morning, had, as a punishment, a rope put around its
neck, to which was attached a weight of twenty pounds; and
thus burdened, like a galley-slave, it was compelled to labor
for a length of time, in the midst of an impure air, in a heated
room... The speaker said he heard the mother, with her eyes
filled with tears, relate this shocking tale of infant suffering in
the factories. ???

1 Extract from a speech made by Mr. Grant, a Manchester spinner, at
a meeting held at Chorlton upon Medlock, Manchester Chronicle, 20th
April, 1833.

&

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 269

Again: ‘‘In a mill at Wigan, the children, for any slight
neglect, were loaded with weights of twenty pounds each,
passed over their shoulders and hanging behind their backs.
Then there was the murderous instrument called the billy-roller,
about eight feet long and one inch and a half in diameter, with
which many children had been knocked down, and, in some
instances, murdered by it. . . I knew, said the same speaker,
that the Russians made the Poles carry iron weights in their
exile to Siberia, but it was reserved for Christian England thus
to use a helpless infant.’’? |

The evidences upon which we rely are all drawn from English
sources of authority. The Report of this Parliamentary Com-
mittee, detailed to inquire into the condition and treatment of
the operatives in the several departments of labor in Great
Britain, as well as their own public prints, and the speeches of
their public men, abound with instances of the most brutal and
inhuman treatment to these hapless orphan children, consigned
by the poor-laws and workhouse system to conditions of phy-
sical suffering and mental depravity that shock the most har-
dened sensibilities. In many instances without either father or
mother, or any one to protect them, these helpless, inoffensive
creatures are driven, by the fears of starvation and the lash, to
the most wearisome and exhausting toil, in the most unwhole-
some or dangerous situations, which render them liable to be
crippled for life, or consign them to a premature grave.

Could we but relate all the heart-rending scenes of cruelty
specified by this Committee, as practised upon helpless infancy,
it would fill with tears the eyes of every one possessing the com-
mon sympathies of humanity. But as our limits forbid, we
cannot present this picture of human woe in a more brief and
striking form than by quoting a sympathetic and touching ditty,
from Francis Blake, upon the sufferings of the unfortunate

FACTORY CHILD.

**Karly one winter’s morning,
The weather wet and wild,
Some hours before the dawning,
A father call’d his child;
Her daily morsel bringing,
The darksome room he paced,
And cried, ‘The bell is ringing—
My hapless darling, haste.’

1 Extract from a speech of Mr. Oastler, London Times, 25th February,
1833: See also Bolton Chronicle, 30th March, 1833.

23 *

270

1 It is the concurrent statement of all the overlookers examined by the
Committee, that the labor is so exhausting and wearisome upon the chil-
dren from seven to twelve years of age, that they often fall asleep at their
work, and constant chastisement is necessary to keep them diligent, par-
ticularly towards the close of the day’s work, and that they are sometimes

THE ABOLITIONISTS :

‘¢* Father, I’m up but weary,
I scarce can reach the door,’
And long the way and dreary—

Oh, carry me once more!

To help us we’ve no mother,
To live how hard we try;
They kill’d my little brother—

Like him I'll work and die.’

‘‘His feeble arms they bore her,

The storm was loud and wild—

God of the poor man, hear him!
He prays, ‘Oh, save my child?’

Her wasted form seem’d nothing—
The load was in his heart;

The sufferer he kept soothing,
Till at the mill they part.

‘‘The overlooker met her,

As to the frame she crept,

And with the thong he beat her,
And cursed her as she wept.

Alas! what hours of horror
Made up her latest day!

In toil, and pain, and sorrow,
They slowly pass’d away.

“‘It seem’d, as she grew weaker,
The threads the oftener broke,
The rapid wheel ran quicker,
And heavier fell the stroke;1
The sun had long descended,
But night brought no repose—
Her day began and ended
As her taskmasters chose.

‘Then to her little neighbor
Her only cent she paid,
To take her last hour’s labor,
While by her frame she laid;
At last the engine ceasing,
The captives homeward flee,

One thought her strength increasing—

Her parent soon to see.

whipped to death. See White Slaves of England.

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 271

‘‘She left, but oft she tarried,
She fell and rose no more,
But by her comrades carried,
She reach’d her father’s door;
All night with tortur’d feeling,
He watch’d his speechless child;
While close beside her kneeling,
She knew him not nor smiled.

«‘ Again the loud bell’s ringing,

Her last perceptions tried,

When, from her straw bed springing,
‘Tis time!’ she shrieked, and died.

That night a chariot pass’d her,
While on the ground she lay,

The daughters of her master,
An evening visit pay;

Their tender hearts were sighing,
As negro wrongs were told,

While the white slave was dying,
Who gain’d their father’s gold.”

British Slavery, in General.

What we have shown in relation to slavery in the British
factories, will apply with equal force to slavery in the British
workshops, the work-house system, and various other forms of
this general system of organized oppression. The inmates of
the workshops, in particular, are of the most miserable class of
British slaves. Here, too, children of both sexes and of tender
ages, are subject to physical suffering that has no parallel in
any system but that of British slavery. The workshops of the
small masters are usually of the dirtiest, most dilapidated and
confined description, and situated in the most filthy and un-
drained localities, at the back of their wretched abodes.

‘* Among other witnesses, the superintendent registrar states
that in those trades, particularly in which the work is by the
piece, the growth of the children is injured ; that in these cases,
more especially, their strength is overtaxed for profit. One of
the constables of the town says that there are examples without
number in that place, of deformed men and boys; their backs,
or their legs, and often both, grow wrong; and thus they be-
come hump-backed and knock-kneed. He says, that among
the adult of the working-classes of Willenhall, whose work is
all forging and filing, one-third of the number are afflicted with
hernia.’?!_ Says Mr. Cobden: ‘‘ We have the evidence of

1 Horne’s Evidences, p. 28. No. 128.

272 THE ABOLITIONISTS :

Henry Nicholls Payne, superintendent-registrar of Wolver-
hampton; Henry Hill, Esq., magistrate; and Paul Law, of
Wolverhampton, that it is common for masters to buy offal
meat, and the meat of animals that have died of all manner of
causes, for the food of apprentices. The clothing of these poor
creatures is but thin tatters for all seasons.’’?

The apprentices employed in nail-making are described as so
many poorly fed and poorly clad slaves. Nails are made at the
forges by the hammer, and these forges, which are the work-
shops, are usually at the backs of the wretched hovels in which
the work-people reside. ‘‘ The best of these,’’ says Mr. Horne,
‘are little brick shops, of about fifteen feet long and twelve
wide, in which seven or eight individuals constantly work toge-
ther with no ventilation except the door; but a great majority
of these shops are much smaller, and filled with filth and dirt;
and, on looking into one of them when the fire is not lighted,
it presents the appearance of a dilapidated coal-hole, or little
black den.’?? In these places children are first put to labor,
from the ages of seven to eight, where they continue to work,
daily, from six in the morning till seven at night. Their task is
gradually increased till they arrive at the daily task of one
thousand. A girl, or a boy, from ten to twelve years old, con-
tinually accomplishes this arduous task from day to day and
week to week.’’? In the manufacturing of glass and earthen-
ware, the toil and suffering of the apprentices, as recorded by
the commissioners, is extreme.

One witness said: ‘From his experience, he thinks, the
community has no idea of what a boy at a bottle goes through ;
it would never be allowed if it were known; he has often been
carried home from fatigue. Boys begin to work on Sabbath
evening at ten o’clock, and are not at home any more till three
on Monday afternoon. The drawing the bottles out of arches
is a work which no child should be allowed to do; he himself
has been obliged, several times, to have planks put in to walk
on that caught fire under his feet, and a woollen cape, and
always mits on his hands, and a boy cannot, generally, stop in
them over five minutes.’’? Young females, apprenticed to dress-
makers, suffer greatly from overwork and bad treatment.

1 Let it be asked of Southern masters, what would be the fate of one,
in any community of the Southern States, who was guilty of such con-
duct to his slaves? And the universal answer will be, that public indig-
nation would expel him from that community.

2 Horne’s Evidences, p. 84. No. 128. See, also, White Slaves of Eng-
land, p. 174.

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 273

The report of the sub-commissioner, and of several surgeons
of asylums and hospitals, reveal some shocking incidents of the
loss of sight and of other bodily infirmities, caused by ill-treat-
ment, to the apprentices of this kind. The London Times, in
an exceedingly able article upon Seamstress Slavery, thus de-
scribes the terrible system :—

‘‘Granting that the negro gangs who are worked on cotton-
grounds of the Southern States of North America, or in the
sugar-plantations of Brazil, are slaves; in what way should we
speak of persons who are circumstanced in the manner we are
about to relate? Let us consider them as the inhabitants of a
distant region — say New Orleans—no matter about the color
of their skins, and then ask ourselves, what should be our opi-
nion of a nation in which such things are tolerated. They are
of a sex and age the least qualified to struggle with their lot,—
young women, for the most part, between sixteen and thirty
years of age. As we would not deal in exaggeration, we would
premise that we take them at their busy season, just as writers
upon American Slavery are careful to select the season of cot-
ton-picking and sugar-rolling, to illustrate their theories. The
young female slaves then are worked in gangs in ill-ventilated
rooms, or rooms that are not ventilated at all; for it is found
that if the air be admitted it brings with it the ‘blacks,’ of an
other kind, which damage the work upon which the seamstresses
are employed. This occupation is, to sew from morning till
night and night till morning —stitch, stitch, stitch — without
pause, without speech, without a smile, without a sigh. In
the grey of the morning they must be at their work, say at six
o’clock, having a quarter of an hour allowed them for break-
fast. ‘The food served out to them is scanty and miserable
enough, but still, in all probability, more than their fevered
system can digest. We do not, however, wish to make out a
case of starvation; the suffering is of another kind, equally
dreadful of endurance. From six o’clock till eleven it is stitch,
stitch. At eleven, a small piece of dry bread is served to each
seamstress, but still she must stitch on. At one o’clock, twenty
minutes are allowed for dinner,—a slice of meat and a potato,
with a glass of toast and water to each work-woman. Then
again to work —stitch, stitch, until five o’clock, when fifteen
minutes are again allowed for tea. The needles are then set in
motion once more—stitch, stitch, until nine o’clock, when fif-
teen minutes are allowed for supper— a piece of dry bread and
cheese, and a glass of beer. From nine o’clock at night until
one, two, and three o’clock in the morning, stitch, stitch; the

S

O74 THE ABOLITIONISTS:

only break in this long period of time being a minute or two —
just long enough to swallow a cup of strong tea which is sup-
plied, lest the young people should feel sleepy. At three
o’clock A. M. to bed; at six o’clock A. M. out again to re-
sume the duties of the following day. But when we have said
that, for certain months in the year, these unfortunate young
persons are worked in the manner we describe, we have not said
all. Even during the few hours allotted to sleep—should we
not rather say to a feverish cessation from toil—their miseries
continue. They are cooped up in sleeping pens, ten in a room,
which would, perhaps, be sufficient for the accommodation of
two persons. ‘The change is from the tread-mill, and what a
tread-mill! to the Black Hole of Calcutta. Not a word of re-
monstrance is allowed, or is possible. The seamstresses may
leave the mill, no doubt, but what awaits them on the other
side of the door? starvation, if they be honest; and if not,
consequences equally to be dreaded. They would scarcely
escape from slavery in that way.’ Surely, this is a terrible
state of things, and one which claims the anxious consideration
of the ladies of England, who have pronounced themselves so
loudly against the horrors of negro slavery in the United States.
Had this system of oppression against their own sex been really
exercised in New Orleans, it would have elicited from them
many expressions of sympathy for the sufferers, and of abhor-
rence for their cruel task-master who could cruelly overwork
wretched creatures so unfitted for toil. It is idle to use any
further mystification in the matter. The scenes we have been
describing exist at our own doors; and in the most fashionable
quarters of luxurious London. It is in the dress-making and
millinery establishments of the ‘West End’ that the system is
steadily pursued.

This continuous labor is bestowed upon the gay garments in
which the ladies of England love to adorn themselves. It is
to satisfy their whims and caprices that their wretched sisters
undergo these days and nights of suffering and toil. . . The
leading milliners and dressmakers of London have hold of
English society at both ends. They hold the ladies by their
vanity and love of fine clothes, and the poor seamstresses by
what appears to be their interest and by their love of life.

1 American slaves are held to labor and service by law, and are pro-
tected by the same from all excess and cruel treatment. British slaves
are compelled to serve from fear of starvation, and are without protection.
Which is the most abject slavery ?

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 975

Now love of life and love of fine clothes are too very strong
motive springs of human action.’’?

Beside the female, there are also the male slaves of the needle,
who, in common with all the apprentices of the workshops, are
subjected to physical suffering by toil, starvation, and bodily
chastisement that finds scarce a parallel in the history of any
other system of slavery in the world. They are sometimes
struck with a red-hot iron. Says one of the witnesses, ‘‘ But
a few months ago an adult workman broke a boy’s arm by a
blow with a piece of iron.’’ . . Another boy, aged sixteen,
says, ‘‘ His master has cut his head open five or: six times —
once with a key, and twice with a lock ; knocked the corner of a
lock into his head twice, and once with an iron bolt,’’ &c. We
might multiply the instances to a great number, taken from
Horn’s Reports, also from Dickens’ picture of Smike, in
Nickleby ; there are thousands of Smikes.

in , aged seventeen; has no father or mother to take
his part. His master once cut his head open with a flat file
Baft,??# , aged eighteen. His master once ran at him

with a hammer, and drove the iron head of the hammer into
his side; his master often knocks him down upon the shop
floor.’’?

What has been said upon slavery in the workshops will apply
to a great extent to

Slavery in the Workhouse System of Britain.

It has been estimated that out of the twenty-eight millions
of population of the United Kingdom, upwards of four millions
are paupers. We have related something of the causes of this
immense pauperism in Britain; it all lays at the door of the
policy pursued by the landed aristocracy. The laboring classes
have no power to acquire an interest in the soil; their wages
are kept so extremely low, and they are so much consumed in
the payment of taxes to support national extravagances, that
they are wholly unable to provide anything for the future ; and
in case of sickness, misfortune, or want of employment, their
only alternative is the work-house. It is the ‘‘ glorious institu-
tions’’ of Britain that crowd these miserable places of abode
with an overwhelming population of paupers. And when they
can no longer find room for them at home, thousands are

1 Horne’s Evidences, p. 87, 1: 57. See also White Slaves of England,
p. 184.

276 THE ABOLITIONISTS:

shipped to the asylum of the free, and throng the cities and
towns of the United States. Each parish has a work-house
which is under the control of several guardians, who, again,
are under the control and orders of a Board of Commissioners
sitting at London. |

From a casual survey of the poor-laws, it appears that
poverty is considered criminal in Great Britain. The work-
houses, which are declared to have been established for the
relief of the poor, are worse than prisons for solitary confine-
ment; for the visits of friends and the consolations of religion,
except under particular forms, are denied to the unhappy
inmates, while they are permitted to criminals in a dungeon.

What an English pauper is, may be learned from the thou-
sand pathetic descriptions to be found in as many books,
pamphlets, and magazines, written by Englishmen themselves,
upon the miseries of pauperism. ‘‘ What is that defective
being, with calfless legs and stooping shoulders, weak in body
and mind, inert, pusillanimous, and stupid, whose premature
wrinkles and furtive glance tell of misery and degradation ?
That is an English peasant or pauper. His sire was a pauper,
and his mother’s milk wanted nourishment,’’ &c. These work-
houses are the nurseries of all the miseries attendant upon the
apprenticeship system. Here the victims are reared up without
the consciousness of their own rights, or scarcely of their own
personal identity, to a certain age, when they are dealt out by
the guardians to suit customers, and are taught to be the willing
and submissive subjects of slavery, cruelty, and every degradation
that can be inflicted upon them. Instances might be enumerated
of cruelties and sufferings to which they are subjected, that ~
would make a merciful heart bleed at every pore. Perhaps
there cannot be found a more truthful and life-like conception
of the beauties of this system, than in the Life and Adventures
of Oliver Twist, Dickens’ work-house boy, to which we refer
the reader.

Some years ago an investigation into the treatment of the
poor in St. Pancras work-house was made. It originated in
the suicide of a girl, who, having left her place, drowned
herself rather than return to the work-house to be confined in
the ‘‘shed’’—a place of confinement for ill-disposed and refrac-
tory paupers. ‘The shed is a kind of dungeon in the basement
story of the building, two feet below the surface, where they
are at times huddled in by crowds, like the victims of the Black
Hole of Calcutta.

This pleasant apartment communicates with a yard forty feet

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. yy

long, and fifteen broad, with a flagged pavement, and high walls
like that of a penitentiary : it is always kept locked. It resembles
in many respects, the Roman Ergastulum, a place of confine-
ment for runaway slaves.

The system of farming out paupers, especially children, is
one of the most prolific sources of misery among the English
poor, who are compelled to appeal to the parish authorities.
This practice consists in entering into contracts with individuals
to supply the paupers with food, clothing and lodging. This is
put up at auction, and the man who offers to perform the work
the cheapest commonly gets the contract. It is said that during
the last visit of the cholera to England, a large number of
farmed paupers were crowded, by one Mr. Drouet, a contractor,
into a close and filthy building, where they nearly all perished.
But another of the most oppressive features of the English poor
laws is that called ‘‘ Chargeability.’’ ‘‘ Chargeability (says a
writer in Chambers’ Journal) is the English slave system. The
poor man cannot go where he lists in search of employment —
he may become chargeable. He cannot take a good place which
may be offered him, for he cannot get a residence lest he become
chargeable (7. e. a pauper). Thus houses are pulled down over
the heads of honest working-men, and poor people are driven
from Dan to Beersheba, lest they become chargeable.’’

By this arrangement of parochial settlement, the English
agricultural laborer has a compulsory residence like that of an
American slave upon the plantation where he is born. This
gives rise to those distressing accounts that we see of the
immense distance that laborers often walk to their daily labors.
For the shocking accounts of the miseries attendant upon the
slavery of the Irish, we must refer the reader to the numerous
accounts that have filled the public prints in both Europe and
America.’

The condition of the Irish peasantry has long been most
miserable. Untiring toil for the lords of the soil affords the
laborers only such a living as an American slave would despise.
Hovels, not fit for pig-styes — rags for clothing — potatoes for
food, are the allotment of these poor people. Who can read the
terrible accounts of the thousands of these hapless wretches
turned out of their miserable huts at the will of their lords
without a home or any possible means of subsistence, and left
to perish by starvation upon the highway, and so pervert the
meaning of language, and shock their own sensibilities, as to

1 See White Slaves of England, p. 284. Giles’ Essays, Ireland.
24

278 THE ABOLITIONISTS :

call these people free? In the language of O’Connell, in his
Repeal Declaration of July 27, 1841: ‘‘No people on the
face of the earth pay to another such a tribute for permission
to live, as Ireland pays to England. There is nothing like it
in ancient or modern history. It is a solecism in political
economy, inflicted upon Ireland alone, of all the nations that
are or ever were.’’? While Clarkson and Wilberforce were
laboring for the cause of negro emancipation thousands of
miles away, they overlooked the most hideous system of slavery
at their very doors—the slavery of a people, too, capable of
enjoying the highest degree of civil and religious freedom.
And this is the accursed stigma peculiar to British slavery, that
it enslaves the best and purest blood of the human family.
Hebrew could not absolutely enslave Hebrew, Greek could not
enslave Greek, Romans could not enslave their own country-
men; but it remains for Christian England alone to reduce to
the most abject and servile bondage her own kindred blood,
the noblest and best of the Anglo-Saxon race.

The moral degradation and mental darkness of the laboring
classes in Great Britain in the middle of the nineteenth century,
are appalling to contemplate. Beneath the wing of a govern-
ment professedly Christian, there is sheltered a vast number of
people who must be characterized as heathen, and as fit subjects
of missionary labors as are the dark sons of India and Africa.
They know nothing of God but his prevailing name; and the
Bible’s light is hid from them as completely as if its pages were
inscribed with Egyptian hieroglyphics. Their code of morals
is the creation of their own sensual inclinations. The mode
of life that they are compelled to live, is fraught with the most
debasing consequences upon their moral and intellectual char-
acter. The majority of the cottages in which they live have
but two small rooms; in one of which, husband and wife, young
men and young women, boys and girls, and often a married son
and his wife, all sleep together. Says Mr. Kay :—

‘‘People of both sexes, and of all ages, both married and
unmarried — parents, brothers, sisters, and strangers — sleep
in the same rooms,.and often in the same beds. One gentle-
man tells us of six people of different sexes and ages, two of
whom were man and wife, sleeping in the same bed. Another,
of the uncle’s and nieces in the same bed together. Many tell
us of adult brothers and sisters sleeping in the same beds
together; others tell us of rooms so filled with beds that there
is no space between them, but that brothers, sisters, and parents
crawl over each other half naked, in order to get to their

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 279

resting-places; another, of its being common for women and
men not being relations, to undress together in the same room
withont any feelings of indelicacy, and many other scenes too
horrible to be alluded to. Nor are these solitary instances,
but similar reports are given by gentlemen writing in all parts
of the country.’’

This is but a slight glance at the true picture of the life of
an English peasant, or slave, which is the same. For the
startling developments of crime in its various forms, particularly
that of adultery, incest, bastardy, and the like, we must refer
the reader to the statistics of Mr. Cobden, in the White Slaves
of England.

Who can contemplate, without feelings of horror, hundreds
of thousands of human beings driven into this terrible abyss
of crime and misery by the iron rule of aristocracy ! Who ever
heard of such brutalizing scenes among the slave population
of the Southern States! No; dissolute and licentious as they
naturally are, no such degrading scenes are ever witnessed
among them; they possess a sufficient sense of decency and
self-respect to preclude every possible idea of any such a loath-
some state of existence.

Much has been said of the philanthropy of England displayed
in the emancipation of the slaves of the West Indies; but it
has resulted only in depreciating the value of those islands, per-
mitting a half-tamed race to degenerate into their native
barbarism, and in adding about seventy millions of pounds to
the national debt to be paid by the sweat and blood of her
white slaves at home. This is termed a grand act of humanity,
to increase their poverty, pauperism, and wretchedness at
home, to permit a few hundred thousand semi-barbarians to
degenerate into their native savage state. The negroes, being
free, with the indolence inherent in their natures, would not
work; consequently it became necessary to substitute other
laborers in place of the freed negroes, and hence the origin of
the importation of the Coolies of India to the Antilles for
experiment. These laborers were generally sober, steady, and
industrious; but how were they treated? A colonist of Mar-
tinique, who visited Trinidad in June, 1848, thus writes to a
French author of a treatise on free and slave labor :—

“Tf I could fully describe to you the evils and sufferings en-
dured by the Indian emigrants (Coolies) in that horribly-
governed colony, I should rend the heart of the Christian world
by a recital of enormities unknown in the worst periods of
Colonial slavery. . . My soul has been deeply afflicted by all

280 THE ABOLITIONISTS.

that I have seen. How many human beings lost! So far as
I can judge, in spite of their wasting away, all the young are
perishing under the weight of disease. . . In less than one
year, as is shown by official documents, two thousand corpses
of these unfortunate creatures have furnished food for the crows
of the island.’”? But how is this strange and astounding state-
ment to be accounted for? If disease renders a Coolie inca-
pable of work, he is driven from his habitation. This happens
continually; he is not, in that case, even paid his wages.
What, then, can the unfortunate creature do? Very different
from the case of the slave, far distant from his country, without
food, without money; disease, the result of insufficient food
and too severe labor, makes it impossible for him to find em-
ployment. He drags himself into the forests, or upon the skirts
of the roads, lies there and dies !}

In Mauritius, the Coolies are also in a miserable condition ;
a large number of the Indian convicts have been transported
to this island, and their slavery is deplorable. Backhouse, who
visited the island when these poor wretches were not so nume-
rous as they now are, says: ‘Among the Indian convicts work-
ing on the road, we noticed one wearing chains; several had a
slight single ring round the ankle. . . There are about seven
hundred of them in the island.’’?

Hence we see, that after that memorable act of humanity on
the part of the English Parliament, in emancipating the negroes,
for which the pauper laborers of Great Britain had to pay by
their own slavery, the Colonial Government created another
system, attended with the misery and degradation of a people
better fitted for freedom than the negroes. And yet the English
aristocracy constantly thank God that they are holier than other
nations.

But the last, and one of the most repulsive forms of British
oppression which we shall notice, is

Slavery in British India.

The policy of the Hast India Company, and of British con-
querors in India, was fully illustrated during the gubernatorial
term of Warren Hastings.

The rich and populous peninsula of Hindostan has suffered
greatly from the crushing effects of the British slave system.

1 See White Slaves of England, p. 434. Also Slave Trade, peupeggeey
and Foreign, by H. C. Carey.
2 See Backhouse’s Visit to Mauritius. Also Bigelow’s Jamaica in 1850,

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 281

These vast and magnificent tracts of country have been wasted
with fire and sword, in punishment of the native princes for
refusing to become slaves. There the fat of the land has been
garnered up for the luxury of the conquerors, while famine has
destroyed the people by thousands. There, indeed, have the
British aristocracy, tempted by the love of gold, displayed its
most malignant propensities. In the last charter granted to
the East India Company, in 1834, a clause was introduced,
binding a secret committee of the Company, consisting of three
persons only, the chairman, deputy chairman, and senior di-
rector, who are solemnly sworn to this work: to receive all
private dispatches from the home board of control, and without
communicating them to a single individual besides themselves,
to forward them to India, where the receivers are bound, with-
out question or appeal, to enforce their immediate execution.

By this inquisitorial system, this worse than Spanish or
Venetian system of secret decrees, the British Government has
reserved to itself a direction of the affairs of India, freed from
all constitutional or representative check, and reduced the East
India Company to a mere cat’s-paw. By this sworn secresy,
and implicit obedience to this mysterious triumvirate, the Com-
pany is made the unconscious instrument of measures the most
hostile to its own interests. It may, at any hour, become the
medium of a secret order that may threaten the very destruction
of its empire. Such was the case with the war of Cabul. The
aristocratic government at home planned and ordered it; and
the unconscious Company was made at once to carry out a
scheme so atrocious, so wicked and unprincipled, as well as so
destructive to its plans of civil economy, and to bear also the
infamy of the same.’

Says Mr. Cobden: From the earliest times the ‘village
system,’’ with its almost patriarchal regulations, seems to have
prevailed in Hindostan. Lach village had its distinct organi-
zation, and over a certain number of villages, or a district, was
a hereditary chief and an accountant, both possessing great
local influence and authority, and certain estates.2 The Hin-
doos were strongly attached to their native villages, and could
only be forced to abandon them by the most constant oppres-
sion. Dynasties might change, and revolutions might oecur,
but so long as each little community remained undisturbed, the
Hindoos were contented.

1 See Aristocracy of England, by John Hampden, Jr. Also Mills’ His-

tory of British India.
2 Briggs’ Historical Fragments.

24 *

282 THE ABOLITIONISTS:

Mohammedan conquerors left this beautiful system, which
included much more of genuine freedom than the British insti-
tutions of the present day, untouched. The English conquer-
ors were not so merciful, although they were acquainted with
Christianity. The destruction of local organizations, and the
centralization of authority, which is always attended with
increase of slavery, have been the aims of English efforts.?

The principle that the government is the sole proprietor of
the soil, and therefore entitled to a large share of the produce,
has been established, and slavery, to escape famine and death,
has become necessary to the Hindoos. |

From free communities, these once happy little villages were
reduced to the condition of British tenants at will. The Ze-
mindaree system was first applied to Bengal. This struck a
fatal blow at all local organizations, which were the sources of
freedom and happiness among the Hindoos. Government
assumed all the functions of an immediate landholder, and dealt
with individual cultivators as its own tenants, getting as much
out of them as possible.

The Zemindars are an unthrifty, rack-renting class, and, like
the lay proctors of some absentee landlord of Ireland, take the
uttermost farthing from the under-tenants. Oppression and
eviction are their constant employment; and since they have
been constituted a landed aristocracy, they have fully acted out
the character in genuine British fashion.”

Another of the most distressing and destructive features of
British slavery in India is the government monopoly in the salt
trade. The salt consumed in India must be purchased through
the government, at a duty of upwards of two pounds per ton,
making the price to the consumer about eight-pence per pound.
In England, salt may be purchased by retail, three pounds, or
wholesale, five pounds for one penny; while in India, upwards
of thirty millions of persons, whose average incomes do not
amount to above three shillings a week, are compelled to expend
one-fourth of that pittance in salt for themselves and their fami-
lies. It may naturally be inferred that, with such a heavy duty
upon this important necessary of life, underhand measures
would be adopted by the poor natives for supplying themselves.
But the most stringent regulations are adopted by the govern-
ment to prevent smuggling of this character.®

Says Mr. Howit: ‘‘The Hast India Company exists by mo-

1 Slave Trade, Ancient and Modern, by H. C. Carey.

2 Campbell’s Modern India.
8 See Household Words. White Slaves of England, p. 460.

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 283

nopolies of the land, of the opium, and of the salt. By their
narrow, greedy and purblind management of these resources,
they have contrived to reduce that once affluent country to the
uttermost depths of poverty and pauperism. The people starve
and perish in famine, every now and then, by half a million at
a time. . . We have some glimpses of the treatment of the
people in the collection of the land tax, as it is called, but
really the rent. . . The government claim the land in fee sim-
ple. . . The same system is pursued in the opium monopoly.
The finest lands are taken for the cultivation of the poppy ; the
government gives the natives what they please for the opium,
and ship it off to curse China with. ‘In India,’ says a writer
in the Chinese Repository, ‘the extent of territory occupied
with the cultivation of the poppy, and the amount of population
engaged in its cultivation and preparation, are five times
greater than in any other part of the world.’ Turkey is said to
produce only 2000 chests of opium annually ; India produces
40,000, of 134 lbs. each, and yielding a revenue of about four
million pounds sterling. But worse than all [‘and most to be
deplored, as human nature’s broadest, foulest blot’ | is the
salt monopoly. It is well known that the people of India are
habituated to only a vegetable diet. Boiled rice is their chief
food, and salt is an absolute necessary of life. With a vege-
table diet in that hot climate, without plenty of salt, putrid
diseases and rapid mortality are inevitable. Nature or Provi-
dence has therefore given them salt in abundance. The sea
throws it up to them, ready crystallized, in many places; but
the Company steps in and imposes two hundred per cent. on
this indispensable article, and guards it by such penalties that
the native dares not stoop to gather it when it lies at his feet.
The consequence is that mortality prevails, to a terrific extent
often, among the population. Officers of government are em-
ployed to destroy the salt naturally formed, and government
determines how much salt shall be annually consumed.

Now, let the people of England mark one thing. The cho-
lera originates in the East. It has visited us once, and is on
its march once more towards us.

Has any one yet imagined that this scourge may be possibly
the instrument of Divine retribution for our crimes and
cruelties? Has any one imagined that we have anything to do
with the creation of this terrible pestilence? Yet there is
scarcely a doubt that this awful instrument of death is occa-
sioned by this very monopoly of salt,—that it is the direc
work of the four-and-twenty men in Leadenhall Street. The

984 THE ABOLITIONISTS :

cholera is found to arise in the very centre of India. It com-
mences in the midst of this swarming population, which sub-
sists on vegetables, and which is deprived by the British govern-
ment of the necessary quantity of salt,’’ &c.

The evil effect of the opium trade is not confined to India
alone. The imperial government of China seeing that the
traffic in opium was sowing misery and death among its sub-
jects, prohibited the introduction of the drug within the empire
in 1889. But the British had a vast amount of capital at stake,
and the profits of the trade were too great to be relinquished
for any considerations of humanity. War was declared ; thou-
sands of the Chinese were slaughtered, and the emperor forced
to permit the destructive traffic on a more extensive scale than
ever, and to pay two millions for daring to protest against it.

The annual revenue now realized from the opium traffic
amounts to about three and a half millions of pounds sterling.
It is estimated that about four hundred thousand Chinese perish
every year in consequence of using this drug, while the amount
of individual and social misery proceeding from the same cause
is appalling to every human heart. The recent Burmese war
had for one of its objects the opening of a road to the interior
of China for the purpose of extending the opium trade.

Thus, these four-and-twenty men of Leadenhall Street, Lon-
don, have been permitted, after having perverted the use of the
fairest fields and finest land, and thus paralyzed the power and
energies of India, to send to China, not the articles the Chinese
wanted, but to force upon them the very thing, above all, that
its authorities abhorred.’

It is not for the purpose of proving that American slavery
is right, that we have attempted to show that British slavery
is wrong. We are not of that school of logicians who would
attempt to justify the sins of one nation by exposing the iniqui-
ties of another. But, after what has been said in the foregoing
pages upon that subject, we appeal to a candid world to decide
the question of consistency and sincerity of these latter-day
apostles of liberty and humanity known as Abolitionists in both
England and America; those holy abhorrers of negro wrongs.
England, who has taxed and extorted sweat and blood from a
starving and helpless population, at home and abroad, to abo-

1 For the horrors of the opium trade, see Medhurst’s China, Thelwall’s
Iniquities of the Opium Trade, and Montgomery Martin’s Opium in China.
It is well. known what horrors, crimes, impoverishment and destruction
of families, the rage of opium-smoking introduced among millions of the
Chinese.

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 285

lish negro slavery in her empire; to maintain a cruising fleet
upon the coast of Africa to suppress the African slave trade,
and who drained nearly the last drop of the life-blood of her
laboring people, to maintain her fleets and armies in the trian-
gular fight in the Crimea, is the great centre and radiator of
the worst form of slavery that the world has ever witnessed.
She has studded the ocean with her sails; girdled the earth with
the track of her dominion, and stretched the broad wing of her
empire over one-fourth of the groaning globe. But the most
abhorrent forms of slavery, physical oppression, suffering, and
death, have everywhere sprung up in her footsteps. And such,
too, as find no parallel in any age or nation.

The poor Coolie’s long catalogue of suffering may be all
faithfully told ; the poor Irish peasant may struggle through
the brief period allotted to his existence, writhing constantly
under the stinging lash of hunger, and finally perish by starva-
tion; a faithful picture of all the horrors of British slavery at
home and abroad, may be presented; and not a sigh is ever
breathed for their suffering ; not a tear of sympathy ever shed
over their graves. Yet, about negro wrongs, the Abolitionists
preach and pray; yea, “make long prayers at the corners of
the streets, and in the synagogues.’’ Surely these telescopic
philanthropists must be possessed of distorted visions or sensi-
bilities, who can see no wrongs but those inflicted on a sable
victim.

Go with them to the fairest portions of India where the soil
now lies under the curse of British slavery. It has become the
burying-place of millions who die upon its bosom crying for
bread. Show them, upon the plains of the Bengal Presidency,
the bleaching skeletons of five hundred thousand human beings
who perished of hunger in the space of a few short months ;
yes, died of hunger in what is called the granary of the world.
Let them inhale the air, poisoned for miles by the effluvia
emanating from the putrefying bodies of the dead. Let them
behold the rivers choked with the corpses thrown into their
channels; mothers casting their little ones beneath the dark
rolling waves, because they would not see them draw their last
gasp, and feel them stiffen in their arms. Let them behold the
jackals and vultures approach and fasten upon the bodies of
men, women, and children, even before life was extinct; while
madness, disease, and despair stalked abroad with no human
power present to arrest its progress. Show them even this
terrible carnival of death, under the van of the English flag, in
devoted India, in the reign of Victoria the First; and they

286 THE ABOLITIONISTS:

will tell you it is all the work of Christian England, of a
Christian princess, and a Christian aristocracy, who are send-
ing Christian missionaries into all the world to preach the Gos-
pel; who have abolished African slavery, and are laboring to
abolish the African slave trade: it must all be right.

Oh consistency! thou art a jewel! The Abolitionisis of
America constantly look to England for encouragement, coun-
tenance, and support; and he who has done most faithfully the
work of treason against the Constitution and laws of his coun-
try, is invited home to his foster-mother with the welcome
plaudit, ‘‘ Well done, thou good and faithful servant.’”? While
justice, humanity, and the spirit of the age, demand the aboli-
tion of this exhausting, famine-breeding, and murderous system
of British slavery, they see nothing in it to condemn. Though
it is hostile to every principle of right, to civilization, to the
loving spirit of Christianity; though starving millions groan
beneath its yoke, it is no evil in their sight. Their ears are deaf
to all cries; their souls are impervious to all sense of wrong,
except those of the negroes in America. From the crowded
factories and work-shops ; from the pestilential hovel; from the
dark and slave-filled coal-pits; from populous work-houses ;
from the vast army of wandering beggars in England and Scot-
land; from the perishing peasantry ; from the wretched Hin-
doos upon the Ganges and the Indus; from the lowest depths
of misery among the betrayed Coolies of the West Indies, may
arise the cry for relief from their plunderers and their oppres-
sors, yet no sound of their supplication ever reaches the ears of
the Abolitionists. And we must say of them, as was said of
Ephraim of old, they are ‘‘ joined to their idols, let them alone. ”’
Speaking after the manner of “a plain blunt man,’’ we say
such philanthropists are hollow-hearted hypocrites, disunionists,
and traitors, willing to be used as a cat’s-paw, in the hand of
England, to sow the seed of disaffection, dissension, and dis-
union in the bosom of their own country; like Judas of old, to
betray the pride and glory of America into the hands of its
enemies. Benedict Arnold was pampered and caressed by the
English aristocracy, so long as he could be used as a vile tool,
to betray the strongholds of our national defence into the hands
of the British army; but, when these offices had ceased, and
he could be no longer used for that purpose, he was avoided
as a traitor, cast out from all sympathy, and even sunk lower
in the estimation of every high-minded Englishman, if possible,
than in that of his own countrymen.

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 287

Conscience and ‘‘ Higher Law.’’

But the Abolitionists profess to meet the charge of toryism
and apostacy towards the Constitution and towards their
country, with the plea of conscience and that ‘‘ higher law’’
than the laws of the government and permanent law of the
land. All questions of construction and political obligations
are referred to the self-constituted tribunal of conscience. But
what is the history of this mysterious being? It is but a bundle
of inconsistencies, a bloody paragon of absurdities. It is
written in characters ‘‘ blacked through the damning drops that
fall from the denouncing angel’s pen.’’ Conscience administered
the cup of poison to the lips of Socrates; she prompted the
atrocities of the wicked reign of Nero, and dealt the severest
blows of blood and cruelty to the meek and lowly followers of
the Lamb. Conscience was the amicus curie of Pontius Pilate,
the condemner of the Saviour to the cross; the sun hid its face
in the firmament and rocks were rent asunder on the day of the
crucifixion, at this terrible deed of Jewish conscience. It was
the same conscience that hurried on St. Paul to Damascus, to
bring back the Christians bound to Jerusalem ; and that moved
him to send back the Christian slave Onesimus from Rome to
his master at Colosse. Ignatius Loyola had a conscience ;
Xavier was a vain boaster of his conscience, yet the conscience
of the one, upon the principles of that ‘‘ higher law’’ of which
we hear, founded the tribunal of the Inquisition in Europe, and
that of the other, the same institution in Asia. St. Dominic
left a standing monument to the memory of his conscience and
the prevalence of that ‘‘ higher law,’’ at Languedoc. As the
perfect lover of truth, this same conscience imprisoned Galileo,
and long suppressed the beautiful theory of Copernicus. Con-
science was mistress of the secret and bloody tragedies of the
‘“‘higher law’’ of the Inquisition. Conscience was the ruling
genius of the reign of Bloody Mary; she lighted the bigot’s
torch at St. Paul’s Cross, and glowered over the cinders at
Smithfield ; she wielded the axe of the guillotine, and plied the
knife of the executioner. But Mary was a very conscientious
woman; so was James the Second a conscientious man; and
even Jefferies made noisy boasts about his conscience. ‘‘ The
Grand Duke Constantine was a very conscientious and pious
man, he said grace before he swallowed Poland.’’? The Hindoo
mother, who throws her child into the Ganges, or ascends the
funeral pile to mingle her ashes with those of her deceased hus-
band, is urged on to the daring deed by conscience. And even

288 THE ABOLITIONISTS :

the poor deluded African pleads conscience in justification of
the horrid ceremony of sprinkling the graves of his ancestors
with the blood of his fellow-beings.

But even Puritanical conscience, purified by the fires of regal
persecution, is scarcely less inconsistent and absurd. What,
then, is

The History of New England Conscience ?

Endicott, the first governor of Massachusetts Colony, early
commenced the work of bigotry and intolerance. In 1628, he
enforced the same laws which had driven the Puritans from
their native country. He banished two of the principal
offenders, men of respectability and standing, for laxity of
religious sentiments, and sent them back to England. But the
very men who countenanced this, lived to see their own grand-
children excluded for the same reason. Coddington, dn eminent
man of Boston, was banished for holding to the errors of Ann
Hutchinson. At the first general court held at Charlestown,
on board the ship Arabella, a law was passed that none should
be admitted as free men into the colony, or enjoy any rights of
the same, but such as had been received as members of the
Established Church.t In 1656 commenced the well-known
Quaker persecution, a number of them having arrived in that
year. They were immediately outlawed; some of them ban-
ished, and others actually hung. They fled to Rhode Island,
and settled there. Severe laws were passed against their
return. All toleration was denounced in the most unmeasured
terms. _One Mr. Dudley Deal, a very pious and devout man,
went constantly with a copy of some verses in his pocket, that
commenced thus : —

‘¢Let men of God in courts and church keep watch
O’er such as do a toleration hatch.”

The Antibaptists were the next sufferers ; some were disfran-
chised, and many were banished. The celebrated John Clark,
one of the first settlers of Newport, Rhode Island, was sentenced
to pay twenty pounds, and be whipped, July 20, 1651, by the
Court of Assistants, held in Boston. He was thrust into prison,
and on the 31st of the same month the said sentence was
executed upon him. A Mrs. Holmes was also sentenced to pay
thirty pounds, and be whipped; a Mr. Crandell five pounds,
and be whipped ; and all for differing from the church upon the
subject of infant baptism.

1 The account of the banishment of Roger Williams is familiar to all.

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 289

Mary Dyre, a Quakeress, was sentenced and executed for
returning to Massachusetts. The great and pious William
Robinson and Marmaduke Stephenson, were sentenced and
executed on the 20th of October, 1659, for a like reason. The
poor helpless witches of Salem, and other places, fell the next
victims to the relentless bigotry and intolerance of New Eng-
land conscience.

Here is an instance of the most fatal illustration of the
practical effects of the Seward ‘‘ higher law’’ system in the
direction of public affairs. Conscience was the amicus curice
and ruling genius of this unparalleled outrage. About 1690
this strange infatuation commenced its career. The innocent
sufferers were accused of being wizard spirits colleagued with
the devil to overthrow the holy religion established by the
Puritans, and to undermine the prosperity and happiness of the
colony. Like wildfire it spread till it enveloped the whole
colony, and filled the land with consternation and dread.» Men,
women, and children, of all ranks, were accused of the wizard
malady. No one dared to raise a warning voice to stay its
terrible progress, lest a conspiracy should be set on foot to
bring him into the limits of the accusation. The governor,
lieutenant-governor, and council, terror-stricken with the alarm,
as was usual in cases of great national calamities, appointed a
day of solemn observance to consult upon the best means for
their future safety. On the 15th of June, 1698, by order of
Sir William Phips, governor, and Mr. Stoughton, lieutenant-
governor, the most eminent divines were called together to give
them their wisdom, their weight and influence, of this body of
New England clergymen; as is often found necessary to give
direction in the management of public affairs, and to remedy
great moral and political evils. They assembled in solemn
convocation to aid the civil authorities in suppressing the moral
and political bane of witchcraft. This conscientious body of
the learning, wisdom, and piety of New England, acting upon
the “higher law’ principle, united in strongly recommending
the most rigorous persecution of all accused of this heinous
crime. Consequently all the accused were violently laid hold
of and arraigned for trial.

At these trials there was a new species of evidence admitted,
which I find in no other treatise on the Law of Evidence; it
was called ‘‘ Spectre Evidence,’’ for which I find no accurate
definition ; but it appears that this class of evidence was finally
done away with on a resolution of the clergy—‘‘ that the devil
himself might assume the shape of a good man, and appear

25 ps

290 THE ABOLITIONISTS:

among them to deceive the people.’’ But this was after twenty-
eight innocent persons had been capitally convicted, nineteen
hanged, and one. pressed to death for refusing to plead. At the
trial of one Burroughs, a most respectable clergyman, who had
publicly tried to convince the people of their delusion, the
witnesses testified that they saw the devil standing by, to put
words into his mouth. This, perhaps, is what is meant by
** Spectre Evidence.’’

It was here that the celebrated and conscientious Samuel
Sewell first acquired his notoriety. He sat upon the bench at
Salem during these trials, and concurred in the condemnation
of these persons. He became so thoroughly imbued with the
doctrine of the infallibility of conscience, and so thoroughly
schooled in the true principles of ‘‘ higher law,’’ morals, and
Christian philanthropy, that he soon came out (as the first
agitator of the subject) with a pamphlet against slavery; as
he says in his diary, that “he essayed to prevent negroes and
Indians from being rated as cattle and beasts.’? Here, it
appears, is where abolition in New England first took its source.

Cotton Mather looked upon an African slave as a great
blessing to himself; he had no conscientious scruples upon the
subject. The Rev. Dr. Styles was conscientious in advocating
the system both by precept and example. The same may he
said of Gov. Winthrop, Dr. Edwards, and many distinguished
men in our colonial history, as will be seen in the following
Essay. Such is the brief history of conscience; such was New
England conscience during parts of the seventeenth and eigh-
teenth centuries. But we shall be told that the enlightened
conscience of the nineteenth century is not accountable for the
darkness and errors that pervaded generations so long passed
away; that the light and knowledge which have since beamed
npon her pathway, have corrected all her aberrant peculiarities
and tendencies, and brought her back to a perfect knowledge
of truth and rectitude; that she is no longer to be charged
with the errors and peccadilloes of a perverted conscience. But
this logic savors of the petitio principti, or the begging the
question. Will you allow us no conscience? ‘‘ Who made
thee a ruler and a judge over us? Wilt thou slay us as thou
didst the Egyptian yesterday ?’? Ye whose consciences have
raised the standard of nullification and revolt against the
government upon the “higher law’’ principles, overleaped
the Constitution, ignored all political obligations, and would
even trample the Bible in the dust if opposed to its mad career
—will you allow us no conscience in this matter ? How say you

CONSISTENCY OF THEIR LABORS. 29)

that we are on the side of perverted conscience? Do you take
it from the Bible? But we have shown that Moses and the
Prophets, St. Paul, and the Apostles, unfortunately, differ from
you in opinion. We prefer to adopt their precepts, doctrines,
and opinions upon this subject to those of Abolition commen-
tators, and latter-day theologians, and monomaniacs, who enjoy
but intervals of mental ratiocination. We hurl back the charge
upon you, that you have the perverted conscience ; that you are
the blinded bigots, the misguided zealots who are hurrying on
with the torch-lights in your hands in the bloody footprints of
the worst forms of persecution. From the history of conscience
we are naturally led to inquire into the laws of its operations,
and the philosophy of its existence. It is held by some men-
tal philosophers to be a distinct and independent faculty of the
mind, always approving what is right and rejecting what is
wrong. It is classed with memory, reason, and imagination,
as @ separate power that enables us to determine between right
and wrong, as we determine between the size, form, position,
and color of different objects, as we retain the idea of events
that have passed, distinguish between truth and falsehood, or
picture to the fancy ideal existence.

But it is not our purpose to enter into the metaphysical la-
byrinth of this controversy, but briefly to analyze the consti-
tuent principles of conscience, and leave the advocates of the
different theories to fix upon terms that best suit their own
views. If we can fix upon a true rule of interpretation of what
is right, there will be no difficulty in determining what is wrong.
Why, then, is an act said to be right? Or, what is the true
standard by which to determine the character of the act in that
respect? One answers that it is its consistency with the moral
law. But this is but shifting the difficulty into another form.
Different nations have different codes of moral, as well as of
civil law. And even individuals may honestly differ upon the
true interpretation of moral law as upon any other subject.
By custom, education, and locality, the moral law becomes all
things to all men. One will say that the moral law is supreme;
and absolves him from all obedience to the civil law in cases of
their fancied conflict. Another teaches him to be obedient to
the powers that be, to render unto Cesar the things that are
Cesar’s, &c. In this conflict of conscience, what is to be done?
We have, as yet, made no progress towards a true rule of in-
terpretation of right and wrong.

As Cicero once said, ‘‘If there be a Supreme Being that
governs all things, and a hereafter of rewards and punish-

292 THE ABOLITIONISTS, &C.

ments, as our fathers have taught us,’’ then there must be such
an idea as consistency and inconsistency with the laws of his
moral government, or right and wrong in an absolute sense.

If, in the language of the poet, ‘‘ Whatever is, is right,”
then there can be no such thing as government or law, the whole
must resolve itself into a blind rule of necessity, and there could
be no such thing as accountability or moral action. But how
can these absolute and abstract rules of the Supreme Being be
applicable to the actions of mankind? Should they be obeyed
because they are right? Or, are they right because they re-
quire obedience? We answer in favor of the former; the lat-
ter would make them but a set of rules depending, for their _
binding force on mankind, only upon the arbitrary will of the
Law-Giver. Hence, the precepts of the moral law, when
rightly understood, are to right what demonstration is to truth.

The absolute principle of right has a necessary existence an-
terior to all commandments, as much as truth is anterior to the
fact of its demonstration. A thing, then, may be said to be
right when it has an exact fitness to all other things in all their
most minute and comprehensive relations to one another. This
is harmony ; it is in unison with the great plan of government
and laws of the Supreme Ruler of all things. Mankind have
an intuitive notion or idea of the existence of such a principle,
and of the necessity of its prevalence, the same as they have
of the necessity existing between cause and effect. And this
inward consciousness which they have of its obligatory force
upon their actions, constitutes what is called moral sense, and
renders them accountable beings. But this absolute principle
of right cannot serve as a practical rule of action for any being
but Him in whom all things have their existence, and ‘‘ who
sees the end from the beginning. ’’

Right and wrong, in their relations to the finite mind of man
as a rule of action, can have but a relative signification, and
always depend, so far as man is concerned, upon the condition
and relative influences of the matters of fact, concerning which
those questions arise. And nothing but Omniscience can do
away with the province of reason and understanding in deter-
mining the path of duty and furnishing the true guide of life.

The determination of the will in all moral action is the result
of the combined influence and effect of the imagination upon
the moral sensibilities, reason, judgment, or understanding.
Habit renders this mental process as quick and unconscious to
the mind as intuition: thus, they are mistaken for one another.
Hence, if we correctly analyze this spiritual light, this silent

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 293

monitor within, that serves (as we are told) as an unerring
guide in the bosom of every mortal being, we shall find that its
constituent principles, in all ages and conditions, are dependent
entirely upon education. ‘As the twig is bent the tree is in-
clined.’’ And hence, when reason, imagination, judgment,
and the other mental faculties are overpowered by bigotry,
overheated by enthusiasm, or misguided by fanaticism, —con-
science, like the chameleon, may assume the hue of every sub-
ject with which it comes in contact, and turn into all the loath-
some shapes that have chequered its history in the past. Away,
then, with this unscriptural, law-defying, truce-breaking, Paul-
reproaching conscience, and let every man abide in the calling
wherein he is called. ‘* Art thou called to be a slave, care not
for it.”

ESSAY X.

THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF SLAVERY IN
THE UNITED STATES.

By the late decision of the Supreme Court of the United
States in the case of Scott vs. Sanford,’ some principles of
vital importance to this feature of the institution in this coun-
try, have been settled. The Court held, in that case, Ist,
‘That free negroes, of African descent, whose ancestors were
brought here as slaves, are not citizens within the meaning of
the Constitution of the United States ;’’ 2d, ‘‘ That they were
not originally numbered among the people or citizens of the
several States at the adoption of the Constitution of the United
States ;’’ 3d, ‘‘ The only two clauses in the Constitution that
point to this race, treat them as persons who were lawfully
held as property ;” 4th, ‘‘ That Congress has no constitutional
power to interfere with slavery in the territories; the territo-
ries are acquired for the common benefit of all the States, and
the people thereof have equal right to go there with their
property; that the Constitution recognizes slaves as pro-
perty, and the Government is pledged to protect them ;” 5th,
“That the Act of Congress known as the Missouri Compro-
mise was, therefore, in violation of the Constitution.’’

119 How. Rep. p. 899-554. See also pamphlet form.
25 *

294 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

Our limits in this essay will not admit of an extended review
of the masterly reasoning of the Court in that celebrated case ;
indeed, no review can improve it—no abstract can do it jus-
tice; we can but refer to the opinion as a whole. In many
respects, it is one of the most important cases that can be
found in the history of this or any other nation. The sympa-
thies of the whole nation were deeply enlisted in the cause.
Interests of incalculable magnitude were indirectly involved in
the results. Principles that have shook the foundation of the
Union to its centre, were put at issue in the contest; principles
that not only the peaceable administration of the Government,
but the sternest dictates of public justice and national equality,
have long demanded a constitutional adjudication at the hands
of the Federal judiciary, are here settled. These elements of
political strife have all here found their quietus. A. geographi-
cal line invidiously drawn between slave and free territory, with
the worst forms of political antagonisms raging on either side,
has been blotted out by the invincible power of constitutional
law. With the aid of the power of the nation, it may yet
work out its political salvation. The issues in this case are
not measured by individual interests; it was a national con-
test between the two nominal sections of this vast Union; and
the decision stands unrivalled in the magnitude of these national
adjudications. If this view of the case could have prompted
the Court to an effort commensurate with the majesty and im-
portance of the subject-matter, they have proved their ability
fully adequate to the undertaking. This decision will form an
important era in the judicial history of the country, and will
go down to posterity as an imperishable monument to perpe-
tuate, in grateful recollection, the sterling integrity and intel-
lectual power of those who have reared it. It is founded
upon the rock of truth, and ‘‘the gates of hell cannot prevail
against it.’?

Thus has our enemy been shorn of his locks; thus has the
weird monster, Fanaticism, been decapitated ; but he dies not
without a struggle. As it took the Republic of Rome three
hundred years to die, so the Black Republic in America may
for a while struggle in the violent throes and agonies of her
approaching dissolution. But the fiat has gone forth — the
culprit has been sentenced, and his doom is sealed. No effort
was spared to parry the blow about to be dealt upon his guilty
head. He found his sympathizers and abettors of the tribunal
even before which he had been arraigned. These captious
dissenters (captores legium) would fain have thwarted the

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 295

great national purposes of this decision, by the merest subtlety
that could be devised: they have rung their paralogies upon
every available technicality within the legal vocabulary, to
arrest the judgment, and obtain a respite: never did a tyro
at the bar play more ingeniously upon his technical quibbles
to save his victim from the gallows. <A brief review of their
positions may not be inappropriate. And in attempting this,
we hope to be able to illustrate the optical anomaly, that great
men are the only objects in the universe that diminish as you
approach them.

Mr. Justice Curtis says (page 577): ‘The Constitution
having recognized the rule that persons born in the several
States are citizens of the United States, one of four things
must be true: First, that the Constitution itself has described
what native-born persons shall or shall not be citizens of the
United States; or, second, that it has empowered Congress so
to do; or, third, that all free persons born within the several
States are citizens of the United States; or, fourth, that ut
has left it to each State to determine what free persons born
within tts limits shall be citizens of such State, and thereby
citizens of the United States.’? * * Therefore he says (page
588): “The conclusions at which I have arrived on this part
of the case, are, first, that the free native-born citizens of
each State are citizens of the United States ; second, that as
Sree colored persons born within some of the States are
citizens of those States, such persons are also citizens of the
United States.”

Perhaps the cheapest refutation of these sweeping proposi-
tions is the reductio ad absurdum. If this position be cor-
rect, then every free negro and every Indian born within the
limits of the territory originally belonging to the several
States, are natural-born citizens of the United States; and
we have no constitutional guarantee against having a Choctaw
chief or the son of a Guinea negro for President of the United
States. There is nothing in the Constitution itself that ex-
cludes them, or that empowers Congress to exclude them, from
the pale of citizenship. There must, then, be some limit to
the acquisition of that right. But by what authority is this
limit to be fixed? It will not for a moment be contended,
that the various Indian tribes and remnants of tribes found
roaming through the territory of the United States, in a
savage state, at the adoption of the Constitution, were a part
of ‘“‘the people,’’ and citizens within the meaning of that in-
strument. It is true that those not taxed are excluded from

296 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

the census and Federal basis of representation; but that is
only a matter of compromise, to equalize representation be-
tween the different sections of the Union; and, by itself, no
more deprives them of citizenship, than the including three-
fifths of the slave population would confer that right upon
them. How, then, is the Constitution to be construed relative
to citizenship of native-born persons? If Indians are excluded,
then why not negroes? In the case of the Cherokee Nation
vs. the State of Georgia,’ the Supreme Court of the United
States held that the Cherokees were not a foreign nation within
the meaning of the Constitution, and capable of proceeding
against the State; but it was admitted that they were a dis-
tinct political body, and capable of managing their own affairs ;
and that the several Indian tribes in the territory of the United
States had been uniformly treated as such since the settlement
of the country. The same doctrine was held in the case of
Worcester vs. the State of Georgia, by the same court.2, Upon
what legal authority are these decisions founded? The Con-
stitution is silent upon the subject ; Congress has no power to
discriminate between native-born persons as to citizenship.
But the Court based their opinion upon immemorial usage,
one of the most potent sources of law. This principle, on
authority, may apply to the exclusion of native-born negroes
as well as Indians. Hence, the ingeniously constructed propo-
sition above quoted falls to the ground. It is a blind view of
the science of human government, to say that no laws can exist
except in the prescribed forms of constitutional provisions and
legislative enactments. There is an inherent sovereignty in
the body politic that lies back of all written constitutions and
statutes. This is the authoritative source of all law, and may
establish legal principles by an expression of the popular will
through immemorial usage or custom, or by common consent,
as well as by the prescribed forms of legislation.

What, then, has been determined by custom relative to the
citizenship of the native-born negro population of the United
States? It may be premised that there is a marked distinction
between those persons who enjoy all the rights and privileges
of citizens in any one of the States and citizens proper. For
example, suppose a colony of free negroes should settle in the
State of New Hampshire from a foreign country, and by the
laws of that State every male over twenty-one, after one year’s
residence in the State, was admitted to all the rights and privi-

15 Peters’s U. 8. Rep. p. 1. 2 6 Peters’s U. 8. Rep. p. 515.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 29%

leges of native-born white citizens. This could not affect their
relation towards the Federal Government; they could never
become citizens of the United States; for, by the present law
of Congress, none but whites can be naturalized. Though they
might be eligible to the office of Governor, and both branches
of the State Legislature, yet. they would be for ever ineligible
to either house of Congress. Though the rights, privileges,
&e., appertaining to citizenship within a State may be within
her power to confer, yet citizenship itself is not; that can be
acquired only by birth or naturalization. Hence, the distinc-
tion between the citizens of any State and those of the United
States is without any difference. Every citizen of the United
States is necessarily a citizen of some one of the States or ter-
ritories, and vice versa. Hence we say, that the people of the
United States have the power, by virtue of their inherent
sovereignty, to elect or establish, by immemorial usage, or
common consent, who shall and who shall not be citizens of the
United States, under the Constitution and Acts of Congress
upon the subject. We have seen that native-born Indians have,
in this manner, been excluded. And it may safely be asserted,
that the same is true of native-born negroes. The voice of the
people, whenever and wherever it has been expressed, directly
or indirectly, upon this subject, has uniformly been in the nega-
tive. The negro race, in this and all civilized countries, occupy
a degraded condition ; they have been, by the customs and laws
of nations, considered legitimate articles of traffic. Commence
with families and neighborhoods, and go up to communities,
States, and nations, and their social and political position is
everywhere servile and dependent. From the social circle to
the public school, from the school-room to the village church,
from the court-house and jury-room to the ballot-box, and the
several offices of honor, profit, or trust, the mark of Cain is
everywhere upon them; they are not considered a part of “the
people,’’ or members of the political community, and, by com-
mon consent, are denied the rights and privileges of citizens.
These customs have given rise to a class of legislative enact-
ments by Congress, and the several States, for the political
degradation of the negro race, that are wholly inconsistent with
their position and rights as members of the political community.

We commence with the naturalization law passed in 1790,
which confines the right of becoming citizens ‘‘to aliens being
free white persons.”’ This act excludes all negroes of foreign
birth from the pale of citizenship. And why, if native-born
negroes enjoyed that right? The Constitution is silent upon

998 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

the subject, and here is an unmistakeable expression of the
popular will, founded at first upon immemorial usage, and sanc-
tioned by common consent to this day. Another of these early
laws was the first militia law, passed by the Second Congress,
in 1792. This law directs that every free, able-bodied white
male citizen shall be enrolled in the militia. It is of the spirit
of a republican government to exclude all privileged classes, to
deny all hereditary claims to pre-eminence, and to secure equal
rights to all in like circumstances. ‘‘All men (meaning poli-
tical men, or members of the political community) are created
equal,’’? &c. This is one of the civil axioms upon which the
government is founded. But in the last Act of Congress referred
to, there is a numerous class of persons denied one of the first
and dearest rights of freemen, namely, to enrol their names
in defence of their country. This inconsistency, however, with
the citizenship of negroes, is attempted to be explained by a
comparison of their position, in this particular, with that of
invalid and female citizens. But the sophistry of this shift is
manifest to the understanding of a child. This disability of
invalids and females is general in its application; it is founded
upon a good and sufficient physical cause, and operates alike
upon all classes, black and white. Here there is no unjust and
invidious distinction of citizens. But what reason is there why
an able-bodied male citizen of color should be exeluded? If
he is a citizen, he stands on a perfect equality, politically and
physically, with the white citizen of that class, except as to the
color of his skin. Now, is that of itself any better political
reason for this discrimination, than the color of his hair, or the
color of his eyes, or of family lineage? The distinction, then,
must be founded upon the want of political equality, or of citi-
zenship—for the Constitution admits of no degrees of member-
ship, in the body politic, to those in similar circumstances.
The only real standard requirements for military service recog-
nized by law, are citizenship, sex, and physical ability; and it
is not pretended that the entire negro population are deficient
in any one of these, except citizenship; and, as the color of
the skin could not alone exclude them, it must be an evidence
of something else —that is, the want of citizenship.

Again, by the Act of Congress, passed in 1813, it was ‘‘not
lawful to employ on board of any public or private vessels of
the United States, any person or persons except citizens of the
United States, or persons of color, natives of the United
States.’? By the language of this law, persons of color, though
natives, are not citizens of the United States; the distinction

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 299

is broad and marked between them. This is but another ex-
pression of the popular will, acknowledged and admitted by
common consent. Again, the laws of the several States, pro-
hibiting the intermarriage of blacks and whites, prohibiting
negroes to serve in the State militia, also their free emigration
from State to State, like the citizens of the several States, all
arose from the same source, and have been upheld and enforced
by the same authority. If negroes are citizens, these laws
amount to the worst forms of political proscription and degra-
dation.' But they have received the popular sanction from
time immemorial. Marriage, in the eve of the law, is a civil
contract, and any abridgement of the rights of citizens, in this
matter, that does not operate equally upon all classes, is an
unconstitutional proscription. The Constitution has guaran-
teed to the citizens of each State (or of the United States) the
enjoyment of all the rights, privileges and immunities of the
several States. The rights, privileges, &c., contemplated by
this provision of the Constitution, are enumerated by the Fede-
ral Court in the case of Corfield vs. Corquell.2, Among them
are found the right of suffrage, to emigrate and settle in any
of the States or territories, to contract, hold property, &c. It
is true, these rights must be exercised conformably to the regu-
lations of the State in which they are enjoyed. But these
regulations must apply to all citizens alike, in similar circum-
stances; to say that any State can create privileged classes
among the citizens of the United States, arbitrarily, is absurd.
Yet it may be said (without particularizing) that nearly every
State in the Union, free as well as slave, has prohibited the
intermarriage of colored with white persons, excluded them
from the militia rolls, prohibited their emigration from State
to State, and totally denied them the elective franchise. What
right has the State of Ohio to exclude the colored citizens of
New York from her territory, while white citizens of the latter
are freely admitted to settle and live in the former State? Is
this compatible with constitutional equality? Yet such dis-
criminations have been long acquiesced in by the people of the
United States, and by common consent and immemorial usage
have obtained the force of consistent laws. The Constitution
also provides that new States may be admitted into the Union
from the territory of the United States; yet there has not been
a single new State so admitted, with the exception of Maine,

1 See collection of these State laws by the Court, in Scott vs. Sanford,

19 How. Rep. p. 408-417. Also 2 Kent, p. 258 (n. b.).
24 Wash. C. C. Rep. 371.

300 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

without a proviso in her Constitution against negro suffrage.
And though the Constitution of the United States guarantees
to every new State admitted into the Union a republican form
of government, yet these State Constitutions have all been ap-
proved and sanctioned by Congress. Now, if negroes are citi-
zens within the meaning of the Constitution, are these State
Constitutions republican forms of government? Suppose a
territory includes a majority of native-born free negroes; these,
together with the white population, constitute the requisite
number to form a State; the white citizens form a State Con-
stitution disfranchising the blacks, thus usurping the govern-
ment; if negroes are citizens, on a political equality with the
whites, in like political circumstances, is this a republican form
of government? Here are a majority of the citizens liable to
be taxed without representation; this government does not
derive its authority from the consent of the governed. Itisa
usurpation, not in a republican, but an aristocratic form. Now,
as these State Constitutions have been sanctioned by Congress
since the formation of the government, and become absolutely
constitutional and valid by the force of precedent, custom and
common consent, it follows, necessarily, that negroes are not
considered, by the same authority, as citizens within the mean-
ing of the Constitution.

Perhaps we shall here again be met with the miserable sub-
terfuge, that the right of suffrage is not essential to citizenship,
as in the case of females and minors. But this, as we have
before remarked, scarcely deserves a serious consideration.
The civil disabilities resting upon females and minors, are
general and impartial to all in like circumstances, black as well
as white; they are presumed to be founded upon a sufficient
cause, in this: there is no political degradation, inequality, or
rank, in any class of population. This rule, therefore, may
exist without just cause of complaint ; but how can a colored
male citizen, of age, and in every respect upon a political
equality with the white, except his color or race, be proscribed ?
If this discrimination is founded upon any want of virtue,
intelligence, or moral character, it would be a violation of the
Constitution for not being general and impartial, like that of
sex and minority. If, then, the black man is a citizen, he is
excluded from the polls for no other reason than the color of
his skin, which, as we have before said, is of itself no better
reason than the color of his eyes or hair, or family lineage.

These several statute laws, opinions of the Attorney-Gene-

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 301

rals,1 and decisions of courts of justice, show that by common
consent our government is a government for the white man, that
there are no degrees of membership in the political family, and
that negroes and Indians are excluded from the body politic.’

Again, says Mr. Justice Curtis (p. 633) : ‘‘ For these reasons,
Iam of the opinion that so much of the several acts of Con-
gress as prohibit slavery, and involuntary servitude within
that part of the Territory of Wisconsin lying north of thirty-
six degrees thirty minutes, north latitude, and west of the
Mississippi, are constitutional and valid.’’ That ‘the laws
of the United States in operation in the said territory at the
time of the plaintiff’s residence there, did act directly on the
status of the plaintiff, and change ut from a slave, to that of a
free man.”’ (p. 601.)

The Territory of Wisconsin was formed in part from the
Territory of Michigan, which was included in the Virginia
Cession, and the part west of the Mississippi from the Louisi-
ana Purchase. Hence the acts of Congress here referred to,
are first, the ordinance of 1787, for the government of the North-
West Territory, or the Virginia cession north and west of the
Ohio river. Second, the act of the 7th of March, 1789, con-
tinuing the said ordinance in force under the Constitution.
Third, the act of 11th of January, 1805, extending this ordi-
nance over the Territory of Michigan. Fourth, the act of the
6th of March, 1820, known as the Missouri Compromise; and
fifth, the act of the 20th of April, 1836, extending the laws of
Michigan, and the ordinance of 1787, over this territory. The
whole question, however, may be summed up in this: Has Con-
gress the power, under the Constitution, to prohibit slavery in
the territories? for the act of the 6th of March, 1820, known
as the Missouri Compromise, is a direct exercise of that power.
The history and effect of the celebrated ordinance of 1787, we
shall defer for future consideration ;* we simply remark in this
place in reference to this act, that it was in the nature of a
remedial statute, viewed by many in the light of a perpetual
compact, and necessarily presupposed the existence or general
prevalence of the evil sought to be remedied; and viewed by

1 Opinions of Attorney-General, vol. i. p. 381.

2 Whoever wishes to examine the several laws and decisions upon this
subject more minutely, will find an interesting collection in 2d Kent, p.
258 (n. b), also at page 72 (n. a), see also p. 39.

3 See post, p. 839, et seq. Remarks upon the Constitutional Policy or
Relation of the Federal Government towards Slavery.

26

302 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

others as of no constitutional or binding force, particularly
after the adoption of the Constitution, the latter doctrine being
repeatedly held by the Supreme Court of the United States.’
Hence the mere silence of Congress, upon the sixth section or
article of this ordinance prohibiting slavery, in.extending it
over territories formed from the Virginia cession, under the
Constitution, as a convenient form of territorial government,
is no evidence of a direct expression of legislative will for or
against such a proviso. It simply shows their unwillingness to
open an angry debate upon this subject, and their willingness
to let it remain for what it was worth. But to extend this
ordinance, with its anti-slavery proviso, to new territory to
which it was not originally applicable, would amount to positive
legislation upon the subject of slavery in that territory; hence,
in every such instance, this prohibitory clause is excepted. The
only instances of direct legislation by Congress upon this subject
are in the case of Missouri and Oregon, both of which have
been substantially erased from the statute-book of the nation,
by the Compromise Act of 1850. Hence the list of acts cited
by the learned Justice Curtis (pp. 616-619) to prove the con-
structive power of Congress to prohibit slavery in the territories
by usage, stand entirely to the other side of the question. He
locates this power to Congress in the clause of the Constitution
authorizing it ‘‘to make all needful regulations for the
government of the territories,’’ &c. He infers it from this
provision of the Constitution, from the necessity of the case,
as well as from “‘a practical construction, nearly contempora-
neous with the adoption of the Constitution, continued through
a long series of years,” to which we have just alluded. He
infers it from the necessity of the case, and the probability that
the framers of the Constitution would not omit to provide for
the proper government of the territories: (pp. 606, 607.)

As to the probability that the framers of the Constitution
foresaw the necessity of empowering Congress to prohibit
slavery in the territories, we shall refer the reader principally to
our remarks hereafter upon the Policy of the Federal Govern-
ment towards the Institution of Slavery.? We will in this place
present a brief analysis of the several articles of the Constitu-
tion, manifestly founded in the spirit of compromise between

1 Pollard’s Lessee vs. Hagan, 8 How. 212. Parmale vs. First Munici-
pality of Orleans, 3 How. 589. Strader vs. Geulum, 16 How. 82. See also
remarks of Mr, Madison on the perfect nullity of this ordinance, Letter to
Robert Walsh, Nov. 27, 1819.

2 Post, p. 342, et seq.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 303

the Northern and Southern States, to show that the South was
not so hostile to her own interests as to blindly consent to em-
power Congress to circumscribe and crush her institutions, to
leave the fairest portions of the South in desolation and despair,
and blast all her future prospects for wealth, independence, and
equal power, by excluding her slave property from all the terri-
tories. We shall see by this that the doctrine of probability
also stands on the other side of the question. We commence
with the preamble. By this the first and fundamental object of
the Constitution was, ‘‘to form amore perfect Union.” Could
this be effected by excluding slavery and the slave States
entirely from the public domain? would this naturally tend to
strengthen the bonds that held the States together? The sub-
sequent history of the country furnishes a lamentable refutation
of this assertion. Second, to ‘‘ establish justice’? between the
States, and thus ‘‘insure domestic tranquillity.’’ Would this
admit of destroying their property interests ? Could Congress
in that manner ‘‘provide for the common defence,’ ‘‘ pro-
mote the general welfare ?’? &c. In what consists the means
of defence to the States, if it be not in the development of their
resources for wealth, independence and power? and what else
ean promote their general welfare? In this each State is to
be the judge of what constitutes its general welfare, which it is
the object of the Constitution and the Union to promote. But
here the question again returns with redoubled force, could this
be done by excluding slavery and the slave States from all the
public domains, or by empowering Congress so to do? Such
could not have been the understanding of the delegates and
citizens of the Southern States. Again, by Art. I., Sec. 2,
“ Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among
the several States,’? &c. No one can fail to see the spirit of
compromise in this basis of representation and taxation between
the North and the South. No so judicious a plan could have
been otherwise devised to equalize the same. The Southern
States, with their sparse population and vast amount of
unsettled and unproductive territory, with great excess in their
number of slaves, were unwilling to confide their interests to
Congress without some assurance of a respectable voice in
making the laws, and some guaranteeing against excessive and
unequal taxation. This they could not obtain without “ ex-
cluding Indians not taxed,’”’ and ‘‘including three-fifths of all
other persons in the Federal basis of representation.’’

But why would the South have been so zealous to secure to
herself a just proportion of representatives, if she had at the

304 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

same time intended to empower Congress to put an interdict
upon their increase, by excluding all new slave States from the
Union? How long could she maintain her equality on the
floor of Congress under this proscriptive policy ?

‘‘ No capitation or other direct tax shall be laid, unless in
proportion to the census or enumeration hereinbefore directed
to be taken.’’ In the case of Hylton vs. United States,'the
Supreme Court held that a tax on land and a capitation tax
are the only direct taxes within the meaning of the Constitution.
Mr. Justice Chase in that case says: ‘‘ This provision was made
in favor of the Southern States ; they possessed a large number
of slaves; they had extensive tracts of territory thinly settled
and not very productive ; a majority of the States had but few
slaves, and several of them a limited territory well settled, and
in a high state of cultivation. The Southern States, if no pro-
vision had been introduced in the Constitution, would have been
wholly at the mercy of the other States. Congress, in such a
case, might tax slaves at discretion, or arbitrarily, and land in
every part of the Union after the same rate or measure, so much
a head in the first instance, and so much an acre in the second.
To guard the South against imposition in this particular, was
the reason for introducing the clause into the Constitution
which directs that representation and direct taxes shall be
apportioned among the States according to their respective
numbers. ”’

Justice Curtis would have us believe, that while the Southern
States would not intrust the apportionment of taxes and repre-
sentation to Congress without some constitutional provision upon
the subject, lest they be at the mercy of the other States, yet,
upon the momentous question of Slavery in the Territories they
have empowered Congress to legislate without constitutional
restraint. Can it be possible that such an oversight as this
was committed by such statesmen as James Madison, Charles
Pinckney, J. Rutledge, Abr. Baldwin, et genus omne ?

‘“ No person held to service or labor in one State, under
the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence
of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such
service or labor, but SHALL BE DELIVERED UP ON CLAIM of the
party to whom such service or labor may be due.’”’? The
Northern States had comparatively few slaves at the time of
the adoption of the Constitution; and it must have been evident
to every one, from the nature of the soil and climate, and the

13 Dall. Rep. 171. 2 Const. Art. IV. Sect. 2.
p

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 305

diminutive price of slaves there, that the necessary tendency of
the institution was to become extinct in those States. Hence
this provision in the Constitution, that when hereafter any
slave or slaves should escape from the Southern States, where
Slavery would continue, into the Northern States, which would
necessarily become Free States (because none of them were yet
free), they should be given up. This provision was wholly for
the future benefit of the South. It is true, some of the Free
States have repudiated it, by nullifying the acts of Congress
for the restitution of fugitives, founded upon the same; yet the
Supreme Court of the United States, in the case of Peiggs vs.
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,’ held that the fugitive slave
law of 1793 was constitutional, and passed in pursuance of its
express provisions; that it excluded all State legislation upon
the subject, and that no State had a right to modify it, or to
impede the execution of any law of Congress upon the subject
of fugitive slaves.! Here again the property interests of the
Southern States was recognized and secured by the Constitu-
tion. In doing this, could the Southern delegation have been
so blind to their future interests as to have left their States
liable to be entirely excluded from all participation in the
peopling the Territories and in the formation of new States ?
The Southern delegates could not have been ignorant of the
vast amount of territory then belonging to the United States,
from the cessions of the several States; they could not have
been entirely ignorant of the geography and physical character
of this vast amount of territory south of the Ohio and of Ten-
nessee ; that these rich and fertile lands could never be brought
into successful cultivation except by slave labor. Can it be,
that while the Southern States were so zealous of their rights
and future interests in every other particular, as to hedge them
round with every necessary constitutional provision, and yet in
this, the most important of all, their rights and future interests
in settling up the Territories and forming of new States, they
should have left themselves entirely at the mercy of Congress
or of the other States? They had provided in the Consti-
tution that ‘‘new States might be admitted by Congress into
the Union,’’ but what benefit had they secured to themselves
from this, if they were liable to be excluded from them? So
far from any benefit, they were liable to be swallowed up by an

116 Peters’ U. S. Rep. 5389. The Constitution and laws of the United
States contemplate a summary proceeding and surrender on a claim, and
not the delay of a trial by jury, 8. C. See also Jackson vs. Martin, 12
Wendell’s Rep. 311. 2 Kent, 32.

26 * U

306 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

increasing majority, to overwhelm them and entirely annihilate
their political importance in the affairs of the nation. Such
could never have been their intention. And our learned Justice,
when he comes to examine it, will find as little authority from
the doctrine of probability for his position, as from that of con-
temporaneous construction.

This Union is a union of all the States upon political equality.
No State can be admitted into this Union under any restraint
or political inequality. It appears by Mr. Madison’s state-
ment, that there was a proposition in the Convention to dis-
criminate between old and new States, by an article in the
Constitution, which was rejected. The effect of such a dis-
crimination, he said, is sufficiently evident.! All power not
delegated by the Constitution to Congress is expressly reserved
to the States; that is, to all the States. Whatever restraint,
therefore, is imposed upon one, must be common to all. The
exercise of any power by Congress over the Territories for the
purpose of forestalling public opinion or predetermining the
political character of the domestic institutions of the States
formed out of such territory, is a partial and an unjust inter-
ference with the rights of the people, and a palpable violation
of the spirit of the Constitution. If Congress cannot abolish
Slavery in the old States, it cannot prohibit it in the new, or in
the Territories, which would be indirectly doing the same
thing. What the Constitution will not permit directly, cannot
be done indirectly ; according to a legal maxim. ‘The prohi-
bition of Slavery in a Territory as a needful regulation would
not only exclude all the citizens of the Slave States, or their
property, which would be the same thing, but it might, if legal,
involve the expropriation of millions of private property for
public use, without compensation —an assumption of power
' over Slave property that has never been exercised by the
government of any civilized nation on earth.’ Suppose that
there had been fifty thousand slaves in the Territory of Oregon
when the territorial law took effect; they would all thereby
have become free, and that, too, without compensation — an
act of confiscation unparalleled in the history of civilized
nations.” The same may be said of the Louisiana Purchase,
and the Missouri Compromise line; if that line could have
been placed where it was, it might also have been run along

1 Madison’s Letter to Robert Walsh, November 27, 1819.
2 In every instance of emancipation by the English Parliament, com-
pensation has been awarded to the owners of the slaves for their loss.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 307

the southern boundary of the territory, and instead of three-
fifths it might have left the whole territory to its north; with
this difference, however, that while in Oregon the property was
only protected by the Constitution, in Louisiana it was pro-
tected both by treaty and the Constitution. But we are told
that there were no slaves in Louisiana north of this line; also
that the slave States ought not to complain of being excluded
from the territories, as they have a fair proportion of the terri-
tory, &c. Such reasoning cannot better be characterized than
as a kind of argumentative whining that always betokens the
weakness of the cause in which it is employed. It should be
borne in mind these are great constitutional questions to be
determined upon principles entirely independent of such circum-
stances. In the phrase “‘all needful regulations,’’ our learned
Justice lays great stress upon the word ‘‘all,’’? as though the
jurisdiction of Congress in this respect admitted of no limit.
Suppose then Congress should deem it a needful regulation to
establish some particular form of religion in the territories by
law, or confer titles of nobility; or for the purpose of pro-
moting settlements it should tax the lands of non-residents
double those of residents, would our learned Justice in his seat
upon the Federal bench affirm the constitutionality of these
acts of Congress? Itrow not. For that Federal Court has
decided in the case of Loughborough vs. Blake, that the binding
force of the Constitution, which prohibits these acts, is co-ex-
tensive with the dominion of the United States, including the
territories. As Congress has no power except what it derives
from the Constitution, it can exercise none except it be under
that instrument. .
Justice M’Lean, in his dissenting opinion in this case (Scott
vs. Sandforth), page 534, says: ‘‘The civil law throughout
the continent of Europe, it is believed, without exception, is
that slavery can exist only in the territory where wt is esta-
blished; and that, if a slave escapes or is carried beyond
such territory, his master cannot reclaim him, unless by
virtue of some express stipulation.” Even admitting that
the master could not, without a treaty stipulation, recover his
slave in Europe, from a foreign nation, that would have no
bearing upon the question of the locality of slavery.. A treaty
has always been thought necessary for this purpose, even in this
country. ‘Treaties for this purpose existed even between the
colonies, while they were all alike engaged in the slave-trade
and slave-holding ; also to recover fugitives who escaped from
the United States into the Spanish dominions adjoining. Does

308 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

this prove anything with regard to the absolute locality of sla-
very? Was not slavery universal in the colonies and early
States, and the Spanish dominions? But this assertion is not
true with regard to European nations governed by the civil |
law, except where slavery had been prohibited by some royal
decree or ordinance, as it was at an early day in France.? If
the learned Justice will look into the canons of the Church,
he will find it the practice, from the days of Paul’s Epistle to
Philemon down to a late period, not only to distinctly recog-
nize and protect the right of property in the master, but to
restore him his fugitive slave.* Originally, under the civil
law, the master held his slave by virtue of the jus gentium,
and could recover him in any nation where that law prevailed
—till it became modified, in some nations, by their own muni-
cipal regulations. Again (page 629): ‘‘Slavery, being con-
trary to natural right, is created only by municipal law.”
If this proposition be self-evident, as it is asserted to be, there
could be no such thing, at common iaw, as penalties for
crimes; for every penalty is contrary to natural right. But
no: the propositions just cited are unwarranted assumptions,
unfounded in fact, untenable in truth. The original locality
or universality of slavery and the slave-trade, is necessarily, as
regards the present, a question of fact and not of law. Hence,
an appeal to its past history is of paramount authority to the
dictum of jurists or the decisions of courts of justice. No
court of justice can authoritatively determine any question
but a question of law for the present and future, within its own
territorial jurisdiction. We maintain directly the reverse of
this, viz. that slavery and the slave-trade are not founded on
municipal law, but on immemorial custom, incorporated into
the ancient and modern code of nations. That the relation of
master and slave is as old as the human family; that it rests
on the same foundation as that of husband and wife, parent
and child, and the distinctive rights of persons and things;
that it was originally universal, and sanctioned by law public
and private, human and divine; that all exceptions to its pre-
valence arise from the abrogation of universal custom, by the
potent arm of legislation.

The fundamental origin of this institution was ex jure gen-
tiwm, from a state of captivity in war ;* its continuance rested

1 See Essay VI. ante, p. 142,

2 See Essay V. Slavery in the New Testament, ante, p. 113.

3 This law of captivity was the law of the ancient world: this is shown
by reference to the Old Testament, to Plato and Aristotle, to Justinian,

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 309

on the law of birth, ‘‘ partus sequitur ventrum,”’ the offspring
follows the condition of the mother. We put the question to
these learned Justices, upon what municipal regulations did
these principles originally depend, and to what localities were
they confined ?

Law, for the government and regulation of this institution,
is the creature of slavery. The real cause and ultimate neces-
sity of human bondage in some form or other, have had, in all
ages and nations, an anterior existence to all human law;
their foundation is laid broad and deep in the philosophy of
human nature; they take their origin in the physical and men-
tal defects and imperfections of the races. Laws may, it is
true, change the form and modify, for better or for worse, the
system under which any state of servitude may exist; but
they can no more abolish the substantial relation of master
and slave, than they can do away with mental and physical
imbecility, poverty, ignorance, idiocy, lunacy, and the various
forms of mental incapacity, and their consequences upon man-
kind. In the language of Aristotle, it is the province of mind
to govern and of matter to be governed; of the strong to
command and of the weak to obey.’

These principles are universal in their application, and the
world’s history exemplifies their truth. Where is there a
nation that has no slavery or slave-trade in its history? Where
is the nation, if free, that has not become so by the potent arm
of legislation, in some form ?—by the abrogation of immemo-
rial custom? If there be now States or nations, in Europe or
America, that will not enforce this relation, it is because, like
certain other laws, it contravenes their prohibitory statutes
and sound public policy, which they have a right to regulate :
it furnishes no evidence of a territorial limit to the master’s
right, except where it is so prohibited.

Slavery and the slave-trade were originally universal by the
law of nations; approved by all public writers and moralists,
from Moses to Plato, from Aristotle to Seneca, from Cicero to
Justinian, and the publicists of the Middle Ages. No one

to the codes and publicists of the Middle Ages, to Grotius and Puffen-
dorf (the fathers of the modern law of nations), in the Ist, 2d, éd, 4th,
and 6th Essays of this work.

1 See Essay on Greek Slavery, supra, p. 55.

2 Slavery and the slave-trade are universal by the law of nations (the
jus gentium). This law, by the whole ancient world, doomed the captive
to the service of his captor. Gen. 24: 35, 36. Exod. 21: 20, 21. ro yap
wyvpiov avrov sortv; ‘* for he is his money.” Sept. Ez. 27: 18. Rev. 13: 18.

310 |. THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

‘doubted the legitimacy of the traffic, in enlightened Europe.
It was patronized and defended by the best of men. How

Joel 8: 38-8. Am. 2:6; 8:6. Na. 3:10. Nem. 5:8. Lev. 25: 44-46.
Numb. 81: 18, 82, 35, 40. Deut. 20: 14; 21: 10-12. See Essay 1. IL,
Hebrew Slavery, ante, p. 29. Ill. ix. 594: Texva dé r ‘addoi, Ke. xxii. 62,
Odyss. 146: dopiadwroi, Odyss. xv. 483. Isocr. Plates 9, p. 406: od fv’
naptov, &c. Tim. apud. Athen. vi. p. 264: Xioi mpwroi, &c. Theop. apud,
Id. 265: Mné? EAAnva dpa dovrov, &c. Plato de Rep. v. 469. De Leg. vi.
p. 777. See also Aristotle’s Eth. and Politic, by Gillis, 8d Lond. ed. vol.
ii. p. 29 et seq. Gill’s Greece, art. Slavery. Smith’s Gr. and Rom.
Antiq., art. Slavery. Essay III. Greek Slavery. ante, p. 50. Dig. Lib.
i. tit. v. Justin’s Insts. lib. i. tit. iii. sects. 3-4. Cato in Gall. vii. 4,
lib. v. 22. Cicero in Pis. 15. Plaut. Bach. 10, 7,17. Varro, R. R. i. i.
Mart. vii. 87. Essay IV. Roman Slavery, ante, p. 69. For canons of
the Church, see Essay V. Slavery in New Testament. For modern
nations, see Hall. Midd. Ages, iv. 221. Gibbon’s Decl. and Fall R. Emp.
i. 63. Essay VI. Slavery in Middle Ages, ante, p. 183. Grotius and
Puff. Verbo Slave-Trade. By several nations of Europe, slavery and
the slave-trade have been abolished. Mr. Wheaton gives a minute history
of their acts upon this subject; but it is still recognized as a principle
of national law, and the trade is legitimate to all nations that have not
so abolished it. No nation is free of it except by legislation: it is
originally universal. Wheat. Elmts. Internat. Law, p. 184 et seq. Our
learned justices are entirely mistaken as to the locality of slavery.

Case of The Diana, per Lord Stowell: he says England will not be the
custos morum of other nations upon slavery. 1 Dod. Ad. Rep. p. 96.
Slave-trade admitted to Africa by law of nations. Wheat. p. 195. In
all the European nations governed by the civil law, slavery and the slave-
trade were originally universal by the international code of Europe and
America, the Jus Gentium of Justinian. It has only been abolished by
municipal law. Says Mr. Wheaton: ‘‘The African slave-trade, though
prohibited by the municipal law of most nations, and declared to be
piracy by the statutes of Great Britain and the United States, and, since
the treaty of 1841 with Great Britain, by Austria, Prussia, and Russia,
is not such by the law of nations; and its interdiction cannot be enforced
by the exercise of the ordinary right of visitation and search. That right
does not exist, in time of peace, independent of special compact. * *
‘‘This branch of commerce, once legitimate by all European States,
made the subject of wars, negotiations, and treaties, was first success-
fully prohibited by the municipal laws of Denmark, the United States of
America, and Great Britain, to their own subjects. Its final abolition was
stipulated by the treaties of Paris, Kiel, and Ghent, in 1814; confirmed
by the declaration of the Congress of Vienna, of the 8th Feb. 1815;
and reiterated by the additional article annexed to the treaty of peace .
concluded at Paris, 20th Nov. 1815. The accession of Spain and Por-
tugal to the principles of abolition, was finally obtained by the treaties
between Great Britain and those powers, of the 23d Sept. 1817, and the
22d Jan. 1815. And by a convocation concluded with Brazil, in 1826,
it was made piratical for the subjects of that country to engage in the
trade after 1830. By the treaties of 380th Nov. 1831, and 22d May,
1833, between France and Great Britain, to which nearly all the mari-
time powers of Europe have subsequently acceded, the mutual right of

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 311

was it in the American colonies? What locality can be given
to slavery there? The illustrious Winthrop deemed Indian
captives, taken in just wars, to be lawful articles of commerce.
The Guinea trade was carried on without scruple; till, at the
Declaration of Independence, every one of the thirteen were
slave-holding colonies; and, at the adoption of the Constitu-
tion, all the States but one. Slavery, then, in this country,
certainly was originally universal. Free territory became the
exception. The original universality of slavery and the slave-
trade, both in this country and Europe, is a fixed fact in his-
tory; and the dictum of no man, nor the decision of any court
of justice, can prevail against it. The relation of master and
slave is as old and as universal as that of man and wife, or
parent and child; and rests upon the same authoritative source
of right. By analogous principles and parity of reasoning,
the master has the same right to control his slave, whose status
is such at his native domicil, wherever he may go, except in
those governments where that relation is prohibited by muni-
cipal law, as he has to control his wife or his child. And his
right of property is indisputable, as we shall show in this
essay. |

All laws upon the subject of slavery presuppose its existence
from some anterior cause; and they spring up and naturally
cluster around it as they do around any other one of the insti-
tutions that are as old as the hnman family, and lie at the foun-
dation of civil society. It is said that ‘‘ Nature makes no man
a slave; all come free from the hand of the Creator,’’ &Xc.’
This proposition is, directly, true; but, indirectly, it is not;
Nature inflicts the cause upon many men, that necessarily places
them in that condition, in their intercourse with civilized socie-
ty.’ It is not necessary to constitute slavery that the subject
search was conceded, within certain geographical limits, as a means of
suppressing this trade. The provisions of these treaties were extended
to a wider range by the Quintuple Treaty concluded on the 21st Dec.
1841, between the five great European Powers; and subsequently rati-
fied between them all, except France, which power still remained bound
only by her treaties of 1831 and 1833 with Great Britain.

‘¢The United States and Great Britain, by treaty of 9th Aug. 1842,
mutually stipulated that each should prepare, equip, and maintain in

service, on the coast of Africa, a sufficient and adequate squadron or
naval force of vessels, &c., for the suppression of the slave-trade.”

1 Pardessus’s Droit. Comm, pt. vi. tit. 7, ch. 2, sect. 1. Felix Droit.
Internal. Plive Lev. i. sect. 31. Hub. tom. ii. 1 Tit. 38. De Conftct.
Ley. sect. 12. Wheat. Elmts. International Law, p. 122.

2 See verses of Philemon, Fray, Mein, p. 410. Essay on Greek Slavery.

3 ce instances cited of voluntary slavery. Essay on Greek Slavery.

312 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

should be immediately held to service by the force of the civil
law ; there may be, and are, other causes more coercive, deadly
and fatal in their effect, from which it is physically impossible
to escape; and which subject him to a far more abject condi-
tion. It is not necessary that they should be driven by the
dread of the civil law, or the fear of the master’s lash, to render
their servitude involuntary. There may be the stinging lash of
hunger constantly preying upon the vitals of its subjects, as in
the case of British slavery. They may have the grim and
ghostly terrors of starvation and death for their slave-drivers,
stalking after them in their most livid and ghastly form.’ Nei-
ther is the right to kill, or the power of life and death over the
person, or to make merchandize of the services of the slave;
to hold them as money, and ‘‘buy them and take them for aa
inheritance for your children, that they may be your bonds-
men forever ;’’ a sine gua non to a state of involuntary servi-
tude. These are but the peculiar features of the institution
dependent upon the prevailing custom of the age and nation.

One of the most hideous features of the American system of
the present day, in the estimation of anti-slavery -people, is,
that it is termed chattel-slavery ; that it makes merchandize of
human beings, and reduces men to mere things. This, how-
ever, arises wholly from a misconception of the nature and
spirit of the institution in this country. A single ray of light,
could it but fairly find its way into the benighted mass of pub-
lic opinion, would scatter the intense cloud of darkness, upon
this point, from their view. ,

The idea of a person becoming property, a mere chattel or
thing, as a brute, a bale of merchandize and the like, subject to
be bought and sold, is but a fiction of law, for mere form or
convenience, that has no counterpart in reality. There is not,
there cannot be, under the existing form of the government,
laws, and institutions of this country, such an article of pro-
perty as the person of an individual who is (as all persons are)
held amenable to the law of the land.

In the relation of master and slave, the right of ownership

1 This was one of the terrors held up to the Greek slave, to awe him
into obedience, and submission; he was constantly reminded of its hor-
rors by a certain custom which prevailed of beating him and driving him
out of doors on a certain day of the year, called the Feast of BovAipos, or
starvation personified. See Essay on Greek Slavery, supra, p. 58. This
is very similar to the practice of some masters to drive off their runaway
slaves when they come in, to break them of the habit of running away by
starving them.

oa

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 313

or property attaches wholly to his services, and gives no right
or claim of any name or kind upon his person, farther than to
‘secure and obtain the use and benefit of those services. The
right to the services must necessarily carry with it the right, so
far, and so far only, to control the person of the slave; and
hence the ownership of the services is erroneously confounded
with that of the flesh and blood, soul and body, of the slave.

That a slave is not a chattel, and that the master has no
right of property in his flesh and blood, as such, appears from
the fact that he cannot appropriate his bones and sinews to any
other use than that of rendering service, however much more
valuable they might be for other purposes. A chattel, as a
stick of timber, a block of marble, and the like, the owner may
elect to what use they shall be consigned. But not so with the
body and limbs of the slave; those are a sacred trust placed
in the master’s hands by law for their mutual good; and only
as regards his right for a specific purpose. If he violates that
trust, the law will take it from him and punish him.

The person of the slave is not subject to ownership from the
fact that he is individually held amenable to the law; which, if
he violates, he is taken from the control of the master and
punished ; like all other persons, he must atone for a transgres-
sion of the law by suffering the penalty, and all the master can
claim of the civil authorities is remuneration for the loss of his
services.’ Is this one of the properties of a chattel? Would
it not be an anomaly in judicial proceedings to organize a court
for the trial and punishment of unruly horses and horned-cat-
tle? The right of the master to the service of the slave no
more entitles him to the ownership of his person than it does
the State to that of its paupers and convicts. It is true, in
either of these instances, that the labor of a person may and
does become an article of property, which may or may not
be alienable and heritable; and, as such, it necessarily car-
ries with it the right so far to control the person of the in-
dividual held to service. In the Southern States the right is
preserved to the master to purchase, inherit, transmit, and
alienate this species of property; and, as this carries with it
the limited right of personal discipline and control over the
subject, as in all other cases of the kind, it has, by common
gonsent and for convenience, by a fiction of law, come to be

1 In every Slave State in the Union, slaves are privileged with a trial
by jury for any indictable offence the same as any other person. They
may also appear in many of the States, if not all, in courts of justice,
and maintain an action for their freedom.

27

314 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

called the inheritance, transmission, alienation, &c. of the slave.
To disprove this exposition of the philosophy of this feature
of the institution, passages of law, like the following, are often
quoted = ‘‘ Slaves shalt be deemed, taken, and held to be chat-
tels, personal, to all intents, constructions, and purposes
whatsoever.’’? This passage of law is frequently emblazoned in
huge capitals upon Abolition books, pamphlets, and magazines,
and heralded forth to the world to prove that, by the laws of
the Slave States of this Union, the persons of the negroes are
reduced to mere chattels. But a word of, explanation; we
trust, will serve to harmonize the meaning of this quotation
with the exposition of this feature of the institution above
given. In Louisiana, and perhaps some of the other Slave
States, the property which the master has in his slaves, is taken
and held by law to be real estate, immovable by a fiction of
law,’ and each State must determine by law what caste or cha-
racter this species of property shall assume in their acts and
judicial proceedings ; whether it shall be considered real estate,
as in Louisiana, or whether it shall be considered as chattels
personal, as in the law above quoted. The sole object and
meaning, which has been so grossly and blindly perverted, is
not to brand the slave as a chattel, in contradistinction from a
person, but to mark that species of property, which the master
holds in his slave, as a chattel personal, in contradistinction
from real estate. All this, so far as regards the person of the
slave, or reducing him from a person, under the law, to a mere
chattel, is but a fiction ; in a literal sense, it renders the law in-
consistent with itself, and is absurd. There is not a State in
the Union where slaves are not deemed, taken, and held to be
persons within the meaning of the law, amenable, and protected
by the same. To maim, mutilate, or take the life of one of
them, is, in every State, a criminal offence, visited with various
penalties according to the aggravation of the crime. Homi-
cide with malice, &c. is as much murder with regard to a slave
as any other person.? But it would be a singular freak of cri-

1Tt is so also by the French and Spanish law, C. C. La., Art. 461.
Poth Commun, n. 80. Intro gen aux Cout, n. 47. C. N., Art. 523. ‘Les
tuyaux servant a la conduite des eaux dans une maison ou autre héritage,
sont immeubles, et font partie du fonds auquel ils sont attachés.” Baquoit,
5 Aofit, 1829. ‘Les négres, ou esclaves, quoique reputés immeubles lors-
quwils sont attachés dans les colonies 4 une habitation, prennent le carac-
tere de lorsqu’ils en sont détachés.” C. C. Rejet, Martinique.

2 Constitution of Texas, Art. 8, Slaves, Sect. 1: ‘*They (the Legisla-
ture) shall have power to pass laws which will oblige the owners of slaves
to treat them with humanity ; to provide for the necessary food and cloth-
ing; to abstain from all injuries to them extending to life or limb, and,

_ SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 315

minal law to condemn a man to be hung for murdering a chat-
tel, or piece of property. Such a crime can be committed only
upon a person within the power of the State.

The error and misrepresentations of Abolition writers con-
sist in citing single isolated passages and garbled extracts
from the slave code. To form a correct opinion upon this, as

in case of their neglect or refusal to comply with the directions of such
laws, to have such slaves taken from such owners and sold for his benefit.
They may also pass laws to prevent slaves from being brought into the
State as merchandize.”

Sect. 2. ‘“‘In the prosecution of slaves for a crime of a higher grade
than petit larceny, the Legislature shall have no power to deprive them
of an impartial trial by petit jury.”

Sect. 8. ‘*Any person who shall maliciously dismember or deprive a
slave of life, shall suffer the same punishment as would be inflicted in
case of such an offence against a white person, and on like proof.”

Prince’s Dig., Stat. Laws of Ga., p. 656. ‘* Any owner or employer of
a slave, or slaves, who shall cruelly treat them, by withholding proper
food, or by excessive whipping, by overworking, by not affording proper
clothing, &c., every such person shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and on
conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine and imprisonment,” &c.

See similar Statutes of Florida, Thompson’s Dig., p. 511, Art. 21, also
p. 542. In the trial of any slave in the Circuit Court, the same rules and
proceedings shall be observed as in the trials of white persons.

C. C. La., Art. 178. ‘‘The slave is entirely subject to the will of his
master, who may 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.”

Id., Art. 175. ‘* All that a slave possesses belongs to his master; he
possesses nothing except his peculiwm; that is to say, the sum of money,
or of moveable estate, which his master chooses he should possess.”

Id., Art. 194. ‘* The slave for years cannot be transported out of the
State. He may appear in court to claim the protection of the laws where
there are good reasons to believe that it is intended to carry him out of
the State.”

Id., Art. 177. ‘*A slave cannot be a party to any civil action, either as
pci or defendant, except when he has to claim, or prove his free-

om.’

Id., Art. 191. ‘*Masters may be compelled to manumit their slaves
when they have rendered valuable services to the State, but the master
must be compensated by the State, as in case of punishment of his slave,
for the loss of the services of his slaves.”

Id., Art. 192. «‘The slave may be taken from the master, as by a forced
sale, when he is cruelly treated.

«<< Tf any person or persons whatsoever, shall wilfully kill his slave, or
the slave of any other person, the said person or persons being convicted
thereof, shall be tried and condemned agreeably to the laws.’ And it is
provided by the same act, that when any slave shall be beaten, mutilated,
and ill-treated, contrary to the true intent and meaning of this act, and
when, in such case, no one shall be present in consequence of the inad-
missibility of negro testimony, the owner himself shall be deemed respon-

316 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

well as any other legal subject, all laws in part materia, must
be construed together.

In this manner they quote the common definition of a slave,
without any reference to other laws that qualify the meaning of
the terms, and limit the extent of their application. ‘‘A slave
is one who is in the power of the master to whom he belongs.
The master may sell him, dispose of his person, his industry
and his labor; he can do nothing, possess nothing, nor acquire
anything, but what must belong to his master.”? (C. C. La.,
Art, 35.1) By construing this definition with other laws upon
the same subject, to what extent does the slave belong to his
master, and for what purpose can he dispose of his person ?
He has only a limited control over it, for a specific purpose,
and can dispose of nothing more. So as to the property or
peculium of the slave. The master has only such a control
over it as to prevent its being appropriated to any purpose in-
consistent with the services due by the slave, or with the slave’s
own welfare. —

What, then, is to be understood by chattel slavery? It is
certainly not that the slave is an absolute chattel; the term
applies to his labor, and not to his person; the right to the
labor carries with it the limited control of the individual; but
the purchaser acquires no more property in his being than the
husband has in the wife, or the parent in his child. If the
power to alienate and transfer this species of property, in this
manner, be not conducive to the welfare of both the master and
the slave, let it be abolished, altered or modified as their best
interests may require. There is no system that may not be im-
proved. But it is singular that the wisdom and experience of
the world, for more than sixty centuries, should not have de-
tected the error. Of the blessings of this custom, when not
abused, to both the master and the slave, no one at all ac-
quainted with the system can doubt. In the first place, it en-
sible and guilty of the offence, and shall be prosecuted without further.
evidence,” &c. Revised Statutes of La.

A certain allowance of food, and a fixed number of hours for labor are
also fixed by statutes, too voluminous to quote. It is also a grave offence,
under the statute, visited by a heavy penalty, to sell away children from
their mothers before they have arrived at the age of ten years. See Re-
vised Statutes.

We might quote the laws of other slave States to a similar effect, but
it would carry us beyond the limits of this work. We trust we have given
sufficient to show the spirit of the institution. :

1 Let it be remembered that this is but a declaratory statute; it enacts
nothing, but simply declares the condition of a slave; it does not create
that condition, but presupposes its existence; if there were no such class
of persons, no such law could have been passed.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 317

hances the value of this species of property: it gives the owner
better credit and greater ability to feed, clothe, and take care
of his people. Besides, it gives rise to a pecuniary incentive,
which is the most powerful with some to preserve the health
and good condition of the negroes; it protects them, in some
instances, where both law and humanity would fail, against
over-work, bad diet, and other cruel treatment. On the other
hand, it as often enables the slave to better his condition as to
render it worse, and is more frequently the means of bringing
and keeping families together than of producing separation.
Neighborhoods and settlements, that have resided together for
years, whose people have intermarried with one another and
raised families, are constantly breaking up and removing to
different and distant parts of the country; however humane and
kind these masters might be, were it not for the power to alienate
and exchange their people, the entire breaking up and final
separation of all these families must inevitably follow. Thou-
sands of instances also occur of slaves having wives at such a
distance as to render it too inconvenient and expensive for them
to visit as often as they desire In such instances a separation
must follow, unless the husband and wife can be settled nearer
to each other by a sale or interchange. In order to support
and provide employment for any considerable family of slaves
under one’s own care, he must be confined to agriculture, or
some kindred pursuit; and should the merchant, mechanic, or
professional man, come into possession of a large number, had
he not the power to alienate and transfer them, he would be
unable to provide for their wants. If slaves could not change
owners by purchase, exchange, &c., they would be liable to
linger through life in the hands of the poor and destitute, and
suffer all the inconveniences and hardships of abject poverty
and distress; or in the hands of unprincipled brutes, who have
neither the disposition or power to provide for their wants, or
to secure their happiness in the least degree. But being
“‘money,’’ the shiftless and unprincipled are neither worthy of
or able to retain it; as a general thing, it accumulates in the
hands of those who make the best use of it, and who are best
able to manage it. Take this last ray of hope from the slave
who is so unfortunate as to fall into the hands of a bad master,
he has nothing to look forward to but a lingering life of ill-
treatment, cruelties and abuse. Instead of a cheerful looking
forward to a better condition, with the consoling expectation
of a happy change of masters, which he may often effect him-
self, his doom would be fixed, his fate would be sealed. Ask
27 *

318 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

him if the right to change masters is not a blessing to the slave,
and what is his reply? Upon the principle of compensation to
the property in the labor of the slave, and the right to control
his person, the law attaches the obligation to nurse and support
him in sickness and in health, in infancy and helpless old age.
This is the peculiarity and redeeming feature of the American
or (if you please) chattel system. In British slavery, the mis-
erable victims are subjected to the most abject servitude during
life, without the slightest obligation of the master to provide
for their wants in time of helplessness and distress. When
they have spent faithful lives in toil for his benefit, till their
days of usefulness are past, they are turned over to the tender
mercies of the guardians of the poor, to be separated from
their families, and become the inmates of pest-houses and parish
prisons.

The selling of persons is not peculiar to the American or
negro slavery; these paupers of England have been and are
still as effectually sold as negro slaves. There is always an
abundant supply at the public charge, and they are dealt out
by the pauper guardians, under the name of apprentices, to all
manner of employment to suit customers. This practice was
even transferred to the Colonies. ‘‘ The supply of white ser-
vants became a regular business; and a class of men, nick-
named spirits, used to delude young persons, servants and idlers,
into embarking for America as a land of spontaneous plenty.
White servants came to be a usual article of traffic. They
were sold in England to be transported, and in Virginia were
sold to the highest bidder; like negroes, they were purchased
on shipboard, as men buy horses at a fair.’??

Who ever heard of an American slave perishing from starva-
tion, or becoming a pauper at the public charge? But what
is the origin of this right of property of the master in the labor
of his slave, and upon what foundation does it rest? We
answer, that of custom, the most potent source of law, inter-
woven into the very texture of society. It is the same, in this
respect, as any other distinctive right or specification of
property. .

We have endeavored, in the first Essay of this work, to show
that the relation of master and slave, and the right of the for-
mer to the service of the latter, date back to the earliest traces

1 By stat. 1 Ed. 6, chap. 3, it is provided that an able-bodied person at
public charge shall be sold as a slave for two years; if he run away he is
branded (S.) on the cheek, and sold as a slave for life. Enc. Mit. vol. ii.
p- 802. 1 Bancroft, H. U. S.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 319

of the existence of mankind; that this species of property has
been a lawful article of commerce in every age and nation; that
the right and title of the owner to the same has been held as
perfect and indefeasible, and has been as universally protected
and held sacred by the laws of every nation (where it has not
been prohibited by positive law) as any other species of pro-
perty.. We propose still further to show that the authority of
this custom is still recognized, and that this right of property
ever has been, and still is, held sacred and to be protected
(when to be exercised in a country where it has not been abo-
lished) by legislative and judicial authority, in both England
and America.

Slavery existed by the law of nations throughout the ancient
world. It existed in England before the Norman Conquest.
There were certain slaves, who belonged to their lords as much
as the cattle and stock upon the plantations; they afforded
articles for a brisk and lucrative trade; they were transported
to Ireland and other nations. It originated, no doubt, with
the Roman Conquest, and was continued, according to the law
of nations, by the numerous captives taken in the wars between
the Britons, Danes and Saxons, and among the States of the
Heptarchy.? African slavery existed in England as late as
1772. At the trial of Somerset’s case, it was asserted that
there were fourteen thousand African slaves in England.*®

Among the earliest decisions of the courts of justice in Eng-
land, the right of property in the slave is recognized, and it
has been repeatedly held by those courts that trover would lie
for a slave. Contracts for the purchase of slaves, and for the
payment of the price, have been universally held good by the
courts, ancient and modern, in both England and America.
Damages have been universally awarded for injuries done to

1 See Essay I. p. 16. -Also, Numb. 3] : 18-32; 35:40. Just. tit. iii.
sect. 4, Dig. lib.i.t.v. Odyss. xv. 483. Timezeus Apud Ath. vi. p. 264.
Theop. Apud. Ath. p. 265. Xioi mpwroi rwy EAAnvwv, &c. Plato, De Re-
publ. v. p. 469. Demosth. adv. Nic. p. 1250. For modern nations, see
Hallam’s Mid. Ages, iv. 221. Gibbon, D. & F. R. E. vol. i. p. 63. See
ante, p. 309 (n, 2).

2 Blac. Comm. pp. 92 and 98. Temple’s Introd. to Hist. of England, p.
59. Turner’s Hist. of the Anglo-Saxon Race, pp. 292 and 397. The
toll in the market of Lewes, England, was one penny for the sale of an
ox, and four for the sale of a slave. See Work of B. B. Edwards, vol. ii.
p. 124. The Edict of 1685 permitted slavery in the French Colonies, and
that of 1716 recites the necessity of permitting it in France, but under
certain restrictions. See 8. C.

3 See Report of Sommersett’s case, Luft’s Rep. p. 6.

320 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE’ OF

this species of property. In all the cases of emancipation by
the English government, the owners have been compensated for
the value of their property. In 1689, all the judges of Eng-
land, with the eminent men who filled the offices of Solicitors,
Attorney-Generals, &c., concurred in the opinion that negro
slaves were merchandize within the general terms of the naviga-
tion act.1 In the case of Butts vs. Penny, it was held that
trover would lie in England at common law, for negroes taken
from America.” The doctrine of the Court of the K. B. in that
case was that negroes are merchandize at common law; that
they are commonly bought and sold in America and other
nations, the same as other property.

In one of the decrees of Lord Stowell, in 1817, the following:
truth is emphatically asserted : ‘‘ Let me not be misunderstood
or misrepresented as a professed apologist for the practice (the
slave-trade), when I state facts, which no one can deny, that
personal slavery arising out of captivity, is coeval with the
earliest periods of the history of mankind; that it is found
existing (and as far as appears without animadversion) in the
earliest and most authentic records of the human race; that it
is recognized by the codes of the most polished nations of
antiquity ; that under the light of Christianity itself the pos-
session of persons so acquired has been in every civilized
country invested with the character of property, and secured
as such by all the protection of law ; that solemn treaties have
been framed, and national monopolies eagerly sought, to facili-
tate and extend the commerce in this asserted property ; and all
this with the sanction of law, public and municipal, and without
any opposition, except the protest of a few private moralists
little heard and less attended to in every country, till within
these few years in this particular country.’’* The Parliament
of Great Britain has especially recognized and invested negro
slaves with the character of property. In 1676, by special
act, it chartered the Royal African Company to prosecute this
trade. By another act it divested the African Company of its
slaves, and chartered the West India Company for the same
purpose, and vested the slave property of the former in the
latter company. SBy another act it subjected their property to
the payment of their debts, and thus rendered slaves merchan-

1 See Chalmers’ Opinions of Eminent Lawyers, p. 263.

2 Lev. Rep. vol. iii. p. 201.

3 See Speech of Mr. Keitt, of South Carolina, on Nebraska and Kansas
Bill, March 30, 1854. Wheat. Inter. Law, p. 186. 1 Dod. Adm, Rep.
p. 95, case of Diana.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. Sot

dize, liable to be bought and sold. These are the evidences,
said Lord Mansfield, that Parliament has often interfered for
the maintenance of the slave-trade, and the recognition of this
species of property.! The statute 29th Geo. 2d, chap. 31, gives
permission to the colonists to hold slaves in America, because
it was thought necessary. But, said Mr. Hargrave, the same
reasons do not exist in England.

It was evidently against the policy of England to perpetuate
African slavery at home, hence the custom gradually came into
disuse. But, said Mr. Hargrave,.there never was any law
against it except the force of circumstances.

The reason why negro slavery could not exist in England, any
more than in Massachusetts and many of the free States, must be
obvious. Within the limited territory of that country, over-
whelmed with paupers in a perishing condition, there was no
room for negro slaves, no want of their labor. The British
aristocrat found it vastly to his interest to keep a starving white
population around him, nominally free, and working for nomi-
nal wages, without incurring the obligation of furnishing them
a support in times of need.

In the celebrated opinion delivered by Lord Mansfield in
Sommersett’s case, in 1772, we find the principle asserted
(though not positively, as we contend) that the right of the
master to the service of his slave did not give him the right to
control his person in England at common law. Sommersett
was a slave, purchased upon the coast of Africa and carried to
Virginia ; he belonged to one Mr. Stewart; he had been carried
over to England by his master, and was brought before the
judges there on a writ of Habeas Corpus; the question was
whether he should be remanded to the custody of his master,
or whether he might be discharged from the same. The case
was learnedly argued on both sides, and a variety of authori-
ties cited. The argument for the defence was in substance that
the right of the master to the service of his slave was absolute
and indefeasible, being universally recognized by legislative
and judicial authority ; that it necessarily carried with it the
right to control the person of the slave. That there was no
law or precedent in England that prohibited the: enforcement
of this right, and that the court was bound to recognize it as
existing at common law; that to hold the contrary would turn
loose fourteen thousand African slaves that were then, and had

1 Sommersett’s case. The decision in that case turned loose fourteen

thousand negro slaves in England, and gave rise to the foundation of the
colony of Sierra Leone. American Ene, vol. ii. p. 351.

Vv

322 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

been, held in England. On the other hand, it was contended
that African slavery was an evil, immoral in its character and
consequences; that in the present instance it existed only by a
Colonial law which was subject to the supervision of the legis- |
lative and judicial authority of the mother government ; that
such authority could be under no obligations to recognize a
principle of Colonial law in England that contravened its own
policy; that the question of comity, under such circumstances,
did not arise; that to recognize the right of the master to hold
and control his slave would overwhelm England with negroes,
while with a limited territory and a starving pauper population,
she could not support them; besides, they were held in such
odium that they could not live there. With these reasons
before him, the learned judge was evidently thrown into much
difficulty and embarrassment; and we cannot but regret that
his reasons are not more fully stated in the report that has come
down to us. He says he shall confine his reasons strictly to
the return on the writ, and seems to intimate that there might
be some defect in that return. He says, ‘‘ we are all agreed;
and for various reasons, as is usual on the return of a
Habeas Corpus, the only question before us is whether the
CAUSE ON THE RETURN IS SUFFICIENT FOR REMANDING THE
SLAVE.’’ He decides that it was insufficient, and that he must
be discharged. He alludes to the immorality of the institution,
and the evil consequences that it might entail upon England.
It seems to have been decided, not as a question of right,
founded upon law, but either upon some defect in the return or
as a question of conscience, good morals, and sound public
policy in England. As the case is reported, it is difficult to see
the consistency of the reasoning of the court. We submit the
question to more experienced jurists, whether it is within the
province of the judiciary of any government to decide upon
questions of public policy, farther than such policy may be
indicated by the spirit of the law, or to decide questions of
conscience, farther than their office extends under the law as
conservators of public morals; that whenever they overreach
these limits, they usurp the legislative power of the government.
He says, “we pay all due attention to the opinions of Sir
Philip Yorke, and Lord Chief Justice Talbot, in which they
had pledged themselves to British planters for all the legal
consequences of their slaves coming over from the colonies to
this country and being baptized.’’ The learned judge also
admits in this, as well as many other opinions, that the laws of
England attach upon a contract for the price of a slave, and

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 323

it has been universally enforced in both England and America ;
now if the right of property is to be defeated upon the ground
that it contravenes the laws of nature, is immoral, &c., as seems
to have been intimated, it might be by the court in this case,
why does not the same reason vitiate the contract for the price
or the claim for damages for loss of services?! The courts of
England then will so far admit the right of property as to
enforce the payment of the price, and award damages for the
loss of services; but will not enforce the law relative to the
control of the person, because it is immoral, &c.

If immorality taints the right of action in one instance, it
must necessarily do so in the other; else the Court might be
thrown into the awkward dilemma of deciding upon the right
of the master to his slave in England, and his obligation to
. pay the price of the purchase in the same case, and be com-
pelled to give judgment against him on both pleas; in other
words, an individual might sell another a slave, and then
appeal to the laws of England to take him from him, and
compel him, at the same time, to pay the price. Therefore,
this case, as reported, has but little weight of authority upon
any principle whatever. It has been overruled by Lord Sto-
well, in the case of the slave Grace.

Although the African slave-trade has been declared piracy
by a number of Christian nations, yet it remains lawful for all
those that have not renounced it; and this species of property,
belonging to the citizens of those nations, must be respected.’
The courts of both England and America will enforce the con-
tract for the price, and the claims for damages, relative to this
species of property. The English Government has, in all acts
of emancipation in the West Indies and elsewhere, provided
for the remuneration of the owners: commissioners have been
appointed to appraise the damages, as in all cases of the ap-
propriation of private property for public use.’ There was a
case brought up from the Supreme Court of British Guiana.
It was held by the Privy Council, that, in consequence of the
abolition act of Parliament, the lessee of a plantation and
slaves was entitled to a diminution of rent, in consequence of

1 Ex turpi contractu oritur non actio, 11 8S. and R. 164. 11 Wheat. 268.
4 Pic. Rep. Dedham Bank vs. Chickering.

2 Case of the Antelope, 10 Wheat. 66: See Jane Eugenie, 2 Mason,
409. The Amelia, 1 Acton, 240. The Jane Maria, 1 Dod. 19. The
Diana, 1 Dod. 75. Mindoe vs. Willis, 3 B. & A. Commonwealth vs,
Aves, 18 Pic. 193.

® See Albany vs. Metenayer, 3d E. & F. Moore, 452.

324 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

the emancipation of three Indian women. This case was de-
cided in 1841; the act of Parliament took effect in 1834: the
act provided commissioners to appraise the damages for loss
of property generally. In the case of Richards vs. Attorney-
General of Jamaica, the Lord Chancellor held that the com-
pulsory manumission or sale of slaves effected by the abolition
act, so impressed the slaves with the character of [ ‘‘ chattels
personal’? | personal estate, from the passing of the act, that
the compensation money provided by the act passed under the
will of the testator who died before the period of emancipation
arrived.! In the case of Baron vs. Denman, the slaves of a
Spaniard were taken from one' of the barracoons at Dambo-
coro, and carried to Sierra Leone. The learned English
judges held that the plaintiff, who carried on the slave-trade,
had such a property in his slaves, that he might maintain
trespass for their seizure —the slave-trade not being prohibited
by the law of nations, and it not appearing that Spain had
passed any law abolishing the traffic, pursuant to the treaty of
6 & 7 William IV.?

‘‘A native of a country where slavery is not prohibited by
law may recover, in a court of England, at common law, the
value of slaves wrongfully seized by a British officer, on board
of a ship of a country allowing slavery. And the master can
recover damages generally, at common law, for the loss of ser-
vices, when his slaves have been taken from him.’’®

In the case of Williams vs. Brown, the plaintiff was a run-
away slave from Granada: he hired himself as a common sea-
man in England, on board the ship Holderness, bound to
Grenada. On her arrival there, Mr. Hardman, the master of
the slave, claimed him, and the captain gave him up. Where
upon, they all three entered into a new contract for the manu-
mission of the slave for a stipulated price paid by the master
of the ship, on the agreement of the slave to serve him faith-
fully three years on board of said ship, for a stipulated sum.
This was agreed to by the then freedman. But on his return
from the first trip to England, he commenced the present action
for his services on the quantum meruit. The Court held that
he could not recover any more than the stipulated price. In

1 Albany vs. Metenayer, 8d E. & F. Moore, 452. 13 Jur. 197: 7 Har.
Dig. p. 1522.

2 Baron vs. Denman, 2d Exch. 167.

8 Madrazo vs. Willis, 83d B. & A. 853. Bacon’s Abmt. vol. ix. p. 478.
Chamberton vs. Harvey, 1 Ld. Raym. 146. Smith vs. Gould, 2d Ld.
Raym. 1274.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. | 325

this case, it was strenuously contended that the defendant had
taken advantage of the plaintiff’s condition, and that his cove-
nant for services was made under a species of duress, to enable
him to obtain his freedom. But the Court distinctly recog-
nized the right of the master, and the obligation of the slave
to serve, under the laws of Grenada. They say that the slave
committed a fraud upon the master of the ship when he first
engaged his services to him, by concealing the fact that he was
a slave, and incapable of contracting; that when he was
claimed by his master, the defendant was entitled to damages
for a breach of contract by the slave.' Previous to the cele-
brated opinion delivered in Sommersett’s case, in 1772, it had
been held by several decisions, that the master’s right to the
service of his slave carried with it the right to control his per-
son even in England; so much so, that he could maintain
trover for the same.

In the case of Pearne vs. Lisle, in the High Court of Chan-
cery, in 1749, it was held that trover would lie for a negro
slave; that they were as much property in that respect as in
anything else. In that case, the plaintiff claimed fourteen
negroes at Antigua; defendant had them hired, and refused to
give them up. Defendant declared his intention of going to
Antigua soon. Plaintiff filed a bill in chancery, and obtained
a writ ne exeat regno, which was discharged. Per Curiam:
“J have no doubt that trover will lie for a negro slave; they
are as much property [for that purpose] as. anything else.
The case referred to at bar (in 2 Salkield 666, Smith vs.
Brown & Cooper) was determined for want of proper descrip-
tion. It was trover for an ‘4thiop vocat Negro,’ without
alleging that he was a slave. The reason said to have been
given by Lord Holt, in that case, as the cause of his doubt,
viz. ‘'THAT THE MOMENT A SLAVE SETS FOOT IN ENGLAND HE
BECOMES FREE,’ has no weight in it; nor can any reason be
assigned why they should not be equally so when they set foot
in Jamaica, or any other English plantation. All our colo-
nies are subject to the laws of England; though, for some
specific purposes, they have laws of their own. There was
once a doubt whether, if any slave was christened, he did not
become free; and then great precautions were taken, in the
colonies, to prevent their being baptised ; until the opinion of
Lord Talbot and myself, then Attorney and Solicitor-General,

1 Williams vs. Brown, 3d Bass. & Pull. Rep. p. 69. A slave may be
the subject of larceny at common law. Bacl. Abr. 4, p. 178.

28

326 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

was taken on that point. We both held that it did not alter
their condition. There were formerly villiens or slaves in
England; and there are no laws that have abrogated this
right. Trover might have been brought for a villien. As to
the merits of this case, a specific delivery of the negroes is
prayed for: that is not necessary — others are as good: the
negroes cannot now be delivered in the plight they were in
when taken, for they wear out by use.’’? |

Such has been the doctrine universally held in America, in
every instance where the question has arisen, except by some
few abolition fanatics, who acknowledge allegiance only to a
‘higher law’? than the permanent law of the land.

In 1779, the Continental Congress recommended to the
States to make provisions for the ‘‘ proprietors’ of negroes,
and a full compensation for the ‘‘ property,’’ &c. of such as
were lost or killed when in the U. S. service in South Carolina
and Georgia.?

The old Congress of 1782 expressly recognized the right of
masters and of property in slaves, in resolving to have authen-
tic returns of slaves and other property which the British had
been carrying off during the Revolutionary War.’’* In the
- treaty of 1783, the Revolutionary Fathers expressly stipulated
against the destruction or carrying away of negroes. August
9th, 1788, Congress resolved that the Secretary for Foreign
Affairs cause to be made out lists of the number, names, and
owners of negroes belonging to citizens of each State, and car-
ried away by the British, in violation of the treaty. General
Washington himself earnestly demanded of Sir Guy Carleton
restitution of such slave property. Mr. John Jay, of New
York, in 1786, also demanded restitution for this property.
So did old John Adams. The American commissioners made
a bill of these negroes in the possession of the British at the
close of the war. General Morris, in 1799, was pressing this
claim upon the British Ministry.

1 The case vs. Pearne, 28 Charles II. Lev. Rep. 201, is to the same
point. The Court in that case held that trover would lie in England for
a negro slave; that they were originally the property of a heathen prince,
and lawful articles of commerce. The case of Gelly vs. Clive, 5 Wm. &
Mary, 1 Ld. Raym.; Smith vs. Gould, 6 Anne, 2 Sulk. 666; and Smith
vs. Brown, 2d Sulk., all go to establish the indefeasible right of the mas-
ter to the service of his slave, as well as his right to control his person.
By an Act of 9 & 10 William III. Chap. 26, negroes are spoken of as
merchandize; and by an Act of 5 Geo. IL., slaves in the West Indies are
declared subject to seizure to pay debts.

2 Secret Journal, pp. 197-8. 3 State Papers, vol. i, p. 3388.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 327

When the Federal Constitution was formed, in 1787, by the
then twelve slave-holding States, and Massachusetts, that Con-
stitution, in the vein of the Declaration of Independence, starts
out with the preample, ‘‘securing the blessings of liberty to
ourselves and our posterity,’’ and yet, by the express language
of that instrument, the relation of master and slave is several
times recognized, as is the right of property in the master in
providing for the return of fugitive slaves, and in inhibiting
the prohibition of the slave-trade for twenty years. In 1793,
Congress enacted a fugitive slave law,—in the Senate, unani-
mously; in the House, ayes forty-eight, noes seven ;—such
men as Fisher Ames, Elias Boudinot, of N.J., James Hill-
house, of Ct., Theodore Sedgwick, and the like, voting in the
affirmative.

By the Judiciary Act of 1789, Congress recognized slaves as
property. The eighty-eighth section of that act recognizes
the laws of the several States as to property. Where slaves
are property in the States, the Federal Courts are thus ordered
to recognize them as property, and they have ever done so.?

In the direct tax of 1813, slaves were rated as property.
Rufus King, of New York, voted for this act, with the right
of the U.S. Collector to purchase slaves on behalf of the
United States in certain cases.”

By the Treaty of Ghent, and in a subsequent Convention
referring the disputed articles of that Treaty to the Emperor
of Russia, one million and two hundred thousand dollars were
paid to the United States slave-owners in full for slaves taken
away by Great Britain, after the war of 1812. Among the
ayes on this Treaty were Daggett and Dana, of Ct.; Gore, of
Mass.; Hunter, of R.I.; King, of N. Y. John Quincy
Adams, in his messages to Congress, in 1825 and 1826, speaks
of ‘‘the claims of our fellow-citizens to indemnity for
slaves ;’’ it was under his auspices, as President, that the mo-
ney was paid.’

So in the Judiciary; the case of the Antelope was decided
by Chief-Justice Marshall upon the same doctrine so frequently
held by English courts.* She was a Spanish vessel, on board
of which were a certain number of African slaves; she was cap-
tured by an American Revenue Cutter and brought into Sa-

1 In the cases of Williamson vs. Daniel, 12 Wheat., and Skebby vs. Grey,
11 Wheat., every member of the bench concurring, slaves were recognized
as property.

2 See sections 5th and 24th of said Act. Laws U. S.

8 Message, Dec. 28, 1826. 49 Georgia Reps., same case.

328 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

vannah for adjudication. The Vice-Consuls of Spain and
Portugal claimed the negroes as the property of the citizens of
those nations, and they were adjudicated to them. The learned
judge, in that opinion, examined the subject in a masterly man-
ner, and affirmed the doctrine, that as those nations had not
abolished the African slave-trade, the negroes were their lawful
property. This case, decided on the authority of English de-
cisions, settled the law in the United States. The same doc-
trine was very ably maintained in the case of Neal vs. Farmer,
in the Supreme Court of Georgia.?

What considerations could have induced the framers of the
Constitution to prohibit the enacting of any law to suppress the
slave-trade prior to 1808, but that slaves were a lawful species
of property, and the trade in them, lawful commerce ?.

In some of the early decisions of the Supreme Court of Mas-
sachusetts it was held, that slaves in that State, prior to the
adoption of the State Constitution, were lawful property at
common law. f

In the case of the Town of Winchendon vs. the Town of
Hatfield, Chief-Justice Parsons decided the question directly ;
he held the following language: ‘‘ Slavery was introduced into
this country soon after its first settlement, and tolerated till the
ratification of the present Constitution. The slave was the
property of his master, subject to his orders, and to a reason-
able correction, &c.; he was transferable, like a chattel, by
gift or by sale, and was assets in the hands of his administra-
tor; the issue of a female slave also belonged to her master,
according to the maxim of the civil law [ partus sequitur ven-
trem]. He (the slave) could acquire no settlement except
through his master.’?’?

Again, upon the same point, in the case of Dighton vs. Free-
town, the learned Chief-Justice remarked, that ‘‘ Pomp being
and continuing a slave until 1779, he was settled in the town
with his master, deriving his settlement from him, as the slave
was the personal property of the master, and could not be
legally separated from him. Pomp was the slave of Hlnathan
Walker ; at his death intestate; he then, as the personal estate
of the deceased, became the property of Peter Walker, the ad-
ministrator, and acquired the settlement through him as his new
master, which was in Taunton,’’ &c.°

1 Geo. Rep., same case. 2 4th Mass. Rep., 128.

8 Opera cit., see case. But behold what a change in the jurisprudence
of that old and hitherto venerable State! See ‘‘ Personal Liberty Bill,”
nullifying the Fugitive Slave Law, &c. Session Acts of Mass. Legislature,

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 329

By what State or Territorial law was a slave, then, the pro-
perty of his master in Massachusetts? Or, by what statute
was slavery introduced there ?

It was by the force of custom and the principles of national
law, as observed in the common law of England. In the same
manner is slavery extended wherever it goes; it is not the crea-
ture of law and extended only by acts of legislative enactment ;
it is originally sanctioned by universal custom, and grows and
extends itself like every other legitimate institution, propria
vigore.

Upon what foundation, then, does the right and title of the
Southern master to his slave depend? We answer: it is
founded upon custom, the most potent source of law, as old,
too, as the records of the human family. It rests also upon
the sanction of the highest legislative and judicial authority in
the world. It rests upon the same foundation that his right
and title does to any other piece of property that he possesses.
How else did the idea of property, and the distinctive rights of
individuals arise ? |

A person who is a slave in any country or state, where that
condition of persons exists, is also a slave, and belongs to his
master, in the legal sense, wherever he may go, except in those
governments where that condition is prohibited by law. It is
a personal status, like that of wife, child, minor, convict, or
interdicted person; that, in law, follows him wherever he
may go.

In this sense, slavery is universal, and its prohibition the
exception; for it may rightfully exist everywhere, except where
it has been abolished and prohibited. It is erroneously con-
tended that slavery cannot extend beyond the territorial limits
of the States in which it actually exists, for there is not a syl-
lable of law upon the statute-book of any one of the slave
States that gives the master any more right to hold the service
of his slaves as property than he had before that law was passed.
The law in every act presupposes the right of the master to the
service of his slave the same as to'that of his ox or his horse.
When the Abolitionists talk about the extension of slavery, and
the aggressions of the South, &., they seem to have a very
indefinite idea of the manner in which it has been done; as

1855, p. 117. Nullification! the accomplice of treason. O Tempora!
9 Mores! Spirit of Webster! ‘How art the glory departed from Israel,
and the sceptre from Mount Lebanon!”
1 Story’s C. L., T. Personal Statutes, or condition of persons. Saul
vs. His Creditors, 5 Mart. La. Rep., N.S. 586-596.
28 *

330 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

though it has been effected by the aid and operation of the sta-
tutes of the United States, or of the individual States. But
a moment’s reflection will show them that the right to hold
slaves was never legislated, or asked to be legislated, into any
one of the States or Territories; the absence of all legislation
is the secret of its existence. Upon analogous principles of
comity and constitutional law, this right, when élaimed under
the law of a State where it exists, should be recognized by the
courts of every other State except where it may injure their
own citizens, or contravene their own public policy.’

But, it is asked, what proof the Southern masters can show
that his negroes are slaves? Their own pedigree makes the
proof; the evidence of which is seen in the lineaments of their
external features; and is so distinctly marked that it is impos-
sible to be mistaken. Every descendant of African lineage,
except the mixed-blooded to a certain degree, in all the slave
States is presumed to be aslave. This arises from the fact that
they are a nation of slaves at home, one-sixth owning and hold-
ing the balance of the population as property, and trafficking
in them as lawful articles of merchandize. The Africans are
presumed to be slaves for the same reason that helot and slave,
in Sparta, were synonymous terms; and, for the same reason,
that the name of the Sclavonian nation came to be adopted, by
abbreviation, as a general term, for persons held in bondage.’

The master is not required to trace back the pedigree of every
negro to his African ancestors, and to show that they were
slaves; the fact is presumed because they are a nation of slaves
as the Helots were in Greece and the Sclavonians in modern
Europe; made so by their own customs and laws, and because
none came to this country, originally, but slaves. They were
bought in lawful trade; they were lawful articles of commerce ;
the trade was legitimate, and theft cannot be presumed. There-

1 This rests upon principles of international law. Pardess, Droit Comm.,
pt. vi. tit. 7, ch. 2, sect. 1. Felix Droit Intern’l. Prive, lev. 1, sect. 31.
Hub. tom. ii, 1 tit. 3. De Conftet, leg. sect. 12. Wheat. El’mts Intern’l
Law, p. 122. Story’s C. L., sect. 106, 594. 2 Kent. Com., 457, 461. Saul
vs. His Creditors. 5 Mart. La. Rep., N.S., 586, 596. Le Breton vs.
Nouchet, 3 Mart. La, Rep. 60, 66, cited in Story’s C. L., sect. 182. Green-
wood vs. Curtis, 6 Mass. Rep. 878. Andrews vs. Pond, 13 Peters’ Rep.
65, 78. The right of the master to his slave in the territories is unques-
tionable, and can be enforced in the Federal Courts at common law. See
opinion of Attorney-General Cushing, recently given upon this question.
Hence the right to claim a fugitive in any one of the States is provided
for by the Constitution.

2 Essay on Slavery in the New Testament, ante, p. 125.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 331

fore, the ancestors of the present slave population in the United
States must be presumed to have been bought in a legitimate
course of trade, called the Guinea traffic. At the time they
were purchased it was lawful to all nations, as it now is to
those who have not abolished it. Those, now in the country,
have descended from them in a direct line, and have necessarily
inherited their condition according to the well-known maxim of
the institution, ‘‘ partus sequitur ventrem.’’ Much has been
said against the iniquity and injustice of this maxim. But, it
will be seen, that the principle is founded on humanity ; its
force and necessity, in the first place, arise from the laws of
propagation. What would become of the offspring if it did
not follow the condition of the mother? who would nurse and
rear it to an age when it could be separated from her? Indeed,
the contrary would cut off all hope or prospect of increase, as
it would be a direct infringement upon the right of the master
to the service of his slave. It would, therefore, result not only
in the extinction of African slavery, but, pro tanto, of the negro
race.

This maxim is, therefore, one of the fundamental principles
of the institution; it is as old as slavery itself; it is founded
upon the same authoritative source of law, and rests upon the
same legislative and judicial sanction. It makes the status of
the child the same as that of the parent,! gives the master the
same right to its services and imposes upon him the same obli-
gation to nurse, feed, and clothe it in infancy, sickness, and
helpless old age.

Such is the tenure by which the American master holds his
slaves; and who that feels the necessity of civil government,
and of the majesty of the law and of the supremacy of fixed
principles of jurisprudence, who that acknowledges his allegiance
to the laws and institutions of his country, who that has an
American head, and an American heart in his bosom throbbing
to uphold the pride and glory of the American Union, will
wrest it from him by the ruthless hand of violence? Stare
decisis is the motto of the jurist; but for the force of this
maxim, amid the fierce whirlwinds of angry passions and storms
of wild fanaticism that sweep over the land, we should have no
assurance to-day of what the law would be to-morrow.

Human nature, in the multitude of her foibles and imperfec-
tions, has left some choice spirits fitted for the responsible

1 By the laws of Greece, if either the father or mother was a slave, it
tainted the status of the child. See Essay on Greek Slavery, p. 50.

332 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

position of judicial functionaries on the bench. Few there are
who have worn the ermine robe with dignity and power, have
stood up with the strong arm of giants to face the frowning.
multitude; with iron resolution and inflexible nerve, have
carried it through the tumults of popular clamor and. spiritual
indignation, unspotted by their violence, uncontaminated by
the foul breath. _ Such spirits dwell above the stormy atmo-
sphere of popular turmoil and commotion, and bask in the
sunlight of justice and truth in a higher and more ample field
of being. Tempests may rock earth beneath, earthquakes
shatter hill and mountain, angry billows dash upon the rocks
at their feet, sweeping her foundations away ; ‘‘ sublime in their
own solitude, magnificent amid the ruin, they soar above the
storm like the last mountain in the deluge; the last vestige of
earth’s loveliness to be effaced, the last resting-place of heaven’s
light upon her.’? Such names are the just pride of any nation,
the brightest jewels in her crown; they cast a lustre upon the
pages of her history superior to the most gorgeous achievement
of her arms. Time, whose defacing finger obliterates the fairest
earthly possessions, adds new lustre to these; the mist that for
a time may overshadow them, at length fades away, and they
shine out in undimmed splendor to the eyes of the most distant
generations. Monuments may crumble, cities go to ruin, com-
merce may change its channels, and laws and. institutions
undergo every vicissitude of form—still such names remain the
birthright of a nation, a priceless inheritance that it cannot
forfeit, except by such an apostacy as to render it unworthy of
them.

Colonial Slavery in this Country.

We have seen that negro slavery was forced upon this country
during the colonial existence of the States, by the policy and
power of the mother government; at first much against the
will and wishes of the colonists. They were brought here
principally by a company under the charter of the British Par-
liament, and the patronage of the crown of the United King-
doms. The trade was upheld and defended by the best of men,
and many American merchants engaged in the traffic.1 The
colonists entertained no qualms of conscience upon the subject,

1Jt is stated that Newport, R. I., first took its rise from the wealth
acquired by exchanging rum for slaves; as many as forty or fifty vessels
engaged annually in the traffic. Newport was not alone; other places
followed the example; many of the wealthy families might trace their
riches to this origin. Peterson’s History of Rhode Island.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 360

and the business soon became so lucrative that they were quite
willing to adopt it as their own. They had so far identified
themselves with it, that at the formation of the Union under the
Confederation, every one of the thirteen was a slave-holding
State, with a greater or less number of slaves.

It is an interesting source of inquiry as to what were the
views and feelings of the colonists and the American people at
that early date upon this subject; and what was the course of
policy intended by them to be afterward pursued by the Federal
government. |

In the earliest glimpses of Puritan history we find that slavery
and the slave-trade occupy a prominent position as subjects of
legislation in the colonial State papers. Governor Winthrop,
with his associates, having in his possession the colonial charter,
arrived at Boston in 1630. In 1641 the people adopted a code
of laws made by themselves, for their own special guidance and
direction. It was drawn up by some of their most pious and
practical men, after ten years’ residence in their adopted coun-
try, and with the light of all the experience which they had
acquired in the art of self-government. Under the head of
Liberties of Foreigners and Strangers is the following article :

‘‘ There shall never be any bond slaverie, villinage, or cap-
tivitie amongst us, unless it be lawfull captives taken in just
warres, and such strangers as willingly selle themselves or are
sold to us. . . This exempts none from servitude who shall be
judged thereto by authoritie.’’

‘¢Tf any man stealeth a man or mankind he shall surely be
put to death.’’

Here we see a practical exemplification of their notions re-
specting personal freedom, imbibed by the high-souled and
pious Governor Winthrop and his compatriots, amid the
villinage and slavery in England during the reign of Elizabeth.
Slavery was no new idea to the Puritans; within seven years
of their landing, a fierce war broke out with the Pequods, a
numerous and powerful tribe residing within the borders of
Connecticut. The terrible catastrophe at Fort Mystic is well
known; it is related that about seven hundred of the brave
Pequods perished together. Of the captives that were taken,
forty-eight of them, being women and children, were spared and
brought to Boston, the men having been put to death. These
captives were disposed of through the country among the
inhabitants. Some of them ran away, but were taken and
brought back by the neighboring Indians; ‘‘and these,’’ says
Winthrop, ‘‘ we branded on the shoulder.” Of another lot of

334 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

prisoners taken in the same war, Winthrop says, ‘‘ the women
and children were divided, and some sent to Connecticut and
some to Massachusetts. We sent fifteen boys and two women
to Bermuda, by Captain Pierce, but he missing it carried them
to Providence Isle.’’ As early as 1630 there were several
negro slaves in the Massachusetts Colony. When Governor
Winthrop landed in the bay, he found Samuel Maverick already
settled on Noddle’s Island; and as early as 1639 he was the
owner of sundry negro slaves of both sexes. ‘He,’ says a
late writer, ‘‘was not a Puritan, but strong for the worldly
and practical power. This gave him no hold on the sympathies
of those about him. Nevertheless he was not molested.’’

In 1648 the first union of the colonies was formed; Massa-
chusetts Bay, Plymouth, New Haven, and Connecticut, entered
into articles of agreement and confederation. Rhode Island
and the eastern settlements were excluded on account of the
laxity in their religious opinions. After enumerating several
articles of agreement they say, . . . ‘‘and according to the
different charges of each jurisdiction and plantation, the whole
advantage of the war (if it please God to bless their endeavors),
whether it be in lands, goods, or PERSONS, shall be’ proportion-
ally divided among the said confederates. ”’

In 1676 was witnessed the closing of Philip’s War. In dis-
posing of the captives, which was an affair of State, a great
many of the chiefs were executed at Boston and Plymouth, and
most of the rest were sold, and shipped for the Bermudas and
other parts.

In the same year Major Waldron, at Cacheco, in concert
with some Massachusetts forces, under Captains Syll and Haw-
thorn, succeeded by stratagem in capturing, in a time of peace,
about two hundred Indians who had taken sides with Philip
in the late war. They were sent to Boston. Seven or eight,
who were known to have killed Englishmen, were condemned
and hung, the rest were sold into slavery in foreign parts.
Mather relates the exploit with great satisfaction. Slavery
continued to flourish in New England, and negroes were gradu-
ally introduced. Josselyn, who spent ten years in the country
(from 1663 to 1673), says, in relation to the people of Boston :
“ They have great stores of children, and are well accommodated
with servants ; some of these are English and some are negroes. ”’

It is estimated that, in 1680, there were in Massachusetts
from one hundred to one hundred and twenty negro slaves; in
the same year there were in Connecticut thirty-seven. It is
said that but few blacks were at this time imported into Rhode

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 335

Island, though afterwards it became the great New England
emporium for negro slaves.

Another provision in the Articles of Confederation, above
referred to, was as follows :—

“Tt is also agreed, that if any servant run away from his
master into any of these confederate jurisdictions, that in such
case, upon certificate of one magistrate in the jurisdiction out
of which said servant fled, or upon any other due proof, the
said servant shall be delivered either to his master, or any other
person that pursues and brings such certificate or proof.’’

Here commences the history of fugitive slave legislation in
America—and what a commentary does it furnish upon the sub-
sequent conduct, upon this subject, of the boasted descendants
of the Puritans in the Free States !

‘«Slaves,’? says Mr. Coffin, in his history of Newbury,
‘though not numerous in Massachusetts, were, notwithstanding
the law, introduced without difficulty, and bought and sold
without scruple, by all classes of people.

Dr. Belknapp, who was an ardent Whig of the Revolution,
writing from Boston, in 1775, to Judge Tucker, of Virginia,
in answer to sundry inquiries of the latter relative to slavery
and its abolition in Massachusetts, says :—

‘By inquiries of our oldest’ merchants now living, I cannot
find that more than three ships a year, belonging to this port,
were ever employed in the African trade. .... The slaves
purchased in Africa were chiefly sold in the West Indies or in
the Southern Colonies ; but when those markets were glutted,
and the price low, some of them were brought hither... . I
remember one [ship load] between thirty and forty years ago,
which consisted almost wholly of children. ’”’

There had been yet no display of public sentiment against
slavery, and the possession and selling of slaves, acquired in
the lawful course of trade. On the contrary, it was practised
and approved by the best men of the age. Cotton Mather, in
1706, speaks of a great blessing that had been conferred upon
him in the gift, by a friend, of a valuable negro slave. The
reputation for piety, learning and usefulness, of this distin-
guished divine, is well known. The celebrated Jonathan Ed-
wards was born in 1703; he left behind one of his master-pieces
of logic, dedicated to the defence of the slave trade. The
Rev. Dr. Stiles, who was President of Yale College, was a
settled minister in Newport, Rhode Island, when the revolu-
tionary war broke out. During his residence there, being in
want of a servant, he sent a barrel of rum by a slave-ship to

336 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

the coast of Africa, to be exchanged for a negro boy, and one
was actually procured and brought home to him.

It appears, also, by the statement of Mr. Jefferson, that at
the time of presenting the Declaration of Independence, there
were members of the Congress engaged in the Guinea trade,
out of regard to whose feelings certain expressions in the ori-
ginal draft of that document were stricken out. ‘The prevailing
sentiment of the better classes of society in New England was
in favor of the institution. .

Whence, then, came the first voice of abolition and remon-
strance? As we have before said, it had its origin in fanati-
cism; it originated in the same elements, and was cast in the
same mould with Salem witchcraft. Let us appeal, for our
proof, again to the celebrated letter of Dr. Belknapp. With
all his knowledge of men and things, as they existed a century
ago, and with all his extensive and critical researches into colo-
nial antiquities, he was able to name but one person who pub-
licly protested against it.1 And who was that? Oh ye abo-

1 Mr. Coffin, in his History of Newbury, mentions one other person who
bore public testimony against the practice: Elihu Coleman, of*Nantucket.
Dr. Belknapp’s correspondence with Judge Tucker is published in the 4th
vol. of the Col. Mass. Hist. Soc. The slave-trade, in both negroes and
Indians, was as common in the Colonies as at present in the Slave States.
In 1708, Thomas Steel sells to John Farnum, of Boston, for thirty-five
pounds ($175), an Indian boy, called Harry, imported from the province
of South Carolina. In 1725, Theophilus Cotton, of Hampton, deeds to
Jonathan Poor, of Newbury, ‘‘all my right to the Indian boy Sappai,
aged 16 years.” In 1646, Wm. Hilton, of Newbury, sells to Geo. Carr,
for one quarter of a vessel, ‘‘ James, my Indian, with all the interest I
have in him, to be his servant for ever” (Scripture language). Earlier
still, Governor Winthrop wills to his son Adam the island called Governor’s
Garden, and his Indians there,” (‘to take for an inheritance for his chil-
dren, and to be his servants for ever.’) Read the following list of adver-
tisements, showing the fashions a century and more ago :—

‘‘This day ran away from John McComb, Jr., an Indian woman, aged
about 17 years, of a middle stature, having on her druget waistcoat, and
kersey petticoats of a light color. If any person shall bring the said girl
to her said master, he shall be rewarded for his trouble to his content.”—
American Weekly Mercury, May 27th, 1720.

‘*A servant maid, time four years, to be sold by John Copson,”—Am.
Weekly Mercury, June 2d, 1724.

‘A very likely negro woman to be sold, aged about 28 years, fit for
country or city business; she can card, spin, knit, milk, and every other
country work. Whoever has a mind for said negro may repair to Andrew
Bradford, in Philadelphia.” —Jbid, June 2d, 1724.

‘¢A young negro woman to be sold by Samuel Kirk, in Second street,
Philadelphia.” —Jdid.

‘‘To be sold, a very likely negro woman, fit for all manner of house-

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 337

lition fire-eaters, conscience-smitten hypocrites, impostors,
disunionists, traitors, and children of the devil! hide your faces
in shame, when he answers that it was none other than Samuel

work, as washing, starching, ironing,” &c. ‘Inquire of Andrew Brad-
ford.” —Jbid.

‘*A negro child of extraordinary good breeding to be GivEN Away. In-
quire of Edwards & Gill.”— Boston Gazette, Feb. 25th, 1765.

«To be sold, FOR WANT OF EMPLOY, a likely negro fellow, about 25 years
of age; he is an extraordinary good cook, and understands setting and
waiting on a table; likewise all kinds of house-work. Also, a negro
wench, his wife, about 17 years of age, born in the city. For particulars
inquire at this office.”—New York Gazette, March 21st, 1765.

“To be sold, a hearty, strong negro wench, fit for all kinds of work.
For particulars inquire,” &¢.—Penn. Journal, Sept. 4th, 1765.

No wonder slavery died out in New England and the other Free States.
Read the following inventory of prices. Suppose these slaves had been
worth from one thousand to fifteen hundred dollars each, as they now are
in the Slave States. Slavery was never abolished in the Free States; it
died a natural death, and they would now make a virtue of necessity.

«‘ Prick oF Negrozs.—The Homestead, published at Hartford, Conn.,
has lately published an old document, which gives the price of farm stock
and negroes in that State, over 100 years ago. All the old thirteen
States, it will be remembered, were slave-holding until since the Revolu-
tion. The document in question is an inventory of the estate of Capt.
Thomas Wheeler, one of the richest men of his day, his estate being
valued at over $40,000. To show the great difference in the prices then
and now, we give the price of the slaves as found in the inventory, dated
December 11, 1755:—

‘‘QOne negro man named Quash, $8.84; negro woman named Juno,
$2.75; negro woman named Cab, $139.06; negro man named Cezar,
$127.34; negro man named Cipeo, $152.78; negro woman named Hager,
$125; negro woman named Flora, $105.50; negro woman named Sarah,
$133.34; negro woman named Jane, $125; negro woman named Cloe,
$125; negro boy named Pharo, $24; negro girl named Phillis, $50; ser-
vant mulatto boy Harry, $27.79; servant Indian woman Mary, $5.55.”

‘Ran away from Jacob Powers, Esq., on the 29th ult., a negro boy,
about 18 years old; was born in Hopkinton, and brought up by the Rev.
Mr. Barret; his name is Ishmael; he has been a soldier at the lake, is
thick set, has thick lips, and goes limping by reason of a toe of his haying
been frosted, and is not yet well. He had on when he went away a shep-
herd jacket, leather breeches, checked woollen shirt, blue under-jacket, light
colored stockings, brass buckles in his shoes, and an old military cap. He
is an artful fellow, and will pass himself for a soldier, as he has carried
off his firelock and blanket. Whoever will take up the said negro and
bring him to his said master, or confine him in any one of his majesty’s
jails, so that his master may get him, shall receive rouR DOLLARS REWARD
and all charges paid.” —Marblehead, Mass., Apr. 2d, 1765.

“Francis Lewis has for sale a chojce parcel of Muscovado and pow-
dered sugars, in hogsheads, tierces and barrels, and a negro woman and
boy.”—New York Gazette, Apr. 25th, 1765.

“Seventy Gold Coast slaves, of various ages and both sexes, to be sold

29 Ww

338 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

Sewell, one of the judges who occupied the bench during the
trial of the Salem witches, and with whose concurrence nine-
teen innocent persons were hanged, and one, for refusing to
plead, pressed to death !

It is sometimes erroneously asserted that the abolition cause
originated among the Quakers; that they were, as a denomi-
nation, from the time of their settlement in this country under
Penn, opposed to slavery. But this, even if true, would only
prove that among the many wild and visionary theories which
distinguished them as a sect, they adopted that of abolition.
But it is not true. Opposition to slavery sprang up among
them at a comparatively recent date. William Penn lived and
died a slave-owner. Says Mr. Matlack, an aged Friend :—

‘‘The practice of slave-keeping in Pennsylvania and New
Jersey commenced with the first settlement of the Province, and
certainly was countenanced by William Penn. . . . Penn left
a family of slaves behind him. . . . Slave-keeping, of course,
became general among the Friends.’’?

Says Mr. Graham: ‘‘ Negro slavery lingered along in the
settlements of the Puritans in New England, and of the Quakers
in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, although in none of these
States did the climate or soil, or its appropriate culture, suggest
the same temptations to its inhumanity which presented them-
selves in the southern quarter of America. Las Casas first
suggested its introduction into Mexico and Peru; George Fox,
the most intrepid and enthusiastic of reformers, demanded no
more of his followers than a mitigation of its rigors in Barba-
does; and the illustrious philosopher, John Locke, renowned
as a champion of religious and political freedom, introduced
an express sanction of it into the fundamental Constitution of
South Carolina.’’?

The clause in the Constitution of Mr. Locke for South
Carolina, reads as follows :—

on board ship, at Plumstead’s Wharf, by Willing & Morris.”—Penn.
Journal, Aug. 18th, 1765.

‘‘To be sold, a negro man that understands cooking, house-work, &c. ;
also a grown negro girl; both have had the small-pox.”—Mass. Gazette, —
Aug. 29th, 1769.

See, also, copy of a deed of sale from Mrs. Elizabeth Treat to Mr.
Samuel Brooks, of Boston, of a negro man named Harry, for the sum of
twenty-five pounds ($125), in 1770. Historical and literary curiosities,
Boston Genealogical Library. .

1 Letter of T. Matlack to William Findley, Hist. Coll.

2 Graham’s Colonial History.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 339

‘‘Every freeman shall have absolute power and authority over
his negro slaves, of what opinion or religion soever.”’

Abolition, then, did not take its rise in the patriotism, learn-
ing or religion of the past. No; it was the offspring of
bigotry and intolerance, and lives and has its being in injustice
and persecution. It is enough that Sewell was the father of the
creed."

From the foregoing facts (gathered from various sources of
Colonial antiquities) we may infer what was the state of feeling
among the leading men of the nation upon the subject of slavery
and the slave-trade, at the time of the formation of the Federal
Government, and what course of national policy they would
desire to adopt with regard to the same. Already, in their
early Colonial Confederation, had they provided for the resti-
tution of fugitive slaves. But there was yet no free territory
in which they could take refuge. If such a provision was
necessary while there was yet no place of refuge, much more
would it be when they came to have a long coast adjacent to
them in which it had been prohibited by law. Consequently
we find a strenuous opposition to the passage of the Ordinance
of 1787 for the government of the North-West Territory, in
which it was proposed to prohibit slavery. History informs us
that this proviso was, after being thrice defeated, smuggled
into the bill by Northern votes, after the old Congress had be-
come but a ghost of its former power. Nathan Dane was the
last mover of the proviso as it was finally adopted. It was at
first proposed by Mr. Jefferson in 1785, while the Southern
States were fully represented, and this proviso was stricken out,
every Southern State voting against it, and every Southern
delegate except Mr. Jefferson. It was revived again the fol-
lowing year by Rufus King, also of Massachusetts, but no final
action appears to have been had upon it. And Nathan Dane,
in 1787, again brought up the subject; it was at first agreed
to strike out the proviso, but, on a reconsideration, it was
adopted in its present form; but not even then till the abettors
of the Act had so far compromised with its opponents as to
provide, in the same Act, for the restitution of fugitive slaves
that might escape into the territory.”

The Convention had been assembled about three months at

1 By these Abolitionists are meant those fanatics who make it a matter
of conscience to avoid the law, and to adopt a’ political, moral and
religious hobby.

2 But how have they kept the compact in the State of Ohio? See
speech of Mr. Calhoun on the Oregon bill, 1848.

340 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

Philadelphia when this Ordinance was finally passed; all the
leading men of the nation, such as Hamilton, Madison, et
genus omne, had left to occupy their seats in the Convention.
The old hall at Annapolis was left forsaken and desolate; the
old obsolete Congress, with scarce a corporal’s guard left,
eighteen members only remaining, the refuse delegation of eight
only of the thirteen States. It was well known that all the
ereat and leading features of the present Constitution had been
formed and agreed upon in the Convention; they had been
publicly discussed and commented upon throughout the country.
The federal basis of representation, which so much excited the
fears and dread of the North, was one; the perpetuity of the
slave-trade till 1808 was another. It was under such circum-
stances that the old defunct Congress, gasping in the struggles
of approaching dissolution, with just strength enough to invite
the agonies of death, by the craft of Nathan Dane and the
abolition confederates who were left, adopted this ungrateful
and perfidious Act.

It was thus smuggled upon the statute-book, to the great
injury and injustice of the Southern States, particularly Vir-
ginia. It was passed, said Mr. Calhoun, without the legiti-
mate number of States requisite, under the Articles of Confe-
deration, to pass such an Act: it was declared by Mr. Madison
to be void of constitutional authority.

The nation was then struggling with poverty, with a bank-
rupt treasury and broken-down credit; overwhelmed with the
debt of the war. Virginia, North and South Carolina, and
Georgia nobly came to the rescue; Virginia alone ceded to
the United States an extent of public domain more than twice
the amount of the whole territorial limits of the Government
at that time, out of which to pay the national debt and reple-
nish the treasury. But what gratitude did she receive in
return, but this proscriptive Act over the very territory which
she had so munificently ceded away ? — an Act that precluded
all her own citizens from entering upon the soil of this vast
territory, without foregoing the right and privilege of taking
their own property with them. What compensation has ever
been given to the citizens of the Slave States for being peremp-
torily denied the privilege, in common with the citizens of the
several States, of emigrating with their property to this terri-
tory, while it was the common property of the Union? Will
it be said that this ordinance provided for the return of fugi-
tive slaves? But by whom has that compact been violated ?
How many of the Free States have adhered to this promise,

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 341

either in the ordinance of 1787 or as provided by the Consti-
tution of the United States? Again, in 1788, the subject of
the fugitive slave law was brought before Congress: there
seemed to be a plain and manifest disposition on the part of
all the leading men of the nation, at that time, to protect this
species of property from being lost by escape, whenever there
was danger. The subject came up before Congress in the
following manner:

‘On the report of a committee consisting of Mr. Hamilton,
Mr. Sedgwick, and Mr. Madison, to whom was referred a
report of the Secretary for the Department of Foreign Affairs,
of the Ist inst., Resolved, that the Secretary of the Depart-
ment of Foreign Affairs be directed to transmit copies of the
papers referred to in his said report, to the Chargé d’ Affaires
of the United States at Madrid, and instruct him to represent
to his Catholic Majesty the inconvenience which the States
bordering on his dominions experience from the asylum there
afforded to the fugitive negroes belonging to the citizens of
those States; and that Congress have full confidence that
orders will be forthwith given to his governors, to permit and
facilitate their being apprehended and delivered to persons
authorized to receive them; assuring his Majesty that the said
States will assure the like conduct respecting all such negroes
belonging to his subjects as may be found therein. Resolved,
further, that the said Secretary be instructed to communicate
the said papers to the Hncargado de Negocios of Spain, and
to signify to him that his interposition to obtain proper regu-
lations upon this subject, would be very agreeable to Congress.
Aug. 26, 1788.’"?!

Thus did Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Madison labor in concert
to secure protection to the slave-holder: they had the territo-
rial compact on the North—they sought to negotiate this
treaty with Spain on the South: they would leave no place of
refuge unguarded, no asylum where the fugitives could not be
reached. The same provision had already been inserted in the
Constitution of the United States, to operate as a compact
among the States. The influence ‘and instrumentality of Mr.
Hamilton and Mr. Madison, in originating, completing, and
finally carrying the several provisions of that instrument, in
the Convention and with the States, no one will pretend to
dispute. What, then, was the sentiment that pervaded the
Convention and the States upon this subject, at that time?

1 Works of Alexander Hamilton, vol. ii. p. 472.
29 *

342 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

If there was such a spirit of hostility to the institution enter-
tained by the Fathers of the Republic as is pretended, how
came they to assent to the continuance of the African slave-
trade for nearly twenty years after the formation of the Con-
stitution? At the first Congress under the Federal Constitu-
tion, in 1790, petitions were presented by some of the Quakers
of Pennsylvania, for the interference of Congress with slavery :
they were referred to a committee of all northern men, who
reported unfavorably upon them; and it was resolved, that
Congress could not prohibit the importation of slaves prior to
1808, nor interfere with slavery in the States.’

We have seen something of the spirit of English jurispru-
dence relating to this species of property. Says Chief-Justice
Marshall: ‘‘When our forefathers emigrated to this country,
they brought with them the common law.’’ It pervaded every
portion of the social and political fabric, and filled up every
interstice in the whole system: it was the first breath that gave
life to the Republic —the soul that first inhabited the body
politic. Jurists and statesmen breathed its elements and toiled
in its spirit. Whence came the evil genius, then, among the
framers of the Constitution and early national legislators, to
circumvent and paralyze the institution of slavery? What
could have moved them to labor to break down this system —
to wantonly destroy three hundred and fifty millions of private
property, and leave the country to bewail its own desolation,
and the people to weep over their blighted prospects? Were
such the boasted sentiments, the high-toned patriotism of the
age, that the thirteen original States (which were then ail
slave-holding States) should enter into a solemn confederation,
and give their sanction and plighted faith to the stipulations
of the civil compact; that the people should afterwards ratify
and confirm the provisions of a Constitution the avowed spirit
and object of which was to cripple and prostrate the domestic
institutions of these several States? Why, then, was the slave-
trade permitted for twenty years? Why did Hamilton and
Madison, and the great men of the age, strive to throw up,
as it were, a national bulwark, upon the northern and southern
frontier of the slave States, to prevent the loss of fugitives by
escaping into territory beyond their jurisdiction? We are

1 See Webster’s Reply to Hayne. See also the several Acts of Con-
gress, and opinions of the Fathers of the Republic, enumerated above,
on pages 325 et seq.: they illustrate the views and feelings of the states-
men of that age upon the subject. They never refused to recognize the
rights of the South to their fullest extent.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 343

often referred to the ordinance of 1787, as an index of the
spirit of the age. Of what authority was this ordinance,
passed under the circumstances that it was, and what have
been its practical effects? In accordance with the opinion of
Mr. Madison, it has been totally disregarded, even by some
of the States and territories formed out of the North-west
Territory. When Illinois was organized into a territorial
government, it established and protected slavery, and main-
tained it in spite of the ordinance and in defiance of its express
prohibitions. In the constitution of Illinois, with which that
State was admitted into the Union, it was provided that all
slaves then in the State should remain slaves for life; that all
persons born of slave parents, after a certain day, should
be free at a certain age; and that all persons born in the
State, after a certain other day, should be free from their
birth. Thus, this State Constitution, as well as the territorial
law, repudiated this Wilmot Proviso in the ordinance of 1787
—the one receiving the direct and the other the indirect sane-
tion of Congress.1. And thus the General Government, to say
the least, has been accessory to these acts of repudiation.
Congress have also repudiated this proviso in the ordinance
in every instance when they have directly legislated upon the
subject, since the adoption of the Constitution of the United
States, except in the case of Oregon.

Now, if it was the intended policy of the framers of the
Constitution and the early legislators of the nation, to carry out
what are called free-soil principles, to prohibit the extension
of slavery into the territories ceded to the Union for the pur-
pose of being organized into new States, as is asserted by the
abolitionists, why was such not the practice in the early history
of the Government? If Congress intended really to prohibit
slavery in the territory north and west of the Ohio river, how
was it on the south? why did they repudiate this proviso
there ?

In organizing the territorial government of Mississippi, in
1798, the ordinance of 1787 was expressly applied to it, with
the exception of Article 6th, that prohibited the introduction
of slavery: that was omitted.’

1 Tllinois, in 1818, when admitted into the Union, had 1000 slaves:
Indiana also had a number. See Census U. 8. 1850, p. ix.

2 Justice Curtis, in his dissenting opinion in the Dred Scott case, has
instanced this and similar acts as an indirect interference with slavery in
the territories; but no, they leave it as they find it. 19 House Rep. p.
619. If Congress, by simply extending the ordinance of 1787 over cer-

344 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

Here, then, is an act of Congress—under Washington and
the early presidents, during the infancy of the Republic, and
under the administration of the elder Adams—showing that,
in the Southern territories, or those south of the Ohio River,
ceded to the Union by Virginia, North Carolina, South Caro-
lina, and Georgia, the right to hold slaves was clearly implied
and recognized. It will be seen, also, by looking into the ter-
ritorial bill of 1805, establishing the government of the terri-
tory of Orleans, embracing the same section of country now
known as the State of Louisiana, that this celebrated ordinance
was expressly extended to that territory, excepting the 6th sec-
tion, relating to the prohibition of slavery, which was again
omitted. And when Congress came to form a government for
the remainder of the Louisiana purchase, subsequently known
as the Missouri Territory, north of the 33d parallel, they did
not extend this ordinance to it at all. The people were, at
first, to be governed by laws made by their governors and
judges, and when the territorial government was finally organ-
ized by Congress in 1812, the people were left to do as they
pleased upon the subject of slavery, when they formed their
State constitutions. Illinois and Indiana, as we have seen,
also repudiated the anti-slavery proviso in this ordinance, on
the ground probably taken by Mr. Madison, that it was of no
constitutional authority, and it is asserted there were some
slaves also in Ohio. The Territory of Iowa was formed from
that of Wisconsin, which was taken from the old Michigan
Territory, or part of the Virginia cession. Congress, in form-
ing the government of Iowa, did not legislate upon the subject
of slavery; here, again, was omitted the anti-slavery proviso
of the Ordinance of 1787. Though the ordinance was carried
into effect there, yet the very clause that transfers it, also makes
it subject to be altered, modified, or repealed by the Territorial
Legislature ; leaving the people free to act: upon the subject of
slavery, subject only to the Constitution and laws of the United
States. The Oregon Bill is also referred to as an evidence of
the anti-slavery policy of the Federal Government. But here,
unfortunately for this position, the people, in their sovereign
capacity, had anticipated any action of the General Govern-
ment upon this subject. They had lived twelve years without

tain territories, without omission, intended positively to re-enact and
enforce the anti-proviso in the same, how could it consistently approve
of the Constitutions of Indiana and Illinois, which repudiated jt? These
acts only show that the effect of this ordinance was left to be determined,
under the Constitution, by the judiciary, not by the legislatures.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 345

any act of Congress to give them a government, or protection ;
in the mean time, they organized one of their own; and, by
virtue of their own laws, passed by their own representatives,
before the United States extended its jurisdiction over them,
they prohibited slavery by a unanimous vote, right or wrong.
It is true, the northern members of Congress, through their
zeal for the triumph of certain free-soil tenets, partially re-
enacted this law by the passage of the Oregon Bill; but for
what practical purpose no one can tell ; it was like the re-enact-
ing a law of Nature; as well might they have provided in this
factious bill that the sun shall continue to rise and set in Ore-
gon, and that no tropical fruits shall be cultivated there. But
this was the first and only triumph of the proscriptive policy of
their Abolition agitators, and God grant that it may be the last.
How was it in California? The people were left to act upon
the true principles of self-government, and they coolly and dis-
passionately decided to prohibit slavery. In Utah, New Mexi-
co, and Nebraska, the people have been also left free to adopt
or reject the institution in the State constitutions when formed,
as their feelings and best interests may dictate, without congres-
sional interference.
. The first departure from the true line of policy, intended by
the framers of the Constitution, was, in the interference of Con-
gress with the subject of slavery by the act known as the Mis-
souri Compromise. The application of that State for admis-
sion into the Union was with a true republican form, and upon
strict principles of constitutional self-government. But the
spirit of faction and dissension raged to such an alarming ex-
tent at that period, that it was in vain to appeal to paper com-
pacts, or political obligations, to control it; men’s prejudices had
become so strong, their zeal and enthusiasm so overheated and
violent in the din of conflict and the strife of angry and jarring
passions, that the foundations of the political fabric were fast
breaking away, and the whole system was likely to be precipi-
tated into anarchy and civil commotion, or resolved, perhaps,
into its original elements: the embankments had fairly given
way ; the current was sweeping with terrible impetuosity through
the crevasse, threatening to deluge the face of the nation with
its frightful flood. At this critical juncture, some scheme must
be. devised to check the headlong and wreckless career of poli-

1 The tempestuous and angry debate upon this party strife for supre-
macy, was a waste of the public fund. The Supreme Court of the United
States have recently decided in the Dred Scott Case that Congress has no
power to exclude slavery from the territories: hence this Oregon Bill is se
far unconstitutional.

346 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

tical fanaticism. The occasion called for the exercise of tact
and temporizing policy, equal to that of the most critical mili-
tary juncture upon the field of battle. Under this species of
duress, to save the nation, the States, and the people from the
impending catastrophe of a revolutionary dissolution of the
Union, it was reluctantly conceded that the parallel of 36° 30’
should be the dividing line between slave and free territory in
the Louisiana purchase. But this was not acquiesced in upon
constitutional principles, and as a matter of right, but merely
adopted as a temporizing expedient, as the least of two evils.
Can it be supposed that it was the intention of Mr. Jefferson,
when he paid fifteen millions of the people’s money for this
lovely tract of country, that the Southern States should be ex-
cluded from so large a portion? After speaking of his quiet
repose from public labors, he says of the Missouri question :
“This momentous question, like a fire-bell in the night, awa-
kened me and filled me with terror; I considered it at once the
knell of the Union. It is, indeed, hushed for a moment, but
this is a reprieve, not a final sentence. “A geographical line
coinciding with a marked principle, moral and political, once
conceived and held up to the angry passions of men, will never
be obliterated ; and every new irritation will mark it deeper
and deeper.”

Again, he says, speaking of the Spanish Treaty, and some
other topics of the day: ‘‘ These are all small waves that will
pass under the ship; but the Missouri question is a breaker on
which we lose the Missouri country by revolt, and what more
God only knows.”

That this restriction upon the admission of Missouri into
the Union was unjust and in violation of the spirit of the Con-
stitution, and was so considered, but adopted as a temporary
expedient, appears from the opinions of the ablest constitutional
lawyers of that day.

Says Mr. Monroe: ‘‘ My decided opinion is, that all the
States composing our Union, new as well as old, must have
equal rights, ceding to the General Government an equal share
of power, and retaining to themselves the like, that they cannot
be incorporated into the Union on different principles or con-
ditions. Should a bill pass admitting Missouri, subject to re-
straint, I shall have no difficulty in the course to be pursued ;
nor shall I, in any future case, respecting the admission of any
new State as to its rights as a State.’’!

1 See Mr. Monroe’s Letter to Judge Roane, of Va., dated Washington,
Feb. 16th, 1820.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 347

And, accordingly, after the passage of the Missouri bill,
President Monroe prepared the draft of a veto message, from
which is quoted the following extract :-—

-“ Having fully considered the bill, entitled, &c., and disap-
proving of it, I now return it, &. * * The Constitution, in
providing that new States may be admitted into the Union as
is done in the third section of the fourth article, intended that
they should be admitted with all the rights and immunities of
the original States — retaining, like them, all their powers as
to their local government, and ceding to the United States, in
the General Government, all the powers ceded to it by the
Constitution.

“That if conditions of a character, not applicable to the ori-
ginal States, should be imposed on new States, an inequality
would be imposed or created lessening, in a degree, the right
of State sovereignty, which would be always degrading to such
new States, and which, operating as a condition of its admis-
sion, its incorporation would be incomplete, and would also be
annulled, and such new State be severed from the Union, should
it afterwards assume equality, and exercise that right of sove-
reignty acknowledged to belong to the original States.’’?

Mr. Monroe applies the same objections to the interference
of Congress with slavery in the territories. He says it is
designed to act as a restraint upon the future policy of the new
States to be formed out of those territories, calculated directly
to injure many of the States in interests recognized and pro-
tected by the Constitution and in direct violation of the spirit
of that instrument.

No one but a bigot can fail to see the truth of this demon-
stration, no one but a fanatic can fail to acknowledge its
political force.2 Says Mr. Pinckney of South Carolina:

‘‘T cannot on any grounds think of agreeing to a compro-
mise on this subject. However we may all wish to see Missouri
admitted as she ought, on equal terms with the other States,
that is a very unimportant object to her compared with keeping
the Constitution inviolable, with keeping the hands of Congress

1 See Speech of Mr. Keitt, of S. C., on Nebraska Bill, March 30, 1854,

2 The recent decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, in the
Dred Scott case, has affirmed this doctrine to its fullest extent: the Court
held in that case that the Missouri restriction was a violation of the Con-
stitution of the United States, and that a negro is not a citizen of the
United States in the meaning of the Constitution; that ours is a govern-
ment for the white man; and that African slaves are property. This
opinion of the Court should be read by every one.

348 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

from touching the subject of slavery. On the subject of the
Constitution, no compromise should ever be made—neither can
any be made on the national faith, so seriously involved in
the treaty which gives to Louisiana, to every part of it, a right
to be incorporated into the Union on equal terms with the
other States. ’’?

But why then did President Monroe finally give his assent
to the Missouri restriction? He was driven to it as a tempo-
rary expedient to save the Union, but such an acquiescence is
no acknowledgment of the right. He says, in the same letter
to Judge Roane:

‘As to the part which I may act in all circumstances in
which I may be placed (in relation to the Missouri restriction),
I have not made up my mind, nor shall I, till the period arrives
for me to act, then I shall weigh well the injunctions of the |
Constitution, which, according to my understanding of them,
will be conclusive with me. The next consideration with me
will be the preservation of the Union.”’

Mr. Calhoun in a speech in the United States Senate, in
1847, reiterated this same sentiment ; he says, ‘‘ Sir, let me say
a word on the Compromise line; I have always considered it
a great error—highly injurious to the South, because it sur-
rendered, for mere temporary purposes, those high principles
of the Constitution on which I think we ought to stand. I am
against any compromise line, yet I would have been willing to
acquiesce in a continuation of the Missouri Compromise in
order to preserve the peace of the country.’’

But Mr. Jefferson was mistaken in his prophecy, when he
said, ‘‘ Every new irritation would serve to mark it deeper and
deeper.’’ He could not foresee the point to which the mad
career of Abolition phrenzy would drive its devotees. When
the subject came up again, in relation to the section of country
between the Rio Del Norte and the Pacific Ocean, acquired
from Mexico, the total abrogation of this compromise was the
watchword of the Abolitionists. The principle of this pre-
tended mutual concession, and in fact the division line itself,
instead of being marked deeper and deeper, as the true and
real division line between the conflicting elements that raged
on either side, had become totally obliterated from the memory |
of the free-soil party.

Immediately after the acquisition of this vast extent of

1 See Speech of Mr. Keitt, of South Carolina, March 30, 1854, in House
of Representatives.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 349

Mexican territory, the Senate, on motion of Mr. Douglas of
Illinois, voted into a bill, a provision to extend the Missouri
Compromise line indefinitely westward to the Pacific Ocean, in
the same sense and with the same understanding with which it
was originally adopted.; but when this resolution was submitted
to the House, it was voted down by free-soil votes. Here,
certainly, the prophecy of Mr. Jefferson did not prove true.
In the annexation of Texas, in 1845, this line had been still
extended through that territory to the Rio Del Norte; but here,
for the first time since its adoption, had it been disregarded by
Congress; here, for the first time, had it been openly abjured
and abandoned by even the Abolitionists. In the height of
their zeal, in an evil hour, they resolved that the Slave States
henceforth should possess no right, title, or interest in, and to,
the common territory of the Union, and that their citizens
should be excluded from the same. Not content with our coat,
they went upon the literal Scripture principle that we ought to
give them our cloak also. But, unfortunately for them, they
overreached the mark—din chasing the shadow they lost the
substance. Says Mr. Douglas: ‘‘ By whom was the Missouri
Compromise defeated in 1848? By Northern votes with free-
soil proclivities. It was this defeat of the Missouri Compro-
mise that re-opened the slavery agitation in all its fury, it was
this defeat of the Missouri Compromise that gave rise to the
tremendous struggle in 1850. It was this defeat of the Missouri
Compromise that gave rise to the necessity of the compromise
in 1850.

‘« Had we been faithful to the Missouri Compromise in 1848,
the question would never have arisen (in organizing the
government of Kansas and Nebraska), who was it that was
faithless? I undertake to say that it was the very men who
now insist that the Missouri Compromise was a solemn com-
pact that should never have been departed from. Hvery man
who is now assailing the principles of the bill under considera-
tion (the Nebraska bill), so far as I am informed, opposed the
Missouri Compromise in 1848. The very men who now
arraign me for a departure from that Compromise, are the men
who successfully violated and repudiated it in 1848, and caused
it to be superseded by the Compromise of 1850. . . . Then,
sir, as I before remarked, the defeat of the Missouri Compro-
mise of 1848, having given rise to the necessity for the estab-
lishment of a new one in 1850, let us see what that compromise
was. The leading feature of the Compromise of 1850 was
Congressional non-interference as to slavery in the territories,

30

350 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

that the people of the territories, and of all the States, were to
be allowed to do as they pleased upon the subject of slavery,
subject only to the Constitution and laws of the United States.”

Thus has Mr. Jefferson’s prophecy proved as false as the
theory on which it was based. Instead of ‘‘ every irritation’s
marking tt deeper and deeper,’’ it has had a tendency to
obliterate it. He overlooked the great principle of popular
governments, that when an ascendant faction once depart from
the just and true line of policy, they are never satisfied with
their aggressions, and every new agitation is not to keep what
they have got but to get something more, till the wrong becomes
so apparent, and the outrage so flagrant, as to produce a
reaction ; then the people seize upon the occasion to right them-
selves, by their virtue and intelligence to return to the path of
rectitude, by their capacity for self-government to correct
popular error, to bring back the laws and institutions of the
country to their correct and legitimate position. It is this salvo
of popular power and policy that has corrected the error of
Congressional interference upon the subject of slavery.

But let us inquire what would have been the present condition
of the country had that course of policy been pursued from the
formation of the government, which is contended for by the
free-soil party of the present day. There were at the adoption
of the Constitution, about seven hundred thousand slaves found
in greater or less numbers in every one of the thirteen original
States. At a reasonable estimate this amount of taxable pro-
perty could not have been estimated at less than three hundred
millions of dollars. For the loss of such an amount of private
property, the nation, bankrupt as it was from the heavy debt
of the war, was totally unable to make any compensation, had
it been disposed to do away with the institution. Its existence
must therefore be tolerated, and this vast amount of property
recognized and protected by the Constitution. It is a well-
established principle in politics as well as civil jurisprudence,
that the Constitution and law of the land recognize no evasion
of their own provisions; ‘‘the law permits nothing to be done
indirectly that cannot be done directly.’’ Suppose, then, the
government of the United States had attempted at the outset
to limit the territorial extent of slavery to the thirteen original
States; that from all new territory that might thereafter be
acquired in any manner by the United States, slavery should
be excluded ; what would have been the effect of such @ pro-
hibition upon the increase and future prospects of this vast

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 351

amount of property, within the pale of the Constitution and
of the States in which this species of property still exists ?
The slave population throughout the United States at the
present day cannot number less than four millions of persons ;
figures would fail to give any adequate idea of the real value
of this mass of property. But instead of being restricted, as
it would have been under the free-soil policy, to the six original
States, where it is still retained, it is spread over the face of
nine more of the most luxuriant and productive States that
have since been admitted into the Union. Instead of the pre-
sent prosperous and thriving condition of all the Slave States,
instead of the four millions of the present comparatively happy
and contented slave population in all these States; under this
proscriptive policy, it requires no stretch of imagination to see
what would have been the mournful history of both the master
and the slave.

The rigor of the climate and the character of the soil in the
Kastern and Middle States could not foster the institution : it
would, as is evident, necessarily die out there, like plants trans-
planted from a warmer to a colder region, uncongenial to their
nature. The constant tendency of the negro race in those
States is to become extinct, as we see by the different censuses
taken of the inhabitants. The six Southern States then would
have been left with the whole burden of the present four millions
of slaves and free black population, instead of being distributed
as they now are over the vast territory of the entire Slave
States. Under this prohibitory policy these old Slave States
would have been overwhelmed with a slave population, with no
outlet, no means of selling or disposing of them, that would
ultimately have destroyed this species of property as such.
Such an undermining course of policy would have cut off all
prospects of the present wealthy and flourishing condition of
the Southern States. It is conceded by all acquainted with the
South, that no system of free labor could, in the same time,
have pushed the conquests of civilization so far through the
then sultry and epidemic regions along upon the Gulf coast and
upon the banks of the Mississippi. No constitution but the
African’s can endure constant toil beneath the burning sun in
this sultry clime.. And but for this system of compulsory labor,
where now smile those beautiful flower-gardens of the South-
West, where now her boundless fields are whitened as the driven
snow, with the great staple of the South, or laden with their
heavy yields of corn and sugar-cane, the Chickasaw, Cherokee,

353 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

and Choctaw, might still roam beneath the deep shades of her
lonely forests ‘‘ with none to molest or make him afraid.’??

Was such the plighted faith when the States united under
the common banner of the Union? Could it have entered into
the genius and spirit of the civil compact, at the formation of
the Federal Government, to undermine and overthrow the do-
mestic institutions of the States; to weaken their power;
break down their future prospects for wealth and general
prosperity; to destroy their property, by circumscribing its
limits; and leave the fairest portion of their country in deso-
lation and waste? Was it for this that some of the original
States ceded away the fairest portions of the Union? Far
from it. They sought refuge from all danger and protection
from all injury under the common flag of their nation; they
' rallied around its standard, streaming over them in the breeze,
with the sacred preamble upon it: ‘‘We, the people of these
United States, in order to form a more perfect Union; to esta-
blish JuUsTICE, insure domestic TRANQUILLITY, to provide for
the CoMMON DEFENCE and GENERAL WELFARE, &c. * *
Do ordain and establish this Constitution of the United States
of America.’’

Whatever is destructive to the property interests of any
State, is subversive of its resources of wealth, independence,
and power. Would it, then, have been conducive to the
general welfare of the States, to have sacrificed this wealth,
destroyed their most valuable property interests, and cut off all
hope of future prosperity ? Would it have established justice

1 We had intended to prepare some statistics upon the effects of British
emancipation in the West Indies, but finding that it will extend this work
beyond its proper limits, we can make but a brief reference to that sub-
ject. The reader will find the subject fully treated in a report of the
West India Association of Glasgow, April 14, 1853; he will there find the
tables showing the number of estates that have been abandoned and gone
to waste since that act took effect, also the depressed and wretched con-
dition of these islands. Who can read it and then honestly contend for
the efficacy of free labor with a negro population! The British governor
of Jamaica recommends the importation of fugitive slaves from Canada,
to instruct, enlighten, and improve the creole population of that Island.
(See Essay on Treatment of Negroes, sup. p. 231.) Hence, we say, that
without compulsory labor, many of the new Slave States could not have
been populated. Without these new Slave States, whence would the world
supply its present demand for cotton? where would be obtained the three
or four millions of bales of cotton that now feed and clothe nations? and
what would be the condition of the millions of population and tens of
millions of capital now employed in its manufacture? Who can estimate
its loss to the world?

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 353

among them, to have forever prohibited their citizens from
entering upon those beautiful and fertile lands that stretched
away from their boundaries towards the setting sun? Whence
have those wealthy and flourishing Slave States upon the Ohio,
the Mississippi, and the Gulf of Mexico, been peopled? By
whose industry, wealth, and enterprise have they been consti-
tuted, in proportion to the number of their inhabitants, some
of the most interesting and important States of the Union?
And how have the two millions of slave population that inha-
bit them found their way into this territory? Were they car-
ried there by the effect of any statute law of any State or
nation? They rather flowed in there, like every other species
of property, simply because there was no law to prevent it:
slaves first found their way into these new States and territo-
ries in the same manner and by the same right that they first
fonnd their way into the New England and other States, during
their early colonial existence. How did slavery originate in
Massachusetts, and how did it cease to exist in that State?
Was there ever any statute law of the State or nation upon
that subject? Did any law, during the existence of slavery in
all the States, ever prohibit the free emigration of citizens from
State to State, and taking their property with them? Now,
because slavery was not profitable, and could not continue to
exist in Massachusetts and the other Free States, but survived
and flourished in Virginia and the Southern States, would it
not have been the height of ‘‘InsusTice”’ for Congress to have
prohibited the citizens of those States from emigrating with
their property to those beautiful and luxuriant climes and
countries that lay to their south and west? Were they never
to set foot in the Hesperian Gardens that now lie in the beau-
tiful Valley of the Mississippi? Were the vast Elysian Fields
of the South-west to sleep forever in an untrod wilderness, in-
accessible to the footsteps of civilized man, to gratify the
whims and caprices of an Abolition sect in the Free States ?
Is such doctrine compatible with the great spirit, the just,
liberal, and comprehensive views of Washington and his com-
patriots ? |

But this proscriptive policy, if unjust then is unjust still;
and the same reasoning may be applied, half a century hence,
to the present condition of the States and territories, that we
have applied to the condition of the country from the begin-
ning. Who can reside but for a single year upon the banks
of the great Father of Waters, at one of the crossings of the
great thoroughfare of the immense tide of emigration that has

30 * x

354 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

been for years setting westward from the old Slave States, to
seek new fields and a virgin soil in the immense territory even
beyond the Mississippi, and not feel the weight of injustice
and the severe calamit} that would befall these people, were
they denied this privilege; and not realize the fact that it
would be the death-blow and knell of their future prospects ?

The soil, from long cultivation, in some of the old Slave
States, is fast becoming exhausted. In the States of North
and South Carolina, Georgia, and even in Alabama and parts
of Mississippi, large tracts of country, for this reason, must
be annually abandoned, and the inhabitants are compelled to
seek new and fresh lands to reward their labors.1 Millions
and millions of acres of the richest and most productive lands
upon the face of the globe, that have for years, and will for
hundreds of years to come, lay unoccupied in the West, invite
them, by the most tempting rewards, to seek new homes in
these vast realms of the public domain. Whoever has wit-
nessed them moving on, in caravans of hundreds in a company,
with their men-servants and their maid-servants, and their cat-
tle and their horses, and their train of wagons for miles arrayed
in a line of march, like the children of Israel in pursuit of the
promised land, can feel most sensibly the weight of the death-
blow that would be inflicted upon the industry, wealth, and
enterprise of these States, were their citizens denied this
privilege.

But why should Congress be asked to cut off this fruitful
source of public revenue, arising from the sale of the public
lands, and to deny the citizens of the Slave States the common
right of the citizens of the several States, to emigrate to the
new territories which can alone secure value to their property
and success to their labors? It is asked for the reason that
they possess a species of property that does not meet the con-
scientious views of the people of those States where it has been
proven that it cannot exist. But, say they, slavery in the
United States has a tendency to corrupt public morals, and a
baneful and debasing influence upon productive industry and
free labor; therefore the people of the Free States cannot

1 It will perhaps be said that this is owing to bad husbandry; but such

is not the fact: the soil is of such a character that, in consequence of its
washing, &c. it cannot be reclaimed.

2 Dr. Belknapp, in his correspondence with Judge Tucker, says the win-
ters were unfavorable to the African in Massachusetts; the price which
- they commanded shows that they were comparatively worthless in the

now free States, from one hundred and fifty to two hundred dollars being
their average price.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 355

intermingle with it. We cheerfully take issue with them on
these points, and appeal to facts to support the verity of our
pleading.! But is the General Government to become the
propagandist of a moral or religious sect? Shall Congress be
called upon to support a moral or religious creed —to uphold
its devotees in all their quibbling qualms of conscience, false
and fastidious notions of freedom, relative to the laws and
institutions of any one of the States or territories? If so,
then the next sect, for the same reasons, will proscribe some
particular form of religious belief; another will shut out and
preclude all great cities in the new States and territories, large
public works of internal improvements, manufacturing corpo-
rations, &c. for the reason that they all have a tendency to
corrupt public morals, and to monopolies with regard to free
labor. And, finally, if these all succeed, the Christian social-
ists will next come in with their petitions to exclude the insti-
tution of marriage; they will portray the long catalogue of
evils attendant upon it, and pray that it may be abolished in
the District of Columbia, excluded from the territories; and
that no new State may be admitted into the Union without a
‘Wilmot Proviso’’ in its constitution against it. Next come
the non-resistant Woman’s Rights, till we finally get back to
the full proscriptive system of the early colonists.

Each of these creeds may be made as legitimate a subject of
congressional interference, if the sect became sufficiently nume-
rous and powerful to sustain it, as that of anti-slavery. Once
give fanaticism a foothold upon the statute-book of the nation,
and who can satisfy the demands of its bigotry and intolerance ?
Who shall say ‘‘ Hitherto shalt thou come and no farther ?”’
Or, set bounds to its blind and lawless career? It will ulti-
mately lead to the most fatal consequences of political intoler-
ance, riot, and misrule. It is the same spirit that prompted
our forefathers to persecute and punish men for opinion’s sake.
It is the same spirit that banished Roger Williams, the Ana-
baptists, and the Quakers, that would now exclude a portion
of the citizens of the United States from the common territory
of the Union; it seems to be still lurking, like the tempest
around the mountains, amid the hills and vales of these ancient
fields of puritanical persecution. And had they but the power
to wield the sceptre of the nation, we might read the terrible
fate of the Nonconformists, the Anabaptists, the Quakers, and
the Witches, and tremble for our own.?

1 See Table, appended to this volume.
? Look at the recent act of the Massachusetts Legislature in removing

356 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

It is objected to the prevalence of slavery by the free-soil
party that it is deleterious to the interests of free labor, para-
lyzes industrial pursuits, corrupts religion and public morals,
and impedes the general progress of the nation in knowledge,
wealth, independence, and power.

We have considered to some extent the effect of slavery upon
the slave population, but one of the most interesting aspects of
this institution is its effects upon the white population in slave-
holding States. Men have been so long accustomed to listen
to the bold and unwarranted statements of the Abolitionists, to
suffer these slanderous charges to go uncontradicted, that they
have been cheated into a partial belief in their verity ; forget-
ting the old adage, that a lie well stuck to is as good as the
truth ; they have come to look upon all who presume to con-
tradict them as presumptuous and unprofitable agitators, and,
generally, to decry discussion upon this subject. Thousands
of the dough-faced panderers to Northern fanaticism, even in
the slave-holding States, for want of a proper understanding
of this subject, have been brow-beat and bullied by the sophis-
try and misrepresentation of the Abolitionists, into a desire to
live in the peaceful and silent enjoyment of an acknowledged
evil; fearing a truthful examination of its facts and details,
and dreading their unfavorable results.

But let every true-hearted friend of the South, who feels in-
terested in upholding and defending her institutions, put far
away such a craven and suicidal policy; the day is fast ap-
proaching when he must record his vote and the weight of his
influence for or against the institution that has made the South
what it is, and the Southern people what they are. Let him
meet the Abolitionists fairly and boldly in the field, with his
bosom bravely brunt to the battle, and hurl at them the death-
shots of truth and facts as detailed in the statistical history of
the country, remembering that truth cannot suffer in the con-
flict, and that victory is never won in dastardly shrinking from
the field of battle.

We will commence with its effects upon religion. The Abo-
litionists have so long represented the people of the non-slave-
Judge Loring for afaithful and conscientious discharge of his duty in the
Burns’ Case. The murder of Bachelor, for the same reason. Look
also at the persecutions of the immortal Webster! An editor, or quon-
dam editor of Providence, Rhode Island, stated to the author, in the
month of August, 1854, that if he could have had his way he would have
hung Daniel Webster on the first tree, on his return from Congress after

making his great speech in 1850: doubtless, thousands entertained the
same feeling.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 357

holding States, and especially the people of New England, as
a devout God-fearing, saint-like people, ‘‘free from all pride,
vain-glory, and hypocrisy ;” they have been held up as such
- models of humble piety, virtue, and sobriety, that their land
has been known as the land of steady habits. So strict have
they been in the outward observance of God’s law, that even
the puff of a steam-car, or the kiss of one’s wife on the Sabbath,
has been made a penal offence. On the contrary, the slave-
holder is held up as a God-forsaken, God-despising heathen ; as
one regardless of all law, human and divine, as vicious, reck-
less, lavish of his wealth only to gratify his pride.

- The humble piety, the strict morality claimed for the people
of New England is attributed to their having freed themselves
from the curse of negro slavery, to the blighting effects of which,
charity charges the alleged moral and religious degradation of
the slave-holder. These vain-boasting and sweeping denuncia-
tions being uncontradicted by the South, have long passed for
current truths. But, ‘‘there is a point beyond which forbear-
ance ceases to be a virtue.’’ The evidence is now made pub-
lic in the statistics of the country, and we purpose to present
the comparative condition of these two sections.

For this purpose, we will take Maine, New Hampshire, Ver-
mont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, and con-
trast them with Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South
Carolina, and Georgia, the old slave-holding States that still
retain the system. We give the Abolitionists every advantage ;
we take their models of religion and piety; we take the very
homes of the good old Puritan Fathers, and we will compare
them with those who are denounced as ‘“ fire-eaters,’’ ‘‘ cut-
throats,’’ ‘‘ traffickers in human flesh,’’? &c. The free popula-
tion of the New England States, and of these five Southern
States, are so nearly equal that the test is sufficiently exact.

We give, from the Census of 1850, the number of churches,
the value of church property, and the number of worshippers
who can be accommodated in the churches in each of these
portions of the country.

Free Pop. No.of Churches. Value. Accom.

Me., N.H., Vt., Mass.,o 798.016 4,607 19,862,634 1,898,450
R. I., Conn. ;

Md., Va., N.C.,8.C., \ 2,730,214 8,081 11,149,118 2,896,472
Georgia.

2,198 3,473 $8,113,516 1,008,022
These five Southern States, with only a free population of
2,198 greater than the six New England States, have nearly

308 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

double the number of churches capable of accommodating a
million more worshippers at but little over half the cost!

We have, then, these facts, that the slave-holders are more
disposed to build churches ; that their object is not display, but
to accommodate those that wish to worship God; while the
degenerate sons of the simple-hearted, humble-minded Puritan,
the pharisaical Abolitionists, who ‘‘ thanks God he is not as
other men,’’ seeks to glorify himself rather than his God, by
the erection of costly temples from which the humble Christian
is excluded. But these Southern States have even a brighter
picture to present. The ‘‘ poor slave,” who is represented by
the Abolitionists as virtually deprived of all Christian teaching,
is here furnished accommodation in the house of God better than
the pious white man can find in the costly and gorgeous temples
of New England.

Free Pop. No.of Churches. Ratio.
Me., Vt., N. H., Mass., R.I., Conn........ 2,728,016 4,667 1 to 592
Md., Va., N.C., 8:C., Ga; (free) so-so 2,730,214 8,081 1 to 336
LOU cet avieees pe gec4h sobs nasepeade tee aas te stern 3,448,426 peycace 1 to 426

In New England there is one church to every 592 of its inha-
bitants ; while in the Southern States there is one to every 336
of its free to every 426 of its whole population! These South-
ern States contain a population, including slaves, of 720,410
more than New England; yet, in New England, there are
200,000 more who cannot find a seat in the house of God!
These Southern churches can not only accommodate every man
that can be crowded into the gorgeous temples of New Eng-
land, but would then have room for more’than a million of
slaves ! ‘

In New England, 934,566, nearly one-third of their popula-
tion, are excluded from a seat in church! while in these ana-
thematized Southern States there is not only room for all its
free population, but there is also room for 166,258 slaves.

‘These facts are startling. When we look further at the
origin of their respective populations, and other circumstances
which attend them, they are almost incomprehensible. When
we remember that the population is so much more dense in these
New England States than in the Southern —it being, in the
former, 43 to the square mile, in the latter but 13; that in New
England the price of labor and the cost of materials is much
less; that the people of New England live so much more in
towns and villages; that in these Southern States they are on
large farms, scattered far apart, rarely even in villages; that
thus the inducements and facilities for the erection of churches

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 359

are so much greater in New England, we are the more forcibly
struck with the character of these exhibits.

There is yet another fact, in connection with these develop-
ments, shown by the census, which will strike all candid persons
as worthy of reflection. Of the small number of churches in
New England, 202 are Unitarian, 285 Universalist, to say
nothing of the Come-Outers, Spiritualists, Mormons, Millerites,
Swedenborgians, and a host of others, too numerous to men-
tion ; while of the large number in these Southern States there
are but one Unitarian and seven Universalist. Thus we see
that the slave-holders of the South run not after strange gods,
invent no new religions, but are content with old-fashioned
humble Christianity.

But we find Abolition to originate and flourish in the same
atmosphere with every other heresy and heterodoxy, from Salem
witchcraft to Mormon polygamy. And the Garrisons, the
Parkers, Stowes and Beechers, with Fanny Wrights and Abby
Folsoms, are found alone in that land that produced Joe Smith,
Miller, and the Misses Fox.

What is it that has thus reversed the condition of these peo-
ple; set at naught all our experience; that has converted the
indolent, thoughtless Southerner, into the humble orthodox
Christian, while the men and women of the North, the world
over noted for religious enthusiasm, the sons and daughters of
the Puritans, inheriting the homesteads of all their trials and
sufferings, have fallen from their simple, stern devotion, and
become setters-up of strange doctrines? We will attempt,
during our remarks, to suggest the cause.

From the religious we turn to the social and moral condition
of the people. We will take them as they are, and not as they
are represented; we will test bold assertions by stern facts.
We will again take the six New England States and the five
old Slave States, and contrast their condition, because we de-
sign to give the Abolitionists the advantage of their boasted
land of steady habits. When we assert that these slave-holding
States are far in advance of New England in all the elements
of real prosperity and true national greatness; that the people
are richer, healthier, happier; that their natural increase of
population is far greater, and the standard of morality and
intelligence far higher among the people, we know that we shall
be met with a sneer at our presumption. But let facts and
figures decide the issue. We find in the census of 1850 the
first great test of the superior condition of our own over these
other States, is in the larger proportion of our dwellings to our

360 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

families. It needs no argument to show that country the hap-
piest which has the most homes for its people. Not only is
their physical condition, their mere comfort, promoted, but
there is nothing which more certainly conduces to health and
good morals. The watchful care of the home circle, the cheer-
ful, happy fireside, preserve not only the body from disease, but
the mind and the heart from corruption and vice. We turn,
then, to the homes and families of New England, and compare
them with these five old Slave States.

Families. Dwellings.
DiS. Ns, Hn V try DSBS. 54 Fe Ley COND 4 hae nach aot 518,532 447,789
BLD eV Been Nevis} iarktcs (ai ,00.505s si tine ok wns ah sce eee 506,968 496,369

With equal population, New England has 11,564 more fami-
lies; these Southern States 48,580 more dwellings! In New
England, the land whose homes the Abolitionists delight to
praise, one in every seven of the families is homeless! while
in these Southern States but one family in fifty-two is without
ahome. Taking the average of the number of persons com-
posing a family, and New England has 373,700 of its popula-
tion thrown upon the world, who have no place for a home!

Could we trace, in the census, the full consequences of this
vast difference in the condition of the people, it would present
a picture far from flattering to the Abolition moralist. There
is no father in New England who would not place his family in
the humblest cabin, his own home, there to learn the lessons of
virtue, rather than for any luxury to expose them to the cor-
rupting influences of the public house. There is no mother
who would not toil with aching bones to guard her daughter
with the shield of the domestic hearth. At home, virtues
flourish ; abroad, vice plants its seeds, takes root and thrives.

There are consequences exhibited in the census which we can,
in some degree, trace to this cause. It is claimed that New
England has far outstripped the slave-holding States in the
growth of its population. But let us not take naked assertion
for truth; let us again appeal to the census. We will take
New England and the same five old slave-holding States.

Population. Families. Ann.Births.
Me., N. H.; Vt., Mass., R. I., Conn. .... 2,728,118 518,532 61,148 ©
Md., Va., N.C., 8..C., Ga. .....c00 sce. 2,730,814 506,968 77,688

With equal population, with 11,564 more families, New
England has 16,535 less annual births; the natural increase by
birth being 27 per cent. greater in these Southern States than
in New England!

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 361

Of the five Southern States which we have selected, two of
them, South Carolina and Georgia, are deemed so fatal in their
climate, a Northern life insurance company would claim the
forfeiture of the policy for a visit to their territories; and yet
we find them more prolific than the North! Here, again, we
find the laws of nature vanquished, the rule reversed ; the North,
instead of supplying population to the South, is far behind her
in natural increase. We must look beyond the climate for the
cause. We may attribute it, in part, to the greater number of
dwellings, and the consequent increase of comfort to the occu-
pants at the South. But this alone is not sufficient to produce
so extraordinary a difference; other causes, equally efficient,
conduce much to this result; and those causes may, without
difficulty, be traced by their effects.

The natural increase of population is universally held to be

a correct criterion of the physical and moral condition of a
people. To increase and multiply, a people must be healthy
and happy, virtuous and vigorous. They must labor, not toil;
their diet be nutritious, their habits regular. Luxury and in-
dolence as naturally beget effeminacy as do destitution and op-
pression produce imbecility.
A people, virtuous, with comfortable homes, ample provi-
sion, without excessive toil, will even overcome the obstacles of
climate, and increase more rapidly than those who, in the most
favorable climates, without a home, toil for a scant subsistence,
become vicious from destitution ; or those who, from excessive
wealth, with no stimulus to healthful exercise, become idle and
effeminate. But statistical facts relative to the superior condi-
tion of the Southern people are no less startling.

Population. Deaths. Ratio.
Me., N.-H., Vt., Mass., R.1I., Conn...... 2,728,118 42,368 1 to 64
Wi Vics B20,,| Gas s.0.08 Lutaehene 2,720,316 82,216 1 to 85

In these New England States there are 10,152 more deaths
annually than in the sickly and fatal Southern States — about
33 per cent. in favor of the slave-holding States. Here, again,
we find nature conquered, the physical and moral condition of
the people better.

Thus we find that these slave-holding States which the
Abolitionists would represent as becoming depopulated from
the effects of climate and disease, actually increase 62 per cent.
per annum faster than New England, not taking into account
the artificial increase by importation: the excess of Southern
births being 29 per cent., of Northern deaths, 33 per cent. It
, 31

86% THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

is not fair in this estimate to take into account the increase of
population in New England by immigration ; because we can
only look at natural increase to ascertain the physical and
moral condition of a people. There may be extraneous causes
for immigration to a country, that have nothing to do directly
with the moral or physical condition of the people, as, for
instance, the peopling of California and some of the new lands
of the West. Here the same causes operated to produce these
effects that prompted the avaricious Spaniard to the conquest
of Mexico and Peru—an inordinate love of gold. Gold!
Gold! was the watchword.

It is a favorite trick of the Abolitionists to make such com-
parisons as New York with Virginia, Pennsylvania with North
Carolina, Massachusetts with South, Carolina, to show the
superiority of the system of labor in the free States, in the pro-
gress of population, wealth, prosperity, and happiness. But
the sophistry of such comparisons is apparent to the under-
standing of a child. The relative position and physical
character of these great Free States, affording superior advan-
tages for commerce and manufactures, have not only invited
millions of foreign capital to profitable investments, but millions
upon millions of foreign emigrants and paupers to their shores.
While they afford the greater facilities for the carrying trade
of all the States, and commerce in general, they are so situated
as to catch those immense waves of foreign immigration that
are constantly floating in upon the American coast. These
hordes of immigrants from higher northern latitudes in the Old,
range along similar parallels in the New World, and compara-
tively few of them are found south of Mason and Dixon’s Line.
Hence it would be quite as unjust to compare these few States
with those of the Slave States that do not enjoy such advan-
tages of location and physical character, in their progress in
population, commerce, and manufactures, as to compare these
few Statés with California in progress of population and pro-
duction of gold dust, or with Texas in that of the increase of
population. Virginia, with no influx of foreign population, has

been subjected to a constant drain upon her native increase, by
an immense tide of emigration to all the new Slave States. She
has ceded more territory to the government, and peopled more
of the new Slave States with her native sons, than any other
State in the Union. And the same is true to some extent of
all the old Slave States. And what has been the result? They
have from their own native resources opened and settled two
more new States than the old Free States, with all their foreign

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 363

resources ; taken up almost double the amount of government
land, and produced double the value of exports.1 What truth
then is there in the assertion that slavery prevents national pro-
gress, by settlement, increase of population and wealth, or
otherwise? It is an old adage that ‘‘too much of a good
thing is good for nothing.’’ So great has been the increase
of population in some of the old free States, that they have
been compelled to put a check upon it by prohibiting immigrants
from landing. Comparisons are instituted by the Abolitionists
between the comparative value of land per acre in Virginia and
New York, and others of a like kind ; but what does the excess
in favor of the Free States show? Only that there are a greater
number of persons to the square mile, and labor being cheaper
it is harder for the poor man, as in England, to become a pro-
prietor of the soil. But even then, if the comparison be put
upon its true basis, we shall find it to be in favor of the Slave
States; the ratio between the number of persons to the square
mile in any two States, and the value of the land per acre in
those States, is the only criterion by which to determine its
comparative intrinsic value in each. In the State of New
York we find 66 persons to a square mile, with the proportion
of improved to unimproved land twice as great as in Virginia ;
in the latter State the number of persons to the square mile is
only 22, just one-third of that in New York; yet in Virginia,
with all her waste of mountains and excess of unimproved terri-
tory, with a cash valuation of farms less by more than one-half
than that in New York, the value of land per acre is nearly
equal to the ratio between the number of persons to the square
mile ; the ratio of persons to the mile being as 66 to 22, and
the value of land per acre as about 29 to 9. I say the com-
parison put upon this, the correct basis, will in every instance
result in favor of the Slave States. But we do not contend that
the country which has the greatest aggregate wealth is really
the most prosperous; we must look rather to the sources of its
wealth and to the equality in the distribution of the same.
Slave-holding States must be mainly agricultural, and their
wealth of necessity more equally distributed than in those
engaged in commerce and manufactures. The census confirms
this position by the vast disproportion in the number of paupers
in the slayeholding and non-slaveholding States. We will take
again the six New England and the five old Slave States.
Again we give the Abolitionists every advantage ; we take their

1 See Table III., Appendix.

364 THE POLITICAL AND' JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

models of commercial and manufacturing prosperity, and con-
trast them with those which are ever held up and pointed at as
emblems of poverty; we compare the frugal, ingenious, ener-
getic, thrifty Yankee, with the idle, improvident, careless, and
wasteful slave-holder, with equal population :

Value of Property assessed.

Me., NY H.;“Vt., Mass; Conn, Tie Livtinasec oss tevertens $1,003,466,181
Md... Vaz; Ny:C., 8. C.j Gay cccocsicd secececobecceseostededes’ Sta geeU NOG, One

Excess of Southern wealth... ....0. secsss sreccsese $417,523,392
Of Gis OxGOsS, AN ares ce, tense «gpceceenoecsenseenta maaan $127,318,388
wd «¢ Personal Property .v.s<cvce avs as cuavceeae see 291,215,054
The ratio of wealth to the individual is, in New
VATA UGTIG. ss onan 500055 55> ih's.“205e 545" 05ankens Sie aE $367 per head,
An IOUTNOP STATES... <posesese scscenscnass cgenusedr neni 520 = ¢

The poor worn-out Slave States that have ceded away terri-
tory equal to twice the size of the original States, and have
divided their wealth and population over nine new States, have
still $417,523,392 more left than New England, with all its
boasted prosperity! This result is the more extraordinary
because it reverses again all our experience. Since the days
of Tyre and Sidon, commerce and manufactures have been
regarded as the greatest sources of wealth, and agriculture the
less. In Europe tariffs are made to protect the farmer, com-
merce and manufactures protect themselves. But in Southern
States agriculture not only protects itself, but it carries on its
shoulders commerce and manufactures.

If we rank the slaves as persons in this estimate and entitled
to share in the distribution of the property, still the South is
far richer than the North.

Total Popu- Ratio of Property

lation. per head.
Me., N. H., Vt., Mass,, R.I., Conn,...0.«. 2,729,016 $367-00
RE ey he ees facia 1a fharst ocpceahtcane oa eae 3,448, 426 412-00

We may be accused of selecting the poorest of the non-
slaveholding States, and the richest slaveholding States for our
comparison. But let us contrast them with New York, Penn-
sylvania, and Ohio, the giants of the Free States, and we shall
find the comparison still more favorable to the South :

‘ Ratio of property.
NOW YOrK. Ae visoce cnsnce voses) seveseces coccescscasancs $231.00 per head.
PONNSY]VANIA .. 56 cece anense ov o0he cence cccsecten sebsne 214.00

Ohio.. SOCCSHEES COCECHSEE CHS -4OSSESES SHEE SESE EE EES se eeee 219.00 66

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 365

The other non-slave-holding States are still lower in the
scale :

MIBURUN HEB: boneesccs dsc cocccstscces cece ‘di avrrea $154.00 per head.

TUTHOEGT, 0. si cidedcccesc'es AR. sid coestubcattouess 134.00 *
While of the new ‘Slave States :

Mississippi has........ Siiakittininn) psn ub ohiasth ae at - $702.00 per head.

DIOUIBIBIG ve voces cece DETER Cientas oo cccsap ec ecdeetaee 806.00 66

Kentucky, with her barren mountains, is far ahead of Ohio;
and Missouri, the poorest of the Slave States, with a mere
handful of slaves, is richer, under all her disadvantages, than
Illinois, the giant of the West —than Indiana, with her unri-
valled soil and favorable position.

The ratio per head is as follows :

I cclsesanes so ioss bneisi os such ooeneslaoctons P2L900

soos. cba ods cadess neh 02 ces dete disks caeeascvelicc cake Loe
Tllinois....... ase ctnnnt sacusass’-tee coe A OP ops te 134.00
a SPURTE arots cbonssgue us shsckonccezes'sssiie's cue heat ts dee 877.00
Missouri.. ROUPIPEW IATA (eee eubtk> wea selee Lhebedeceete eosnocsct ull 6G;00

We have no means of whievatin the condition of the slaves
in the Southern States, with that of the hewers of wood and
drawers of water, exclusively, at the North. The census
enables us to compare them with the aggregate population of
the Free States —a large portion of whom are not driven by
necessity to toil for a subsistence ; and with all the advantages
of climate against the South, as is supposed; but even with
the odds against us, we need not shrink from the contrast :

Population. Annual Births.
Me., N. H., Vt., Mass. R. I, Conn........ + 2,720,116 61,148
NS ie TN isn 190 Ces) ABs daces cece: tae eneere 1,618,214 slaves, 40,496
Annual Deaths.
IAT coc awaysisbinnabpawsesed' gerne snes dnkasdh sdveeenacpfagaph nana, See OO
Southern Slaves......... MBAS Wey nies ith ax 66x assed os es TaniRe cases een 24,790
RATIO OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS.
Births. Deaths.
New England........... Pages daavape os cts one RetEr FES Es aces Coes 1 to 64
PRGUEROTTD GIA VOS: Cosiece rc sesiocaes ce ccadabasesves MUO SO! Ui... Loew ne 1 to 65
“s POO Loven sd adiase bode ds snd abbachent aan EPO: GA. docket. be GO

Thus we see that the slaves, though not so fortunate as
their masters, are yet more prolific and less liable to die than
the freemen of New England.'

1 This exhibit shows the people of the Southern States to be the most
prolific, and less liable to die than any people in the world. In New
England, the ratio of deaths is 1 to 64; in England, it is 1 to every 44;
and no country will compare with the South in that respect, it being 1]
to 65; of all, as 1 to 85 of the free inhabitants.

31 *

366 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

The number of paupers in New England is 33,431, accord-
ing to the census of 1850; while those in these old Slave
States are but 14,221—- giving an excess to New England,
with equal population, of 19,210, or 135 per cent. more pau-
pers than the Southern States. In New England, the boasted
land of thrift, 1 to every 81 is a pauper; while in these South-
ern States, which the Abolitionists represent as impoverished
by slavery, there is but 1 in 191 of the inhabitants.

But we shall be told that these paupers in New England are
mostly foreigners. If so, these paupers did not come from
slave-holding States; they came from those like New England,
miscalled ‘‘free,’’ where they have been taught to look upon
negro slavery as a curse, blighting with its influence the
energies of the white race. To these foreigners is New Eng-
land indebted for her boasted increase of population.1 With-
out their aid, she would be far behind the South even in num-
bers; for we have seen how greatly the South exceeds her in
natural increase. To foreign capital, also, is she indebted, to
a great extent, for her great manufacturing establishments — to
foreign labor for her railroads, canals, and public works: she
has no right, then, to cast them off when they count against
her.

But even this excuse will not avail; for the census has dis-
tinguished the foreign from the native pauper, and still the
comparison is in favor of the South:

Native Paupers.

Mo;.(N..H., Vt.,,viase. ct. 1, Conti.coscacccccencetsetas tne eos 18,966
Maye. N. 0.552 Gig AAR cc sasc0s soavetsve th esd) sip pap iexcae 11,728
Excess of native New England paupers........0.ssese ~ 7,238

But we have still further and stronger evidence of superior-
ity in the physical, moral, and intellectual condition of the
people of the South over those of the North. Loss of speech,
of hearing, of sight, as certainly indicates physical, as do idiocy
and insanity mental suffering. By the extent to which the
negroes, slave and free, are subject to these afflictions, we may
determine their condition. Blindness, insanity, and idiocy, espe-
cially, result from destitution and distress, other things being
equal. By the census, we find that the Negro race is much
more subject to these afflictions than the white—the ratio
being :

1 For excess of crime and criminals in the Free States, see Appendix,
Table IV.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 367

White. Free Negro.
TORE EPOMT MINE UPIIND) 5.005 cece votsteaes sovece he Ulig 2 LO Necictes deeds 1 to 8005
ee ahead wn dvae snsscccte coors coeact 1 to 2445. ci... 1 to, 870
PUIG BT TOOTH. osccss cecccs ccscce seccesser TOU LOLS scovaeces lto 980

We thus see that the negro, when free, is far more subject
to blindness, insanity, and idiocy, than the white. Yet we find
that the negro, when a slave, is almost exempt from them all—
not only is he far less afflicted than the free negro, but even less
than his master.

White. Free Negro. Slave.
Deaf and Dumb.. - oe a sy ee 1 to 3005. ...... 1 to 6552
SERCO Gab xolaUeece sicccuccvves 1 to 2445 ...... Pte CSi0 acc 1 to 2645
Insane and Idiots........00 Vt6. 1874). 3.0004 1 to 980 ...... 1 to 8080

But one explanation can be made of this remarkable deve-
lopment. It is one that must present itself with peculiar force
to every unprejudiced mind accustomed to hear of the physical
suffering of the slaves. ‘The explanation readily occurs to the
mind acquainted with the real condition of the slave: it is
found in the watchful care of the master, the simple, contented,
and genuine happiness of the slave."

Total Deaf, Dumb, Blind, Insane, Idiots,

Me., N. H., Vt., Mass., R. I., Conn.........00. 8,781
Md., Va., N. & 8. Ci, Ga... Sucsese sie scusiem lo
Excess in New England............. 972
Insane.
New England.........0. ssscorcveend vee cesess ovenee coves sve ede ccecvecesceses O,004
TE os cca acudes Keuigho.pocecd aneus's cpt vas cddhocesb sedetanined tieiiey DOU
Mousse int) New Hugiand ss eos ccecevncaess cvs ens . 1,254

Tn the ‘‘land of steady habits,’? among a sti cold and
phlegmatic in their temperament, claiming to be peculiarly
sober, temperate, and practical, we find “the number of the
insane nearly 50 per cent. greater than among the excitable
and ardent sons of the South. We have, thus far, contrasted
New England with the five old Slave States; and we find
commerce and manufactures, the great sources of wealth, are
here less profitable than slave-holding agriculture. To all the
ills to which man is subject, both mental and physical, the men
of the North, with all their advantages of climate, are far
more liable than the Southern slave-holder. In short, under
all the disadvantages of climate, of the cramping influence of
oppressive legislation to protect the North, in despite of the
very laws of Nature, by the so-called “curse of slavery,’’ the

1 See Essay on Treatment of Slaves, sup. p. 226.

368 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

people of the slave-holding States are more religious, moral,’
healthier and happier, multiply faster, live longer and better,
and are far richer, than the people of the North. They also
produce nearly double the amount in value of our exports;
pay nearly double of the amount of the revenue, by duties and
the purchase of the public domain; furnish a boundless market
for domestic manufactures, and endless resources of the wealth,
independence, and power of the nation.

Yet we are told that ‘‘sterility tracks the slave,’’? &c.; that
slavery corrupts public morals, degrades both master and slave,
paralyzes industrial pursuits, the progress of wealth, enterprise,
and population; and its extension should be prohibited by
Congress, &c. from the territories and new States.

But this, after the exhibits which we have made from the sta-
tistics of the country, may be justly pronounced a false accusa-
tion, a hypocritical pretence for agitation, unwarranted by
facts, unfounded in truth. We have shown from the Census of
1850 superiority of the population of the Slave States in reli-
gion, morals, wealth, comfort, health, and happiness. We
have also shown by our tables that they employ more persons,
including their slaves, in industrial pursuits than those of the
Free States, giving the latter the advantage of all their great
cities and legions of foreigners, that swarm upon their lands
like the locusts upon the plains of Egypt.?

If we off-set these by the slaves employed at the South, with
any given number of population, they will greatly exceed the
same number at the North in the proportion engaged in indus-
trial pursuits. The South also greatly exceeds the North, as re-
gards the number of acres of land improved; in the number of
farmers, and in the amount of grain and live stock; furnishing
nearly double the amount in value of exports, and thus contri-
bute far more to the wealth, prosperity, and power of the nation.
Though the North exceeds in commerce and manufactures, yet
in this there is no real production to enrich the nation but the
value of the labor; and, consequently, while it enriches indivi-
duals, it might leave the nation comparatively dependent and
poor. But which portion of the country offers the greatest in-
ducement to the laborer? Ask the mechanic and laborer of
every description where he is most liberally rewarded for his
labor.? |

1 See, for comparative number of criminals, &c. Appendix, Table IV.

2 See Table I, Appendix. We have not separated the native and foreign
laborers.

3 It would be an interesting inquiry to compare the wages of the seve-

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 869

Who have pushed their conquests farthest into the far-off
wilds of the West? Before whose prowess has the forest van-
ished as by magic, and the wilderness blossomed as the rose ?
Look at the comparative number of acres of improved and of
unimproved lands owned by the farmers of the Slave and of the
Free States as set forth in the tables above referred to. Look
also at their comparative products in corn and live stock, bread
and meat, the great staples of human consumption. In addi-
tion to these, the Slave States have all their peculiar produc-
tions to enhance the annual amount of their productive industry ;
all their cotton, tobacco, rice, turpentine, sugar, hemp, besides
large quantities of wheat raised in many of these States; and
then say which have the best claim upon the Federal Govern-
ment to protect their property interests, the Slave or the Free
States. Upon this subject I beg leave to quote from the elo-
quent remarks of Mr. Keitt, of South Carolina: they should be
read and re-read, and pondered well by every free man.

‘* As a Southern man, sir, I demand that this government
shall protect, constitutionally, our slave property. But a few
years ago, the whole North sent np a cry of distress and op-
pression, when you reduced your tariff but a few cents. You
were told of blighted prosperity, of stagnant industry, and
crumbling enterprises. When your legislation, in restoring
equality to different interests, withdrew some of the enormous
gains of their capital, which had been fostered by legislative
bounty; while the North was thus whining in sackcloth and
ashes over their fancied oppression, she had but about seventy
millions invested in manufactures. What now is this Govern-
ment attempted to be used to do? ‘To withdraw legislative
bounties and refuse to foster unnatural interests upon capital ?
. No! it is called upon to upheave the social foundation of a
magnificent region ; to confiscate property of incalculable mag-
nitude; to expel or exterminate a race, and to involve in
chaotic rupture all the social and industrial relations which an
age could not restore and readjust. Sir, the smallest State in
the South has more property in slaves than all the North had
in manufactures when she crowded these lobbies and besieged
the doors of this Hall, crying out against the withdrawal of
ral kinds of employment at the North and at the South; we may safely
assert that they will be found nearly double in every instance in favor of
the South; and the thousands of mechanics, artizans, school-teachers, and
laborers of various description that annually emigrate from the Free to
the Slave States, will bear testimony to the truth of this assertion. The
expenses of the laborer depend altogether upon his habits: they need
scarcely exceed those of the Free States.

rs

370 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

legislative bounty. And shall the South be quiescent and train
her tongue to honeyed words, when you raise against her the
ruthless hand of power and oppression? No, sir. I ask for
no boon, and I will take none; but I firmly demand our
rights. ’’

Have the Slave or the Free States ceded most of the public
lands to the United States? Which have paid, and are still
paying, the greatest tribute to the nation for the privilege of
settling those lands by entering and purchasing the same ?? ~

A brief comparison between the value of the exported pro-
ducts of the North and of the South will approximate the truth
of the superiority of the latter over the former, as sources of
national wealth, progress, prosperity, and power. So large a
proportion of the exports are, in a degree, so common to all
the States, that the exact ratio cannot be determined.’

The total value of the exports derived, directly or indirectly,
from the products of the South, will average, at a very mode-
rate and safe calculation, four times the amount derived from
the North; and, but for her exports, what resources has this

1 See Table of the comparative number of acres taken up by the inha-
bitants of the Slave and of the Free States. Table, No. II.
2 For the year ending June 80th, 1855, the aggregate

value of the exports of the United States, was............ $246, 708,553
In round numbers, Say... csscerees oe cece cdelsedbveces eboweelepeeeetn amaeanemmmnInnE
Exclusively Southern products ........0+ sseceeses sesecrececceeee 110,000,000
Balance for. all the States .ssoocoss ocacsecoceecena ces cesiosonsnsh seme anienien mn mnnnnnE
From this, deduct for coin, bullion, &c., as common to

both North and South......... wcecceees ese Jeasatshwaea $54,000,000
For manufacture of cotton 2O0dS. ......se. esecer eeeeee feo dase 6,000,000
For total products of wood, as tar, pitch, rosin, turpen- ;

tine, ashes, lumber, &C. .......0s- sandannte Span ecashaee seeeee 18,000,000

Total products of animals . .....0... sscostens soseveses sounss eeapaulinnnt tt ana
Vegetable £000 . 05.5. .csseese socses vosace cnccteecctedecesiee o6vbeheeel iinaem ann

As the value of the exclusive exports of the North, it )
leaves a balance of only......... oe 200s ones ones. oneness ieeneniatn naan
For some years, this ratio was s much larger in favor of the
South ; in 1853, the exports were.. toes cevccsecscesen P2L4, 000,000
Pettatiys of the South |. PARSE Eo! oo oben ecvocee booed be dees eo'upaei ten nmin

Balance for States generally........0.sesccccesscvccseses covcesess Pod, 000,000
Common. to, DOG, -BAY. ..--++ccrvceccrscnase sncece chesecens asqencuch/el iil iin

Exclusively for the North........ WBA Rehirsli precip nd so: Bei $14,000,000
Total amount of imports for the same year was, in round
SEVER cic. Bt tie tctliin vn ode wins ase ce pe han nantuamenerie tne $262,000, 000

Leaving a balance of trade against the United States, of 15,000,000

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. att

nation to meet its enormous annual outlay in foreign commodi-
ties ? and what would become of its revenues arising from their
importation? It is true, many of the Free States produce
large amounts from their various branches of domestic manu-
factures; but these are mostly consumed at home, protected by
national legislation, and add but little to the available stock of
national wealth. Even these Northern manufacturers are sup-
ported, principally, by Southern patronage; the South is com-
pelled by the legislative policy of the General Government to
purchase the-manufactured articles of the North. Hence, of
the one hundred millions annually realized by the South from
the proceeds of her cotton, most of it ultimately finds its way
into the hands of Northern capitalists.!

A partnership business has long been carried on between the
North and the South. At first the North owned the slaves, and
furnished them to the South, which realized only the proceeds of
their labor. The process has since been reversed; the South
now own the slaves, and the North the proceeds of their labor.
The South make the crop and prepare it for market ; the North
ship it, work up the raw material, and furnish all the necessary
supplies for the proceeds. Dissolve this partnership, withhold
our cotton, with its immense profits to the North, from her, ex-
clude her shipping from our ports, and her manufactured arti-
cles from our markets, and what more destructive blow could
be dealt upon her? Throw the one hundred millions of dollars
that now annually flow into her coffers from her partnership
with the South, into some channel of foreign trade, and behold

1 From the official Tables, it appears that the North have, in shipping,
1,201,930 registered tonnage, and 1,456,314 enrolled tonnage. Deduct-
ing the whaling and fishing tonnage, leaves 1,009,750 registered, and
1,322,475 coasting tonnage applicable to the transporting of merchandize.
More than three-fourths of. this entire tonnage (it was asserted by a
re Review) is employed in the transportation of the produce of the

ou

A rough estimate of the profits of the North, derived from the South,
may be summed up thus: —

Freight on Northern shipping of Southern products........... $40,000,000
Profits on imports at the North for the South............. e000. 9,000,000
Profits of exchange operations, and Northern capital at the

BUTIGID hai Upapee anceapeanase sicose co sncsaseveuesmeambiveses Ry wegeastabacs 7,000,000
Profits on Northern goods ; sold at the South .. eevee peeree naeheG sea 24,000,000
Profits on Western produce descending the Mississippi........ 10,000,000
Amount annually left by Southern tourists at the N orth: beae 15,000,000
Amount annually carried North by teachers, artists, and

other transient persons employed at the South.........++. een 5,000,000

TOU occ ees CC CRCS CHOSE CHEESE ee OSCE CHS EO BEEEOH CHEE HHH Es "@eeee $110,000,000

872 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

her shipping rotting in her harbors, her desolate towns and vil-
lages, with their millions of operatives wandering like foreign
mendicants through the land, bankruptcy and ruin would stalk
upon the heels of her palsied energies and withered enterprise.
Break down our property interests, destroy our productions,
and who can calculate the injury that would be inflicted upon
the present and future generations! Of the three millions of
bales of cotton annually produced by the Slave States, the
shipping, fabrication, sale of the goods, &c., &c., directly and
indirectly supports, at home and abroad, a population which it
is impossible accurately to estimate. The production, and
number of persons engaged in its fabrication, &c., &c., and
supported by it, as well as the amount of capital so engaged in
the great staple of the South, are annually increasing at a rapid
rate ; but the supply in no measure keeps pace with the demand.
So great is this excess, that the agricultural resources of all re-
gions adapted to the growth of cotton, are likely to prove inade-
quate to overcome it. It is a fixed fact in human experience, that
cotton cannot be extensively and successfully cultivated except
by slave labor. And whence is this labor to be eventually de-
rived? Any great convulsion that should destroy slave labor,
and swallow up this single article of Southern production,
would shake to their downfall the most powerful governments
on earth.

The suicidal policy of the Black Republicans, by breaking
down the institutions and property interests of the South, would
not only bring ruin and distress upon countless numbers of the
population, deranging the commerce and manufactures of the
world, by cutting off the supply of cotton, but they would
bankrupt our national treasury, by stopping the revenues from
the sale of public lands to the South, and from duties on im-
ported articles, and swell the balance of trade against the
States beyond what their resources could support. They would
lay waste the fairest fields of Southern industry and enterprise,
cripple their own resources by depriving themselves of the
requisite supply of cotton, by excluding their own manufactures
from the markets of the ‘South, and by destroying a lucrative
commerce between these two sections of the Union.

Should the lawless enthusiast continue unrebuked by reason,
should the disorganizing and infatuated continue unchecked by
constitutional compact, till they could achieve their diabolical
purpose, they would find that all their weapons of warfare
would deal the severest blows upon their own heads; that their
very breath, in which they ‘‘breathe out threatenings and

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 373

slaughter” against the South, like the food of Milton’s devils,
would turn to coals of fire upon their own lips ‘‘If the South
were base enough, if she were craven enough to submit to the
overthrow of her honor, peace, and political existence, the
triumph of the North would be that of the gladiator who died
receiving the submission of his foe.’’?

Our tables also refute the accusation that slavery corrupts
the public morals. According to the best statistics, there is
less crime, and not one half the proportion of convicts in the
penitentiaries of the Slave States; the contrast relative to bas-
tards and prostitution is still more favorable to the South.
There are effects produced by negro slavery upon the general
character of the white population that cannot be exhibited by
the census, that cannot be set down in figures, of far more im-
portance than the acquisition of wealth or the increase of popu-
lation. These are its tendency to elevate and give them a more
exalted tone of moral sentiment, and a more stern and un-
yielding attachment to their liberty and their rights, and a just
pride of character.

‘There is, however, one circumstance attending these South-
ern Colonies,’’ said Edmund Burke, ‘‘ which fully counter-
balances this difference, and makes the spirit of liberty still
more high and haughty than in those to the eastward. It is,
that in Virginia and the Carolinas there is a vast multitude of
slaves. Where this is the case, in any part of the world, those
who are free are -by far the most proud and jealous of their
freedom. Freedom to them is not only an enjoyment, but a
kind of rank and privilege. Not seeing there that freedom, as

1 Mr. Charles Sumner asserted, in the Senate of the United States, that
«sterility tracks the slave asit tracked Attila’s horse.” But upon what
authority did this red constitutionalist make this assertion? Let the fore-
going facts and remarks answer. But says Mr. Keitt: “I appeal from
the Mosaic Whig of to-day to the genuine Whig of 1776. I appeal to
John Adams, still revered in Boston. He said in 1776, ‘That as to this
matter (the wealth of the State), it was of no consequence by what name
you called your people— whether by that of freemen or slaves. That in
some countries the laboring poor were called freemen, in others slaves;
but that the difference, as to the State, was imaginary only. What mat-
ters it whether a landlord, employing ten laborers on his farm, gives them
annually as much money as they can use for the necessaries of life, or
gives them those necessaries at short hand? The ten laborers add as
much wealth annually to the State, increase its ‘exports as much, in the
one case as the other. Certainly, five hundred freemen produce no more
profit, no greater surplus for the payment of taxes, than so many slaves.
The condition of the laboring poor in most countries, that of the fishermen

of the Northern States in particular, is as abject as that of slaves.’ ”
Madison State Papers, vol. i. p. 29.

32

374 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

in countries where it is a common blessing, and broad and
‘general as the air, may be united with much abject toil, with
creat misery, with all the exterior of servitude itself, liberty
looks among them like something that is more noble and liberal.
I do not mean, sir, to commend the superior morality of this
sentiment, which has at least. as much pride as virtue in it; but
the fact is so, and I cannot alter the nature of man. These
people of the Southern Colonies are much more strongly, and
with a higher and more stubborn spirit, attached to liberty
than those to the northward. Such were all the ancient com-
monwealths; such were our Gothic ancestors; such, in our
day, were the Poles; and such will ever be all masters of slaves
who are not themselves slaves. In such a people, the haughti-
ness of domination combines with the spirit of freedom, fortifies
it, and renders it more invincible. ”’

History attests the truth of every word of the above; not
only does negro slavery elevate the character of the master, and
where the master is free, render his devotion to liberty a high
and holy feeling, but where, as in our own country, the slave is
of a different and inferior race, marked and set apart by his
color, physical and mental characteristics, it elevates the cha-
racter, not only of the master, the actual owner of the slaves,
but of all the individuals of his own race who wear the color
and distinguishing characteristics of freemen. With us color, -
not money, marks the class: black is the badge of slavery,
white the color of freemen; and the white man, however poor,
whatever be his occupation, is inspired with the just pride of a
freeman, a sovereign. Though his estate be but an empty title,
he scorns to disgrace his station by dastardly acts of crime, or
by stooping, for money’s sake, to become the slave of another.

In a community where all are nominally free and equal, wealth
becomes the great object to be obtained, for wealth alone dis-
tinguishes the higher from the lower classes. There money
makes the real master, poverty the real slave. A contest be-
tween wealth and poverty, capital and labor, necessarily begins.
Kach party seeks, by the means within its command, to increase
its power. Wealth, by the aid of talent and influence, to in-
crease and secure its fortune at the expense of labor; poverty,
by its political power, in numbers the stronger, seeks to better
its condition, to free itself from real slavery. In this unequal
conflict of interest, capital seeks to extort the greatest gain for
the least expenditure; labor, struggling for bread, demands a
higher recompense for its services. The interest of the em-
ployer and the hireling, the capitalist and the laborer, are an-

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 375

tagonistic, like that of the vendor and the vendee—for the gain
of the one is the loss of the other. As a nation increases in
population, wealth, and power, the breach is widened, these
interests conflict the more, wealth becomes more absorbed in
the hands of the few, the demand for labor less, the supply
greater, till at last these starving millions become vicious and
desperate; and crime, misery and wretchedness is the conse.
quence. But not so where capital is labor, and the interest of
both is the same; not so where color alone gives rank, and
where every white man is proud of his position and zealous of
his rights. Dastardly crime is unknown to his high and chi-
valrous character. ‘There is a high standard of honor, an ex-
cessive pride of character, that taints even the kindred blood
of the culprit, and few are willing to hazard the fiery ordeal of
public opinion. This results, also, in part, from a more liberal
education. Though education is not so generally diffused at
the South, it being impossible to support schools, in conse-
quence of the sparseness of the population, and the new settlers
not being able to send their children away, yet, in the older
and more wealthy States and neighborhoods the advantages are
greatly superior, and the general standard of education and
intelligence among business men, who form public opinion and
mould public character, is higher than is general in the Free
States. This results from the fact that the pupils of both sexes
are kept constantly at school from the time of the commence-
ment to that of the completion of their education ; and, in most
cases, they enjoy the best advantages which the country affords.
The custom has hitherto prevailed of sending them to the insti-
tutions of the Free States. A collegiate education, and a
diploma in some one of the learned professions, becomes a fash-
ionable accomplishment, even to the planter and business man.*
The nature of the Souvern planter’s business necessarily re-
quires, and naturally produces, a higher degree of general
intelligence than that of the farmer of the Free States. All
the great commercial and financial questions of the day are his
study, for the reason that they relate immediately to his inte-
rests; whatever deranges commerce, or effects any change in
the operations of financial circles, is first indicated by the ad-
vance or decline in the price of cotton, as regularly as any
change of temperature is evinced by the rise or fall of the mer-
eury. Such topics, therefore, become his study ; he becomes a
man of observation, and leads, to a great extent, the life of a

1 See Table No. I. for the comparative number of students in the Slave
and the Free States. See Table No. V. for criminal statistics.

376 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

theoretical merchant. Whoever makes an acqnaintance with
‘the general character of the Southern planters, will find them
a well-read and well-informed class of people; he will find
among them some of the highest order of mercantile talent, and
some of the boldest and most successful financial operators.

Not only does negro slavery thus elevate the character of the
white man, it ennobles woman. Relieved by the slave of the
abject toils, the servile condition to which the white woman is
so often subjected by necessity where negro slavery does not
exist, and which take from her woman’s greatest charms —
modesty, virtue, and the like, which make of her the rude,
drudging, despised servant of a hard master; the white woman
becomes, as she is fitted to be, not the slave but the queen of
her household, fit mate for a sovereign. Virtuous, modest,
retiring, sensitive, her only ambition to merit the love of he1
husband, her only pride to point to her children and say,
‘these are my jewels;’’ worshipped in her sphere, her gentle
sway undisputed, the white woman in the slave-holding States
needs no convention to secure her rights; whether she be the
mistress of a mansion or the humble tenant of a cabin, to her
the seat of honor is ever accorded at home, and abroad every
true son of the South deems himself her champion.

The rank and position of woman has ever been the true
criterion of civilization aud refinement in all ages and nations.
To the barbarian she is not an equal but a slave, she relieves
her lord of his labor, bows her head in his presence. Thus the
Southern parents, of all professions, zealous of the rights and
privileges of their sons as freemen, proud of the rank and posi-
tion of their daughters, bestow more care and attention upon
their education, where they are able, and thus render a collegiate
. and liberal education a fashionable accomplishment to all.

But is this true generally of the agricultural people of the
Free States? The professional and mercantile circles of these
States, in point of learning and general intelligence, are, per-
haps, excelled by few of those classes in the world; but how is |
it with the common country people? What are the compara-
tive advantages of the farmers’ sons and daughters throughout
the more distant or back portions of the country for an educa-
tion, an acquaintance with the world, with human nature, and
topics of general intelligence ? The New England farmer, and
in most of the Free States, from the climate, character of the
soil, and density of the population, is compelled to live within
a more limited sphere. However commendable may be his
industry, honesty, and frugality (and we would not say a single

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. Yi

word disparagingly of the same), it is a necessary economy to
keep his expenses within his means. His daughters, as soon
as they are capable, must share the burdens and labors of the
household affairs ; hence neatness in cooking, washing, ironing,
chamber-work, &c., is, by the force of necessity, held up asa
very requisite and fashionable accomplishment for a young lady.
His sons, from the age of fifteen to twenty-one, are thoroughly
drilled in the exercise of the crow-bar, the hoe, axe, spade,
&c., to fit them for the duties of citizens, and their sphere of
usefulness in after life. From two to three months’ cessation
from labor during the inclemency of winter, affords them an
opportunity to attend a common country school. Here, by
improving their opportunities, they may learn to read and write,
something of Geography, of English Grammar, and of Arith-
metic as far as Interest or the Rule of Three. At the age of
twenty-one, they have read their Bible, some religious family
newspaper (the Liberator, Emancipator, e¢ genus omne), and
have been to mill and to meeting. And this they call educa-
tion. At majority, the all-important crisis of life for which
they are always eagerly looking forward, they are allowed to
start in the world for themselves, though many become so im-
patient and discontented with their lot at home, that they
surreptitiously quit the parental domicil while they have yet
many years to serve, and take the chances of fortune before
them. Some one is selected to remain with the father and
mother and settle on the homestead, to take care of them in
their declining years; the others are all started out into the
world to shift for themselves. The age-of majority, the culmi-
nating point of all their infant anxieties, deprives them of their
right to a home under the domestic roof where they were born,
and they must now seek some employment to make.a living for
themselves. ‘The girls, if they have not yet been suited with an
offer for a husband, usually find their way to some neighboring
town or city to bind themselves out to some craft of the needle,
or to become the slavish inmates of those extensive cotton and
woollen factories. The boys all set out in the same beaten
track, on foot upon the highway, with a little bundle containing.
a clean shirt, and a go-to-meeting suit, tied up in a flag silk
handkerchief, and swung with a stick over their shoulders, to
look for work. Ifthe adventure is successful, he may ‘‘ set in?’
by the year, for from ten to fifteen dollars per month: for this
pitiful sum he toils on from year to year to get something
‘‘aforehand.’’ If he is economical he may perhaps save one
hundred dollars per year from his wages, and this gives him
32 *

378 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

the reputation of a very steady, industrious, and promising
young man; or he may go to some trade, and by working a
year or two for his board, realize afterwards somewhat higher
wages. Such is, to a great extent, a true picture in the history
of the farmer’s family in the Free States.! He may be ever so
devoted a parent to the interests and welfare of his children,
and may even go beyond his means, as he often does, to assist
them; yet having started even with the world himself, he can
bequeath only the blessed privilege to them, consoling them
with the soothing consolation that fortunes inherited are very
dangerous to the heirs. Thus this sanctimonious custom of
leaving nothing behind them, as the great conservator of public
morals, is carefully observed, perpetuated, and handed down as
a precious bequest from generation to generation. Thousands
waste their intellectual being without the means of discipline
or culture, by spending their lives tied like a bond slave to some
agricultural implement, or other service, without being able
to obtain more than a subsistence. Even Daniel Webster himself,
but for the giant power. of his nature to struggle up through
the surrounding obstacles that beset him, might have been a
New England clodhopper, delving in her granite soil as a
hireling for a support, to the day of his death. But how many
thousands are there, who, instead of rising above these mountain
obstacles to surmount them all, sink beneath their weight and
die in servile obscurity under their shades. Such are some of
the fruits of the vaunted system of free labor upon mental
culture, civilization, and refinement of the boasted yeomanry
of the Free States, ‘‘ the bone and sinew of the land.’”? How-
ever commendable may be industry and enterprise, to a certain
extent, in all classes, it is not the most exalted province of man
or woman to devote themselves wholly to physical labor, like
beasts of burden, for a bodily subsistence; nor is such an
element the most essential to constitute a highly desirable state
of society. It is argued that idleness is the mother of vice,
and labor prevents crime ; but if men are so villanous by nature
that they must be doomed to fields of unremitting toil to prevent
the contraction of bad habits and the commission of felonies,
they should be sent to the work-house and penitentiary at once.
The most perfect conservators of public morals are virtue and
intelligence, and these are always found in the highest degree,
in the most exalted stage of civilization and refinement. But

1To some of the more wealthy families, perhaps these remarks will
not apply, but they will include the great majority of the laboring classes,

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 379

what there is in physical labor itself calculated to purify the
morals, promote the intelligence, and refine the sensibilities of
a community, no one has yet been able to discover. According
to Scripture it was a degrading curse inflicted upon the human
race as a punishment for the first transgression. And in the
progress of civilization the nearer man approaches to the high
and holy attitude in which he was created, the less liable will
he be to be doomed ‘‘to eat his bread by the sweat of the
brow.’’ But labor must be performed by somebody ; and those
who do not live by their own, must subsist upon the labor of
others. ‘‘ Whosoever does not work shall not eat.’”’? That is
very true; but the most perfect state of society is for each
individual, or class, to occupy the position to which they are
best suited, and not be constrained by necessitous circumstances ;
for so far he is a slave, unable to improve his condition though
he may have the ability. Here the philosophy of Aristotle is
again practically illustrated. ‘‘It is the province of mind to
command, and matter to obey; ‘Some men from their natures
are born to rule and direct, and others to serve. They can
obey reason, though they cannot exercise it.’”? When each
occupy their appropriate position they mutually support and
protect one another, and thus strengthen the resources of the
body politic. But let no high-born American freeman be a
slave.

It has been often asserted in the hearing of the author, that
the Southern people can well afford to be more generous and
hospitable, to give their children better advantages for educa-
tion, to travel with them, and give them better means of
acquiring information, and to rear their families in more intelli-
gent, refined, and accomplished circles of society; ‘‘ for the
labor is all done and the money all earned by the slaves.’? But
how has the Southern planter obtained his slaves? Their
service is all capital invested, yielding but a comparatively
small per centage on the amount; how has he come in posses-
sion of this amount of capital? Has it been through the
influence and tendencies of the boasted system of free labor ?
Why does not the farmer of the Free States invest his capital
in the service of a hundred laborers which he may procure at a
less expense than the slave is to his master? Instead of invest-
ing money in banks, stocks, city property, or hoarding it up
and making servants of their wives and children, they might
throw this mass of labor around them, like the hospitable and
noble old Roman, to administer to the ease, comfort, and
happiness of themselves and families. The planter of the

380 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

South, instead of hiding his talent in the earth, invests it in
lands and labor; he throws it around him in such a manner as

not only to contribute to the enjoyment of himself and family,

but to the support and welfare of thousands of laborers who

share his protection. Instead of throwing the drudgery and
hardships of the plantation labor and household affairs upon

his sons, his wife and daughters, and making servants of his

own wife and children, he buys servants for them ‘‘ with his
money,’’ and sends his children away to school, where they are

constantly kept till they are grown ; and by means of travelling,

observation, and a variety of association, by the time they have

completed their education they have acquired something of a

knowledge of the world, of mankind—something of the accom-

plishments of ladies and gentlemen. And hence, at home and
abroad, they live and move in higher and more intelligent and
refined circles of society.’

With these reasons for our faith, with these claims to our
rights, we conclude with a few remarks upon the future pros-
pects of the Union, and the duty and destiny of the South.

It is not the province of philosophy to predict, though
thousands of false prophets and croaking soothsayers have
arisen to prophesy in the sacred name of America, to cast the
horoscope of the Union; to fix the bounds of its perpetuity,
and set the time for its dissolution. Yet we see no immediate
reason to fall in the wake of this multitude of funereal pipers
and pall-bearers, who have been so long knolling the death-
knell of its existence.

Yet facts being given, results may be calculated, in the poli-
tical as well as in the physical world, with some degree of
certainty. It cannot be denied that sectional feelings are
growing stronger; that the breach is constantly widening be-
tween the two nominal sections of the Union. Mason and
Dixon’s line is growing up to be ‘‘a middle wall of partition”
between the North and the South, with the worst forms of
political antagonisms and destructive elements raging on either
side. As Mr. Calhonn well said, this schism first commenced
in the Church. The clergy, in synods assembled, first com-
' menced the undermining process of sundering the sacred ties
that link the political existence of the States together, and of

1 It is true, to the backwoods and frontier settlements these remarks
are not strictly applicable; but it is not in consequence of slave labor,
but rather for the want of it; where the slaves are most numerous, there

is the highest degree of intelligence and refinement among the free popu-
lation.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 881

demolishing the constitutional bulwark of the nation’s salva-
tion. Conscience was the first mover and ruling genius of
this holy crusade against the institution of slavery. This pious
conflagration, fed by the combustible elements of fanaticism,
bigotry, and intolerance, fanned by the fierce breeze of angry
faction and political aspirations, spread from the clergy to the
laity; from the -pulpit it caught upon the forum, the bar, and
the stump, and now permeates the body politic. It has become
the stale theme of every deluded theorist, blinded bigot, and
misguided zealot, that now infests the community. It has been
caught up as the hobby of a host of disappointed politicians
and cast-off demagogues, with an army of foragers, sutlers,
and camp-followers, driven from every quarter where they
have pitched their camp, yet still striving to rally their scat-
tered and dismantled forces around the sable standard of
negro philanthropy. The facts that are now transpiring, the
history that has been forming around their footsteps, forcibly
remind us of the early days of the French Revolution. France
had her Robespierre, her Mirabeau, Danton, and Marat: they
instilled their licentious and corrupting influences into the pub-
Jic mind, inflaming the basest and worst passions of the mob,
till they broke out in those terrible eruptions of popular fury
that drenched the streets of Paris with blood. So the Aboli-
tionists, arrayed in treasonable warfare against the peaceful
execution of the laws of the land, in the attempted rescue of
the fugitive Burns, could congregate an infuriated mass, like
deluded crusaders enlisting under the banner of the Cross for
the Holy Wars, with minds already wrought up to a pitch of
desperation that required but a single spark to explode a
magazine, that would have drenched the streets of Boston,
like those of Paris, with the blood of her citizens. The slay-
ing of one who fell, on that memorable occasion, in the faithful
discharge of his duty, has left a stain upon the spot where he
paid the forfeit of his life, that will never be obliterated from
unprejudiced minds. But they have left the cries from the
blood of the martyr Bachelor to go up from his grave unheard,
except by other ears. All, all in Boston! ‘‘A mob in Bos-
ton?’ Where the great Abolitionist, George Thompson, nar-
rowly escaped with his life, as the secret emissary of a foreign
foe; where William Lloyd Garrison was once dragged along
the streets, like a felon hurried on to the gallows, as a preacher
of sedition. But the names of the Garrisons, the Tappans,
the Parkers, the Beechers, et 7d omne genus — names that, in
the days of the martyr Lovejoy, the rebel refugees of Lane Semi-

382 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

nary, and the fire and blood of the mobs and riots to suppress
abolition, were branded with the broad seal of public infamy,
are now heralded forth as the great apostles of freedom.’ They
have been gradually swept along upon this swelling current of
popular phrenzy, ‘‘to ride the whirlwind and direct the
storm.’? This red revolution, with its fictions of suffering and
tales of imaginary woe, has been long running its wild career,
deluding the unwary by its weird appeal to their sympathies,
beguiling the unsuspecting by its false charms, as in a beautiful
summer evening when poison floats in the spicy gale, and the
damps of disease descend in the pestilent vapors of the night:
the most delicate and refined feelings are the surest victims of
the exposure.

National and state societies have long been in operation,
with their auxiliaries and sub-auxiliaries throughout various
portions of the Free States; their treasuries have long been
replenished by public contribution, under the false pretence of
promoting the cause of freedom. A thousand hireling agents
and lecturers have been kept in the field, at fixed salaries, by
these societies, to mislead and deceive the uninformed, and
dupe them into the custom of often contributing large sums
of money for the false and pretended object of benefiting the
‘moor slave ;’’ but which has all been pocketed by these mer-
cenary advocates of the cause—some of whom have accumu-
lated large fortunes. Frequent quarrels have sprung up among
them about the division of the spoils, or as to who shall be
the constituted authority to handle the funds. Like schisms
in the Church, divisions into old and new schools have arisen,
as to some peculiar tenets in their creeds. Competition, the
life of trade, sprang up; and each school, in striving to outdo
the other in their great work, proclaimed, in flaming notices:
‘*A thousand travelling agents wanted, to travel, lecture, and
take up collections for the glorious cause of Abolition, to
whom liberal wages will be given.’’?

Tissues of falsehood and misrepresentation, in the form of

1 Lovejoy was killed at Alton gill, by a mob, some twenty years ago, “
for publishing an abolition paper. The rebellion at Lane Seminary, by
the students who were denied the privilege of discussing the subject of

slavery, is well known. Lyman Beecher, the father of Edward and Har-
riet, was then president of that theological school.

2 In 1885 or 1886, two separate abolition societies were organized, one
in New York and one in Boston; and a fierce contest arose between them
as to which was the constituted authority: both had numerous lecturers
in the field, the States were generally districted, and each agent confined
to one district, like patent agents and tin peddlers.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 883

lectures, newspapers, books, pamphlets, and magazines, have
been scattered broadcast through the land, and the people
made to pay for sowing the seeds of discord and dissension in
the bosom of the nation. As their capital and numbers have
increased, new enterprises have sprung up, and new fields of
operation been sought out; hence their large investments in
underground railroad stocks, emigrant aid societies, and the
bloody scenes upon the fields of Kansas.

Abolition, with all its infernal machinery, once persecuted
and suppressed by the most rigorous mandates of public opi
nion, expelled from schools and seminaries of learning, hunted
down, like a public enemy, by the most violent mobs and riots
—now, being fostered and encouraged, is taking deep root in
the sentiments and feelings of the rising generation.. The war
has been duly christened a holy war; religion has been more
effectually pressed into the service; her churches have become
places of Abolition gatherings upon the holy Sabbath; her ves-
tries arsenals, and her pulpits political forums; where soldiers
are enlisted and armed, not, as formerly, with the panoply of
the Cross, but with Sharp’s rifles for their Bibles, with broad-
swords for their plongh-shares, and tomahawks for their
pruning-hooks. Thus armed with the panoply of the cause,
they are sent out to propagate the creed among the new set-
tlements in the territories.

If devotion to our institutions be sinister and sinful, where
shall we find a refuge from this charge of moral turpitude ?
Shall we fly to the Abolitionists ? What do we find there but
rottenness in their hearts, and basest hypocrisy and imposition
in their professions ? What do we find to be the secret springs
of their actions, but the love of money and the love of power?
Under the van of British gold and foreign influence, the one
stirs the heart of the knave and the miser, the other prompts
the zeal of the demagogue. Let Queen Victoria justly spurn
every Abolitionist from her presence who becomes a fawning
sycophant for royal honors, for preaching and writing treason
against his native country: let the aristocracy of England
despise them all as traitors; let Britain lock up her treasures
to their calls, and turn them away; let the American people
cease to be gulled into paying tribute to sow the seeds of
desolation in the heart of the Union; and where would be
found an Abolitionist? What would then become of this
band of seditionists and disorganizers? They would all die
of starvation, and their putrid carcases, morally and physically
rotten, would poison and infect the atmosphere with their nau-

384 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

seous exhalations, worse than the victims of famine upon the
plains of Bengal and the banks of the Ganges.

It has ever been the policy of England, since the reign of
Elizabeth, to cultivate peace and amity with her friends at
home, and to scatter discord and dissension among her enemies
abroad. For this latter purpose, she has found the Abolition-
ists willing tools in her hands in this country. Who have poi-
soned the public mind with this frenzy ? Who have wrought
this change in public opinion and prepared the way for such
damning deeds, even in the New England metropolis, and upon
the sanguinary plains of Kansas? It is not alone such blas-
phemous miscreants as Theodore Parker, William Lloyd Gar-
rison, Wendell Philips, and the like; a multitude of ‘‘ lesser
lights’’ enlist under the banner to follow in the wake of this
disorganizing triumvirate of treason and perfidy. Strong-
minded women, even, are buckling on the armor of the faith
and arraying themselves in battle-lines against the authority of
‘‘the powers that be.’’ Many of the more conservative and
professedly judicious, are unwilling to march in the front ranks,
yet they are constant hangers-on, as secret minions and emissa-
ries, giving countenance and aid to this Jacobin concourse, by
furnishing supplies, enlisting volunteers, reconnoitering the
fore-ground, lighting the camp-fires, standing sentinels, man-
ning the out-posts, and acting as spies in the camp of the
enemy. Men of every form of opinion, from the base and
licentious tenets of the Infidel, Socialists, Non-resistants, and
Freethinkers, like the Jacobins and Montaignards in the days
of Louis X VI., to the most rigid school of the Orthodox faith,
unite in this amalgamated collocation, like the union of Pilate
and Herod, upon a common platform. Political Hotspurs
and aspiring demagogues are beginning to see the importance
of their numbers and to bid for their suffrage. Organized
upon proscriptive principles of geographical limit in one sec-
tion of the Union, their avowed object is to paralyze and de-
stroy the power of the other. The foot-prints of Sylla or
Mark Antony, in their pathway to the dictatorship of Rome,
are not more distinctly marked in the history of the overthrow
of that Republic, than those of the present Black Republican
leaders in their recent attempt to usurp the reins of govern-
ment, proscribe the slave-holder, destroy Southern institutions,
and dissolve the Union.

Boisterous with their blood-thirsty philanthropy, and incen-
diary charity towards the South, their aim is to wrap her in

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 385

flames and stain her with blood.’ The fanatical element which is
leavening the North, with unrebuked audacity, avows this ter-
rible purpose. The vindictive leader of this relentless crusade,
when told that Abolition would blast the South and the South-
West; would involve the whites in indiscriminate butchery, or
drive them from their homes in despair and beggary, unshel-
tered from the pitiless blast, said: ‘‘ Let those horrors come,
though five hundred thousand lives should perish.” This is a
fiercer curse against the South than some Marat or Robespierre
uttered against their opponents in the frenzied excesses of the
French Revolution, when they declared that ‘‘a hundred thou-
sand lives was a cheap sacrifice to establish a principle.” It is
more blood than the crown of the most inhuman tyrant has
ever cost the world. This blood-hound instinct of fanaticism
would proscribe the South and girdle her with a belt of fire,
that the master and the slave might perish together of despair,
blood, and conflagration. It cherishes nothing in its bosom
but the most uncompromising and destructive elements of revo-
lution. Self-preservation requires more watchfulness and strin-
gent laws for the protection of the free; and the universal cry
of the slave is, ‘‘ Deliver us from our friends !’’ “because ye
have made us to be abhorred in the eyes of Pharaoh and in the
eyes of his servants, to put a sword into their hands to
slay us.’’

The higher the excitement runs, the more the combat deepens ;
defeats, legislative and judicial rebukes. seem only to provoke
bitter acrimony and a more frenzied zeal; again have their
camp-fires been lighted upon a thousand hills; again are we
threatened with a Black Republican flag in place of the star-
spangled banner, with an Abolition President for our standard-
bearer; again, and still are the Constitution and the laws
threatened to be trampled in the dust; still are the wheels of
Government threatened to be stopped, and Congress converted
into a turbid pool where the highest interests of the nation may
lie rotting in its stagnant waters. The storm is gathering thick
and heavy upon our borders ; we hear the low rumblings of the
distant thunder; we see occasional flashes of its forked light-
nings ; and unless some intervening circumstance shall happily
avert the impending calamity — the day, though distant it may

1 Plans of insurrection in various localities in the Slave States were
secretly laid by the slaves, in anticipation of the triumph of the Black
Republicans in Noy. 1856. Great consternation prevailed among the in-
habitants, and night patrols were kept, and every precaution used to de-
tect these conspirators, some of which were successful.

33 Z

386 * THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF

be, is yet certain, that will provoke a retribution with its terri-
ble revelations of fire and blood.

But, has the South no preparations to make for this eventful
crisis? Cherishes she no disloyalty to her own institutions in
her own bosom? ‘Truth compels us to yield a reluctant affirm-
ative to these queries. We read of some whose ‘‘ enemies
shall be those of their own household.’’ Thousands there are,
in the heart of the South, who live in the daily countenance of
what they blindly acknowledge ‘‘a great moral and political
evil.”? These sickly panderers to their misguided notions of
freedom, have studied only the anti-slavery code of morals,
and the Abolitionist’s Bible; they seem to dread the light, and
constantly cry down all discussion upon the subject, and all
attempts at the defence of the institution and the South, as
though the Southern people were only to suffer in the contest.
They claim only to be permitted to live in the peaceful enjoy-
ment of these evils. They contend only for rights that are
founded on self-acknowledged wrongs, and exist only in sup-
. porting and upholding a self-acknowledged sin. All such need
to be enlightened as to their own rights and duties, and the
true character and spirit of our institutions. All such need to
read and reflect much to disabuse their minds of errors and
misconceptions thoughtlessly adopted through the influence of
the sophistry and misrepresentations of Abolition moralists and
theologians, before they can enter, soul and spirit, into their
own defence.

Is it to such that the South can safely look for the successful
defence of her institutions? Can such ‘‘ grapple’? Southern
interests ‘‘to their hearts with hooks of steel?’’ Will they
ever be found in the front ranks of the battle, with all their
prejudices, on the great day of trial? It is only the self-con-
sciousness of rights to be defended, and of wrongs to be avenged,
that nerves the arm of the injured and oppressed in the death-
conflict of principles. It is this alone that inspires them with
that breathless frenzy and indomitable zeal that ever urge on
to certain victory. But consciousness of wrong gives a faint
heart and a craven resolve to the bravest soldier. Guilt makes —
cowards of the boldest heroes. . Hence the coward and traitor
are always those who have nothing at issue in the conflict or
are forcibly enlisted in a bad cause. The day is coming when
every man must record his vote and man his post. ‘‘ He that
is not for us is against us: He that gathereth not with us,
scattereth abroad. ’’

Dwells there an American heart in this section of the Union

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 887

that would hesitate or waver in its support of our institutions ;
let that heart be purified, or let it cease to be American |

Lo! we hear much of ‘‘ the aggressions of the South upon
the North.’”? But who can point out the fact? If equal pri-
vileges and equal rights under the Constitution be aggression,
then the charge may justly lie at the door of the South. We
ask no legislative boon, no legislative extension or protection,
we ask only to be exempt from unconstitutional interference
with our property, interests, and rights; if this be aggres-
sion in the eyes of any one, ‘‘let him speak, for him have we
offended.” If to claim the privileges of freemen, and the
rights and immunities of the independent principles of self-
government under the Constitution, be aggression, forever be
it so; we deny not the accusation. If to claim our right to
life, liberty, and property, under the law, wherever we may go,
be aggression, then only do we plead guilty to the charge.

Shall the South then “train her tongue to honeyed words,’’
and her sons to dastardly coalescence and submission? Is
there not one drop of the pure New England and Virginia
blood of the Revolution left in her veins? Do we mean to
submit tamely to the measures of the Abolitionists, the repeal
of the fugitive slave law, exclusion from the territories, and
all? ‘‘Shall we still lie supinely on our backs hugging the
delusive phantom of hope till our enemies have bound us hand
and foot ?’’ ‘‘ Will gentlemen still cry peace! peace! when
there is no peace,” but in the surrender of our liberty and our
property ? Will they still ery Union! Union! when there is
no Union, but in submission to the worst forms of political
proscription and despotism? ‘‘Is any man so weak as to hope
for a reconciliation that would leave neither safety to our own
lives nor to our own property?” Is any man so humble as_
to ask for peace upon such ignominious terms as this? Is any
man so craven as to hope for union while union is but an empty
form for political oppression? While the Union is based upon
the principles of the Federal compact, observed and carried
out; while it stands upon the well-constructed pillars of Con-
stitutional liberty and equality, with the national banner stream-
ing free from its summit; palsied be the hand that would mar
or mutilate the beauty of the edifice. But whoever shall under-
mine and sap this foundation, while the superstructure is totter-
ing upon its sinking basement, let us flee from it lest we be
erushed by the fall of its crumbling fragments. If the North
are so blind to their own interests as obstinately to persist in
their injustice, till they have forced a dissolution of the Union,

388 THE POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL ATTITUDE, &c.

and driven us to arms, then let the call go forth for a new De-
claration of Independence, a new Bill of Rights, and a new
Constitution. If, then, as the last alternative, we must fight,
‘let it come,’’? and let every sword leap from its scabbard,
‘resolved to maintain it, or to perish upon the field of honor. ’’
Will Southern gentlemen then stand, like hunted victims, while
prairie flames are closing around them in narrowing and still
narrowing circles, motionless and helpless, crying Union and
Peace! No: ‘‘light but the torch, and every true son of the
South will burst through the wail of fire, though the flames
should shrivel their sinews and blast their eyeballs, resolved to
fall, if fall they must, struggling, blindly it may be, but strug-
gling like men.” Not that we love the Union less, but liberty
and equal rights the more. The Union, so long as it can be
maintained upon the high principles of the Constitution, is
justly held sacred in the bosom of every true American patriot;
in the language of the immortal Webster, ‘“‘ Liberty and Union
forever one and inseparable.’’ But we must add, Union and
Despotism forever twain and incoherent.

APPENDIX.

—— eee

TABLE I.

Showing the comparative number of Farmers, Carpenters, Merchants and
Students, in each Free and Slave State, that approximate nearest to an
equality in their number of free population. As, for instance, Rhode Island
is compared with Arkansas, New Jersey with Alabama, §c.

33 3 ‘S¢ Bg | Sy

ae 8 5 «Ss f aa

co) 3 os OB 2§

Names of States. Fla : E 8 2. is . B38

Ze Ze Zz& | as |.22

Rhode Island ............ 148,875 | 8898] 2,287| 878} 418
Arkansas.......0. sesses ees 162,189 | 28,888} 685] 663] 307
New Jersey -..e-se0: esse 465,507 | 32,392| 5,422] 2,615 | 942

Alabama.......2ssee0. | 426,514 | 66,610} 1,976 | 2,468 | 2269
Connecticut......... ...++ 868,099 | 381,756 | 2,755 2,046 | 1259

DLISBISSIDDL. ...... e050. 20. 295,718 | 44,873} 1,488 | 1,506 | 2284
Massachusetts... ..... ++. 985,450 | 55,082 | 15,836 | 5,388 | 2622
Virginia ...cccccee serveeees 894,800 | 106,807 | 8,088 | 4,621 | 3125
Maine. ........: Resctdepeinn 581,813 | 77,016} 5,088; 2,066 | 692
North Carolina.......... 553,028 | 81,808} 2,476} 1,931 | 2095

WISCONSIN .. ..e.c0cee vores 304,736 ; 40,865 |. 3,689 | 1,231 | 207
POWIBIAND.;. ooscecsee secere 255,491 | 11,697] 4,575} 8,958) 598

DENTE Ess cnacac.escens oseres.as 191,881 | 382,716) 1,871 835 68
TOEBS csocses cvcree ceveee ove 154,034 | 25,051) 1,361 985 | 347

New York.......2. esse. | 8,480,084 | 811,591 | 34,781 | 18,081 | 2572 |
Va., Ky., Tenn., Ga.... | 8,184,621 | 421,827 | 19,707 | 12,614 | 9000

SNR SIZ. 1-02 se ecks neavst 846,034 | 140,894 | 6,523 | 2,558] 708
SERIO, | n42 tis o6eciste0es 894,800 | 106,807 | 8,088 | 4,621 | 8125
Als., Tenn., Ky..:...:.. 2,044,763 | 380,266 | 10,861 | 8,032 | 6218
CERI, ds Wb teatcesidateed sce 1,955,650 | 269,690 | 21,909 | 8,012 | 3659
Gis, NN. Cie, Cre Be cc: | pe Soe Ue, 952! |. sessee | vo covecemfveategn |
Pennsylvania, .......06e08 2,258,160 | 206,847 | .. secs axe ete

- 1 But this estimate gives the population of the Free States the advantage of all their
great cities and hordes of foreigners, and at the same time excludes all the slaves em
ployed in the Slave States.

33 * (389)

390 APPENDIX.

TABLE II.

Showing the difference in the Number of Free White Population in States,
compared in the preceding Table, also the number of slaves employed in each
of the Slave States, comparative number of persons engaged in industrial
pursuits, different acres of land improved, bushels of corn, value of live
stock, §c.1

J

'm aa 'o .

Bee} poh. 88% byes : :

apa IP SR ec a 2 a

Names of States. S23 3 r BS : as z g =.

3.23 3 5S =~ ae os 3S os

efa| 8 aS gos 35 3% =2

eaeAli a at) |) mee ie z° Se
ATKANSAS wicccsesvesene 18,282] 40,785} ......... 58,168| 781,530} 8,891,939) 6,647,000
Rhode Island.........| see - | 48,478) 2,686] .......06 356,487 539,201) 1,532,000
Connecticut ........+6. 67,381] 97,010) 21,928) ......... 1.768,178| 1,985,043} 7,417,000
MEISHIBEIDDIss.s>cnee sence ticteses T0821" sce. ae 809,878] 3,445,558! 22,446,552] 19,903,000
Massachusetts ......+. 90,650) 295,300] 68,425] ......... 2,188,436] 2,845,490} 9,647,000
Virginia .........+ belgrel vecwes | QBOBTBL cessor 472,528) 10,360,135| 35,254,318| 33,656,000|
MainG Se etdcansossecs 88,785) 162,711) 28,824) ......... 2,039,596} 1,750,056] 9,705,000
North Carolina ......| sss 189,387 | cote se 288,584| 5,458,975] 27,941,051} 17,717,000
Wisconsin .:...00..000 50,245} 78,1389 OFA |-.ccevee 1,045,499} 1,988.979| 4,897,000
TiOUISIGNG <ccvecvesisede on] saneere Tg LOS |Westes tone 244,809] 1,590,025} 10,266,373) 11,152,000
TIin0iS...i0e-sceceesceve| 4758470} 49,816] 6,459] “.c..0000- 824,682] 8,656,799} 3,689,000
VOSOS\ssecee siseesnseser | eneeee 42,856 ....0.00. 58,161| 648,976| 6,028,876) 10,412,000
New York..............| 34,663} 888,294] 179,863] ........ 12,408,964! 17,858,400} 73,570,000
Va., Tenn., Ky. Ga..| «.... QOB ABM as, vensee 1,304,650 | 27,882,075 | 177,000,000) 180,500,000
TUB MOIS eisspascons once Mets LOL | DESO] 25.0, .c-ceehe moceseene 5,039,545} 51,646,894) 24,207,000
WIT GINIG 2000. cc cedese| saeese 226,875] 11,816] 472,528/10,360,135} 35,256,319] 38,656,000
Tenn., Ky., Ala....... 89,713! 459,782] 71,010} 798,284/15,519,057| 89,000,000} 80,500,000
ODIO Givvcccse ves sesscanen linens sar DU, (02 octesstx eahlwesseaneen 9,851,493| 59,000,000! 44,120,000
Pennsylvania......... 4,197 | 680,644] 102,590] ......... 8,628,619] 19,000,000) 41,500,000
Ga N IONS. C., Va.) ccaese 578,054] 4.2.20. 1,527,742] 26,265,259| 120,000.000) 92,500,000
New Jersey ...........| 88,933] 128,740} 28,213] ......... 1,767,911| 8,759,704) 10,672,291
IATA DAMA duteee ones ob od hin aasane 100,467 \ek..2.53 $42,844| 4,435,614| 28,754,048| 21,691,112

1 The results of these tables give us some idea of that “ sterility” that “tracks the foot-
prints of the slave as it did those of Attila’s horse.” ‘This assertion is no less false and
unfounded in fact than a thousand others that obtain a free circulation as current truths
among the ignorant and misinformed upon this subject. Look at the comparative number
of acres of land improved by equal numbers of slave and free population, the number of
bushels of corn raised, and the amount in value of live stock! bread and meat—then say
if sterility tracks the slave. Verily, “ He that is despised and hath a servant is better
than he that honoreth himself and lacketh bread.”—Prov. Where can be found in the
statistics of the Free States such evidence of national progress as is furnished by the
history of the Slave States. Look at the amount of lands taken up, rapid increase of
products, amount of exports, &c., compared with the Free States.

APPENDIX. 391

TABLE III.

Showing the comparative number of Acres of Land taken up and purchased of
the Government by the new Slave and Free States.

New Slave. Improved and | New Free Improved and
States. Unimproved. | States. Unimproved.
Reel estssless Lb 90, 209 | ODIO ci se ccoe cacses senses ees 17,997,473
PREM MMMED Puapieevsnutsssse> 2,000,201 | Michigan -....c.c0 sccosceee 4,373,890
SUEUAP Abc don oth ease too os 1,595,287 | Wisconsin ..........see0. 2,976,638
ISRISEIPT <oc50+00s ->-- 22 TUAU, GLY | LOWS ., sccccccss ovesen svieuus st ta, F00, 004
MMMM Sisetaesaries.5.-) 9,707,410 | ‘I1iNOIS ... ceccce secace seccee 12,000,459
TEM Ge atrdalesetovese, 11,496,009 | ‘California ....,... .csseese 4,189,985
TeMNeSSCE.....000 weeeseeee 18,784,032 | Indiana........... erences 12,795,922

Kentucky .......... seoveee 16,752,448

Missouri ..... = 9,732,670
POMEL saiivtess oseo0| 00,219,341 ME OURI ees cbebhs csctes 57,105,911

Excess in favor of the new Slave States........ 32,113,480 acres.

TABLE LV,

Showing the number of Population, Churches, Natives unable to Read and
Write, and Criminals in ten of the Northern and ten of the Southern States.

Natives una-

° no oh te
Names of States. Population. Pe ne alrpates Criminals. | i
BOMETIG Poi ei. cess OAH 583,169 945 2,134 62 |
Massachusetts ....... sse0e. 994,514 | 1,475 1,861 301
New Hampshire........... 817,976 626 945 ai
SMNIINIL Ga Gots sada goses dseses 314,120 599 616 39
Connecticut ...... perl ¥e2 370,792 7380 1,293 145
Rhode Island.......00+ eeveee 147,545 228 1,248 24
OM Pe 8,097,394 4,134 30,670 1080
New Jersey © s..+0e coeres one 489,555 813 12,787 185
Pennsylvania......recoeees 2,311,786 3,566 51,283 802
MEMOS OS® Cisdcecech desvcscee 91,532 180 9,777 6:

Totals ...0.00+0s00 000% | 8,718,888 | 13,800 | 112,614 | 2171 |

1 The value of the cotton in the Slave States increased from 1791 to 1851, sixty years,
from $52,000 to $112,315,317; and the total amount of their exports in the same time,
from about $60,000,000 to $130,000,000, while the total exports of the Free States at that
date, was only about $65,000,000. Thus have the Slave States nearly doubled the Free
States in the increased amount of their exports, in the public lands that they have taken
up and improved, in the amount of cotton and corn, and in the value of their live stock,
And yet we are told by Charles Sumner, of Massachusetts, that ‘“ Sterility tracks the
slave.’ (See sup. p. 373.) We will next present some facts showing the influence of
slavery upon public morals.

392 , APPENDIX.

TABLE LYV.— Continued.

N f Stat Populati No. of” | ates ae Criminal
ames 0 ate opula 10n. i e to rea munais.
Churches. and write. soa

Maryland .... ...sssceve | 588,084 909 88,426 | 200.

IAMIEEIR ..i'ustvanese daenaeess 1,421,661 | 2,383 87,383 | 188
North Carolina ...... seces 869,039 1,795 80,083 14
| South Carolina ... ..ceccses 668,507 1,182 16,460 19
| GeOTZIA ....0. cecrnssee vonnee 906,185 1,862 41,261 85 |
ATAOGINGS .. vocokh sesene vices ‘i 771,623 1,373 38,853 23
f REEBISSID Dl Sssaceye cvcsgees : 606,526 1,016 13,447 . 81
PLD MISIANES sevsconcsoceser eet 517,762 806 18,339 160

TONNESHEE. ccvels céoees 02-000) 121,012; 7170-2 201m 78,114 187
Roan vaaiey ccdiot oc cos tock 982,407 | 1,845 67,859 | © 141

| Bibobala pot teie se.: 8,329,459 | 14,685 | 474,725 | 1098

Though the ten Southern States have nearly half a million less popula-
tion, they have over 1000 more churches than the Northern States;
though among the latter are included that portion of the Union most famed
for religion and morality. The ten Northern States have twice as many
criminals as the ten Slave States, though the latter have four times as
many persons unable to read and write.

It may be said that the above table includes those Northern States
having the largest seaports in the Union, where an undue portion of vice
and crime abound in consequence of the foreign population. But we may
strike out New York and Massachusetts, and the result is not changed.

No. of Natives una-

|
| Names of State. Population. Charhen: bes to ead Criminals.
New Hampshire........... 817,976 625 945 77
Vermont...... sees. p cosecens ‘ 314,120 599 616.|. » 89
OT OCLC ver cpaieces) «eas 370,792 734 1,293 145
FNOGO AGIAN Miia siteces'se vdue 147,545 228 1,248 24
NE Fs eons cis ns pi'es 1,150,433 2187 4,102 285
North Carolina 2.000 essere 869,039 1785 80,083 14 :
South Carolina. ......00. 00 668,507 1182 16,460 19
| Georgia. eeseeeee veeses seeees 906,185 | 1862 41,211 85
| Alabama, .. serccccee ovseeeees 771,628 13738 33,853 23

TOtRlG: aps <ss0ca bansseety 3,215,354 6212 171,657 141

4s

APPENDIX. ; 393

TABLE IV.— Continued.

Here the number of criminals is twice as great in the four New England
States, containing no great cities, as in the four Southern Atlantic States
with a population three times that of the said Free States, and with the
number who cannot read and write, fifty times as great. Vary the esti-.
mation as you will, the result is the same.

Natives una-

Names of States. Population. | No of | ble to read | Criminals.
and write,
New Hampshire ........ +. 817,976 626 945 77
Connecticut. ...... eoceee eee 370,792 7384 1,298 | 145
Totals « ccvcve cvsccesoeces 688,768 1360 2,238 222
RUSSRIESID DE sates 00 verecee « 606,526 | 1016 18,447 81

MiISSOUPI ccoccses sosces coveee 682,044 | 880 84,917 108

TOUS cs 6s0sccec0cc0000 | 1,288,570 1896 48,364 189

SPI OUICT LE. , ocscccc0s cccces 370, 792 racine 1,293 145
MMMM acsccsccs vevves sesee | 1,421,661 Syed 87,383 188

Massachusetts ....0+0 ceseee 994,514 wane 1,861 301
PIENGEOO <civetecs soccccces 1,002,717 seawee 78,114 187

These facts, unless they can be’controverted, must forever put to silence
the eternal uproar, din, and commotion of the Abolitionists about the
baneful influence of slavery upon the public morals; and no traveller
who has become at all acquainted with the general characteristics of the
people at the North and at the South will be surprised at these results.
That there should be a greater proportion of persons unable to read and
write in these comparatively newly-settled States, where the population is
yet too sparse to support schools, would be naturally expected. But that
there should be a purer cast, a higher standard of public morals, and
such a disproportion of crime, can be accounted for upon no other prin-
ciples than the purifying influences of the manners and customs that
prevail.

The foregoing tables have all been carefully prepared from the Census Book of 1850, and
from extracts from De Bow’s Review (June, 1854),

THE END.

Pa ee

rier! oe",

wal) A.
+i ay ‘ - / rLit ty
eae : vie : nee,
raion & ‘ : > ;
i F ‘ Pe. A a>
ae ™ CLA pear eg , .
: cc Cemmee ee ee
" ' ¥
5 haeentin WOR Us Ld PAs: op) mv
Ay ef 7 ‘ 4 me ‘ my
ey nN 7f ove a q 1 A > i -3
z r ta ?
ake hate, D | ii ba test
3 pals ‘Et e4 ? Fon 4g is . e+ ¥
eit > ft: ttn yg 94 ns Ae id soacties
ee tne “ — a hese
{ eA :
ee &) re
‘d 1343; i; . 5 i t

4

ah 1 ' aid Lie ; s ¥ ed a * =
-_¥ 1° <* 4% y " Dy ]

i
of
if
i
if
;
ty
4
2
ys
P

/ » Ps . ~ - eon = ~ a ‘
een Rise! neteniph me Meare : aye
. ¢ ‘3 : ; ; ‘ @ : oH Pract, sess erie!
; Piatt
| 3 .
[Speier bt by ee
? o eel . y ines soot sees ee &
dis ; Pave, ayetet
t
~ z 4 ee oa Fis :
} i
i, / :
Se Rieu Rove fT
= : t
¢ t pis bt Fy Ly
~ ‘ rere a4 oe a f
ia zJ ts. ty Ane ; on va
fadpe “Wes UE OORILS ayhsitin ht Md a fess ive te:
o> Lhe (Pepa. magety mt, ‘\e aa ag th hie pte tah tu ee]
tens Gt vidkiw siesta MAelitguin theres Fea
Bi SAR hes Ore AOMiT! ht 1% 439) eae i Viadt Glos ERY +
Duis ci, beyosecs gltwtntan od Pow “ pyrnnd sles ;
bh gia i vileag Qe b fA eae SG i Fe » oe :
\ vadhate Ws Pedi foteudipan od ee ae te
imi’ edie: Tings efontacs o% Wy weet paige
y Lie, Po ee BOON nee” ot Ing lt Renew hte ne sd > ih pa
b ; Ae WE “ighe bl WHT ®
+ 2 .
; as ata 2a
' 4 F * -¥
— ; f
; ‘ |
P } .
‘ “ b .
‘ .
» ,
* , * e
A. : ;

; cy ete Nie We:
“" cae Pi ees.

PRRCPSELEETER TRB?

bere

PEEPRERPEREE GEE?

LORP TROBE DRS ADSA ADO TA ROSE 202 8:

tORF

PEOPERATEPPESEP SOP PEPE RES SEP EES

eesess HeCHRMS EOLEAAE AHL &

TEPUTPERREDEREERCERRS CR ESEDT?

ERTEUE CODER EDR URAE DEUCES TEER ESE REL D ER heuer tee
rors SER ESTE SUFENT- PLL a pe ttect

vie Ga.
iii

sine - Pebbecrbaaes

nag Uebebpeaaye heey
Pes Cie i we ae
ai ; i< pibeite tpeaty H
LUsbab ered eee hatitieetee beete

4 Why
tisietee

RUF

1 pay

fis a Be
bit, Bis fat
hi A

Hil ut

it

ba

een gl

peapiigidiegyt

iby

NHI

att
qu
PEtpSE ERS

bd t
1 NM
sigeres

A) imethishesbartesnettepitiithe!

oe rr where emencwressnsporene ees ie bye ae ETE SSO E S SET ed teh Se ee. Spent.

wean samira asia STS HS RRs eager ea le AS Gar TET jai eyepiece cai a Tega este eeate nseitandoniteatiicaetecs sia = ener
= = eee rrreqereee ne SE SATE aSSTSTR RTPI ANF ETT eitieieedveeninteastansrrjnseutisinnsctaape ame mT ere sperma” SALRaUI SR TTemeRle dieser Se TI ean shee an ant sratipceancsi Son ale ater ae ae
: ; = 8 9a aye ths Sen m1 ° - . ri pies scoeimtetee esecreatatice <yeatit tele enteeah vt 3 ts oa erage -
' Lene ¢ ah ; i SERS EPR ae eee Serer Sar
Fetarerstsiars TAO” alte Sarre ae ae Oo re Be See ) TSS eS PSN TS adsl etaters: sro: er seat a)
pL ped agd ote: : Sr mi a SGT ae bet an FC pte ee ps Se 2-85 9!
: Sits ry <a 5 nT Pavaotie 2A ier thera eet tiurab leis aetamintaree ceive os aoe =
Sa Sas snn = With Lastest ibe heh M Med ssebnenbernssetoectaniceebaateniciice LORE mee

vt oyee bn pintntes otepaseer te

Let one

~ haps aertrmen enn nee te —
earn neers at tntenisn en anesnuSrensaureeyontenanousioneconeren
~ - or

er embasSiacbnengsan sa ecKBEEn iesayeresocaaseay operor he pene SELLING OP ES MAMA ANER ERNIE 5 scone Seg eo
oie pare ren enw amaeecenn tte sete ees
a ———

Sohsseses
Pirie i renee Tigippeve sts teres)
a

EsPiSieErerreryy yt)

eetrinigs “ti
Hercssh t

peaperereeseieed?

yess Usitioyst
MAPEAp Liat iptare

Perel Cibitevinslerretirititi its
; siete 4 Sab. :
bis F ie tit if a ith bs brehin
Gs Aiodee teeth phoee el ty
< “ ‘eae Hid : fA
abeaeae?

sith Prat ppt
£3) Mesh ht
atthe fe!

mMiiiiiiiinit

asle> PPL SS St

teeeeeenebpin’ |
nif

+i
7 uf
i; >

artatts| Miva

Weights ey

JAA

Dia

evris i iti .

May

=