An Appeal in Favor of that Class of Americans Called Africans/Chapter 3
CHAPTER III.
FREE LABOR AND SLAVE LABOR.—POSSIBILITY OF SAFE EMANCIPATION.
Wo unto him that useth his neighbor's service without wages, and giveth him not for his work.—Jeremiah, xxii. 13.
Who can reflect, unmoved, upon the round
Of smooth and solemnized complacencies,
By which, on Christian lands, from age to age,
Profession mocks performance. Earth is sick,
And Heaven is weary, of the hollow words,
Which states and kingdoms utter when they talk
Of truth and justice.
Political economists found their systems on those broad and general principles, the application of which has been proved by reason and experience to produce the greatest possible happiness to the greatest number of people. All writers of this class, I believe without exception, prefer free labor to slave labor.
Indeed a very brief glance will show that slavery is inconsistent with economy, whether domestic, or political.
The slave is bought, sometimes at a very high price; in free labor there is no such investment of capital.—When the slave is ill, a physician must be paid by the owner; the free laborer defrays his own expenses. The children of the slave must be supported by his master; the free man maintains his own. The slave is to be taken care of in his old age, which his previous habits render peculiarly helpless; the free laborer is hired when he is wanted, and then returns to his home. The slave does not care how slowly or carelessly he works; it is the free man's interest to do his business well and quickly. The slave is indifferent how many tools he spoils; the free man has a motive to be careful. The slave's clothing is indeed very cheap, but it is of no consequence to him how fast it is destroyed—his master must keep him covered, and that is all he is likely to do; the hired laborer pays more for his garments, but makes them last three times as long. The free man will be honest for reputation's sake; but reputation will make the slave none the richer, nor invest him with any of the privileges of a human being—while his poverty and sense of wrong both urge him to steal from his master. A salary must be paid to an overseer to compel the slave to work; the free man is impelled by the desire of increasing the comforts of himself and family. Two hired laborers will perform as much work as three slaves; by some it is supposed to be a more correct estimate that slaves perform only half as much labor as the same number of free laborers. Finally, where slaves are employed, manual industry is a degradation to white people, and indolence becomes the prevailing characteristic.
Slave owners have indeed frequently shown great adroitness in defending this bad system; but, with few exceptions, they base their arguments upon the necessity of continuing slavery because it is already begun. Many of them have openly acknowledged that it was highly injurious to the prosperity of the State.
The Hon. Henry Clay, in his address before the Colonization Society of Kentucky, has given a view of the causes affecting, and likely to affect, slavery in this country, which is very remarkable for its completeness, its distinctness, and its brevity. The following sentences are quoted from this address: "As a mere laborer, the slave feels that he toils for his master, and not for himself; that the laws do not recognise his capacity to acquire and hold property, which depends altogether upon the pleasure of his proprietor, and that all the fruits of his exertions are reaped by others. He knows that, whether sick or well, in times of scarcity or abundance, his master is bound to provide for him by the all powerful influence of self-interest. He is generally, therefore, indifferent to the adverse or prosperous fortunes of his master, being contented if he can escape his displeasure or chastisement, by a careless and slovenly performance of his duties.
"This is the state of the relation between master and slave, prescribed by the law of its nature, and founded in the reason of things. There are undoubtedly many exceptions, in which the slave dedicates himself to his master with a zealous and generous devotion, and the master to the slave with a parental and affectionate attachment. But it is my purpose to speak of the general state of this unfortunate relation.
"That labor is best, in which the laborer knows that he will derive the profits of his industry, that his employment depends upon his diligence, and his reward upon this assiduity. He then has every motive to excite him to exertion, and to animate him in perseverance. He knows that if he is treated badly he can exchange his employer, for one who will better estimate his service; and that whatever he earns is his, to be distributed by himself as he pleases, among his wife, and children, and friends, or enjoyed by himself. In a word, he feels that he is a free agent, with rights, and privileges, and sensibilities.
"Wherever the option exists to employ, at an equal hire, free or slave labor, the former will be decidedly preferred, for the reasons already assigned. It is more capable, more diligent, more faithful, and in every respect more worthy of confidence.
"It is believed that nowhere in the farming portion of the United States would slave labor be generally employed, if the proprietor were not tempted to raise slaves by the high price of the Southern market, which keeps it up in his own."
Speaking of an attempt more than thirtyfive years ago, to adopt gradual emancipation in Kentucky, Mr Clay says: "We were overpowered by numbers, and submitted to the decision of the majority, with the grace which the minority, in a republic, should ever yield to such a decision. I have nevertheless never ceased, and never shall cease, to regret a decision, the effects of which have been, to place us in the rear of our neighbors, who are exempt from slavery, in the state of agriculture, the progress of manufactures, the advance of improvement, and the general prosperity of society."
Mr Appleton, in his reply to Mr McDuffie in the winter of 1832,—a speech distinguished for its good temper and sound practical sense,—says: "I do not think the gentleman from South Carolina has overrated the money price of New England labor at fifty cents; but most of the labor is performed by the owners of the soil. It is great industry alone, which makes New England prosperous. The circumstance that with this cheap slave labor, the South is complaining of suffering, while the North is content and prosperous with dear free labor, is a striking fact and deserves a careful and thorough examination. The experience of all ages and nations proves that high wages are the most powerful stimulus to exertion, and the best means of attaching the people to the institutions under which they live. It is apparent that this political effect upon the character of society cannot have any action upon slaves. Having no choice or volition, there is nothing for stimulus to act upon; they are in fact no part of society. So that, in the language of political economy, they are, like machinery, merely capital; and the productions of their labor consist wholly of profits of capital. But it is not perceived how the tariff can lessen the value of the productions of their labor, in comparison with that of the other States. New York and Virginia both produce wheat; New York with dear labor is content, and Virginia with cheap labor is dissatisfied.
"What is the occupation of the white population of the planting States? I am at a loss to know how this population is employed. We hear of no products of these States, but those produced by slave labor. It is clear the white population cannot be employed in raising cotton or tobacco, because in doing so they can earn but twelve and a half cents per day, since the same quantity of labor performed by a slave is worth no more. I am told also that the wages of overseers, mechanics, &c. are higher than the white labor of the North; and it is well known that many mechanics go from the North to the South, to get employment during the winter. These facts suggest the inquiry whether this cheap slave labor does not paralyze the industry of the whites? Whether idleness is not the greatest of their evils?"
During the famous debate in the Virginia Legislature, in the winter of 1832, Mr Brodnax made the following remark: "That slavery in Virginia is an evil, and a transcendent evil, it would be more than idle for any human being to doubt or deny. It is a mildew which has blighted every region it has touched, from the creation of the world. Illustrations from the history of other countries and other times might be instructive and profitable, had we the time to review them; but we have evidence tending to the same conviction nearer at hand and accessible to daily observation, in the short histories of the different States of this great confederacy, which are impressive in their admonitions and conclusive in their character."
During the same session, Mr Faulkner of Virginia, said: "Sir, I am gratified to perceive that no gentleman has yet risen in this Hall, the avowed advocate of slavery. The day has gone by, when such a voice could be listened to with patience, or even forbearance. I even regret, sir, that we should find one amongst us, who enters the lists as its apologist, except on the ground of uncontrolable necessity. If there be one, who concurs with the gentleman from Brunsuick (Mr Gholson) in the harmless character of this institution, let me request him to compare the condition of the slave holding portion of this Commonwealth—barren, desolate, and seared as it were by the avenging hand of Heaven, with the descriptions which we have of this same country from those who first broke its virgin soil. To what is this change ascribable? Alone to the withering and blasting effects of slavery. If this does not satisfy him, let me request him to extend his travels to the Northern States of this Union,—and beg him to contrast the happiness and contentment which prevails throughout the country—the busy and cheerful sound of industry—the rapid and swelling growth of their population—their means and institutions of education—their skill and proficiency in the useful arts—their enterprise, and public spirit—the monuments of their commercial and manufacturing industry; and, above all, their devoted attachment to the government from which they derive their protection, with the division, discontent, indolence, and poverty of the Southern country. To what, sir, is all this ascribable? To that vice in the organization of society, by which one half of its inhabitants are arrayed in interest and feeling against the other half—to that unfortunate state of society in which freemen regard labor as disgraceful—and slaves shrink from it as a burden tyrannically imposed upon them—to that condition of things, in which half a million of your population can feel no sympathy with the society in the prosperity of which they are forbidden to participate, and no attachment to a government at whose hands they receive nothing but injustice.
"If this should not be sufficient, and the curious and incredulous inquirer should suggest that the contrast which has been adverted to, and is so manifest, might be traced to a difference of climate, or other causes distinct from slavery itself, permit me to refer him to the two states of Kentucky and Ohio—no difference of soil—no diversity of climate—no diversity in the original settlement of those two States, can account for the remarkable disproportion in their national advancement.—Separated by a river alone, they seem to have been purposely and providentially designed to exhibit in their future histories the difference, which necessarily results from a country free from, and a country afflicted with, the curse of slavery. The same may be said of the two states of Missouri and Illinois.
"Slavery, it is admitted, is an evil—it is an institution which presses heavily against the best interests of the State. It banishes free white labor—it exterminates the mechanic—the artisan—the manufacturer. It deprives them of occupation. It deprives them of bread. It converts the energy of a community into indolence—its power into imbecility—its efficiency into weakness. Sir, being thus injurious, have we not a right to demand its extermination! Shall society suffer, that the slave holder may continue to gather his vigintial crop of human flesh? What is his mere pecuniary claim, compared with the great interests of the common weal? Must the country languish and die, that the slave holder may flourish? Shall all interests be subservient to one?—all rights subordinate to those of the slave holder? Has not the mechanic—have not the middle classes their rights?—rights incompatible with the existence of slavery?"
Sutcliff, in his Travels in North America, says: "A person not conversant with these things would naturally think that where families employ a number of slaves, everything about their houses, gardens, and plantations, would be kept in the best order. But the reverse of this is generally the case. I was sometimes tempted to think that the more slaves there were employed, the more disorder appeared. I am persuaded that one or two hired servants, in a well regulated family, would preserve more neatness, order, and comfort, than treble the number of slaves.
"There is a very striking contrast between the appearance of the horses or teams in Pennsylvania, and those in the Southern States, where slaves are kept. In Pennsylvania we met with great numbers of wagons, drawn by four or more fine fat horses, the carriages firm and well made, and covered with stout good linen, bleached almost white: and it is not uncommon to see ten or fifteen together, travelling cheerfully along the road, the driver riding on one of his horses. Many of these come more than three hundred miles to Philadelphia, from the Ohio, Pittsburg, and other places; and I have been told by a respectable friend, a native of Philadelphia, that more than one thousand covered carriages frequently come to Philadelphia market."
"The appearance of things in the slave States is quite the reverse of this. We sometimes meet a ragged black boy or girl driving a team, consisting of a lean cow or a mule, sometimes a lean bull, or an ox and a mule; and I have seen a mule, a bull, and a cow, each miserable in its appearance, composing one team, with a half naked black slave or two, riding or driving, as occasion suited. The carriage or wagon, if it may be called such, appeared in as wretched a condition as the team and its driver. Sometimes a couple of horses, mules, or cows, &c. would be dragging a hogshead of tobacco, with a pivot, or axle, driven into each end of the hogshead, and something like a shaft attached, by which it was drawn, or rolled along the road. I have seen two oxen and two slaves pretty fully employed in getting along a single hogshead; and some of these come from a great distance inland."
The inhabitants of free States are often told that they cannot argue fairly upon the subject of slavery because they know nothing about its actual operation; and any expression of their opinions and feelings with regard to the system, is attributed to ignorant enthusiasm, fanatical benevolence, or a wicked intention to do mischief.
But Mr Clay, Mr Brodnax, and Mr Faulkner, belong to slave holding States; and the two former, if I mistake not, are slave owners. They surely are qualified to judge of the system; and I might fill ten pages with other quotations from Southern writers and speakers, who acknowledge that slavery is a great evil. There are zealous partisans indeed, who defend the system strenuously, and some of them very eloquently. Thus, Mr Hayne, in his reply to Mr Webster, denied that the South suffered in consequence of slavery; he maintained that the slave holding States were prosperous, and the principal cause of all the prosperity in the Union. He laughed at the idea of any danger, however distant, from an overgrown slave population, and supported the position by the fact that slaves had always been kept in entire subjection in the British West Indies, where the white population is less than ten per cent of the whole. But the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina did not mention that the peace establishment of the British West Indies costs England two million pounds annually! Yet such is the fact. This system is so closely entwined with the apparent interests and convenience of individuals, that it will never want for able defenders, so long as it exists. But I believe I do not misrepresent the truth, when I say the prevailing opinion at the South is, that it would have been much better for those States, and for the country in general, if slavery had never been introduced.
Miss Martineau, in her most admirable little book on Demerara, says: "Labor is the product of mind as much as of body; and to secure that product, we must sway the mind by the natural means—by motives. Laboring against self-interest is what nobody ought to expect of white men—much less of slaves. Of course every man, woman and child, would rather play for nothing than work for nothing.
"It is the mind, which gives sight to the eye, and hearing to the ear, and strength to the limbs; and the mind cannot be purchased. Where a man is allowed the possession of himself, the purchaser of his labor is benefited by the vigor of his mind through the service of his limbs: where man is made the possession of another, the possessor loses at once and forever all that is most valuable in that for which he has paid the price of crime. He becomes the owner of that which only differs from an idiot in being less easily drilled into habits, and more capable of effectual revenge.
"Cattle are fixed capital, and so are slaves: But slaves differ from cattle on the one hand, in yielding (from internal opposition) a less return for their maintenance; and from free laborers on the other hand, in not being acted upon by the inducements which stimulate production as an effort of mind as well as body. In all three cases the labor is purchased. In free laborers and cattle, all the faculties work together, and to advantage; in the slave they are opposed; and therefore he is, so far as the amount of labor is concerned, the least valuable of the three. The negroes can invent and improve—witness their ingenuity in their dwellings, and their skill in certain of their sports; but their masters will never possess their faculties, though they have purchased their limbs. Our true policy would be to divide the work of the slave between the ox and the hired laborer; we should get more out of the sinews of the one and the soul of the other, than the produce of double the number of slaves."
As a matter of humanity, let it be remembered that men having more reason than brutes, must be treated with much greater severity, in order to keep them in a state of abject submission.
It seems unnecessary to say that what is unjust and unmerciful, can never be expedient; yet men often write, talk, and act, as if they either forgot this truth, or doubted it. There is genuine wisdom in the following remark, extracted from the petition of Cambridge University to the Parliament of England, on the subject of slavery: "A firm belief in the Providence of a benevolent Creator assures us that no system, founded on the oppression of one part of mankind, can be beneficial to another."
But the tolerator of slavery will say, "No doubt the system is an evil; but we are not to blame for it; we received it from our English ancestors. It is a lamentable necessity;—we cannot do it away if we would;—insurrections would be the inevitable result of any attempt to remove it"—and having quieted their consciences by the use of the word lamentable, they think no more upon the subject.
These assertions have been so often, and so dogmatically repeated, that many truly kind-hearted people have believed there was some truth in them. I myself, (may God forgive me for it!) have often, in thoughtless ignorance, made the same remarks.
An impartial and careful examination has led me to the conviction that slavery causes insurrections, while emancipation prevents them.
The grand argument of the slave holder is that sudden freedom occasioned the horrible massacres of St Domingo.—If a word is said in favor of abolition, he shakes his head, and points a warning finger to St Domingo! But it is a remarkable fact that this same vilified island furnishes a strong argument against the lamentable necessity of slavery. In the first place, there was a bloody civil war there before the act of emancipation was passed; in the second place enfranchisement produced the most blessed effects; in the third place, no difficulties whatever arose, until Bonaparte made his atrocious attempt to restore slavery in the island.
Colonel Malenfant, a slave proprietor, resident in St Domingo at the time, thus describes the effect of sudden enfranchisement, in his Historical and Political Memoir of the Colonies:
"After this public act of emancipation, the negroes remained quiet both in the south and in the west, and they continued to work upon all the plantations. There were estates which had neither owners nor managers resident upon them, yet upon these estates, though abandoned, the negroes continued their labors where there were any, even inferior agents, to guide them; and on those estates where no white men where left to direct them, they betook themselves to the planting of provisions; but upon all the plantations where the whites resided, the blacks continued to labor as quietly as before." Colonel Malenfant says, that when many of his neighbors, proprietors or managers, were in prison, the negroes of their plantations came to him to beg him to direct them in their work.
He adds, "If you will take care not to talk to them of the restoration of slavery, but to talk to them of freedom, you may with this word chain them down to their labor. How did Toussaint succeed?—How did I succeed before his time in the plain of the Culde-Sae on the plantation Gouraud, during more than eight months after liberty had been granted to the slaves? Let those who knew me at that time, let the blacks themselves, be asked: they will all reply that not a single negro upon that plantation, consisting of more than four hundred and fifty laborers, refused to work: and yet this plantation was thought to be under the worst discipline and the slaves the most idle of any in the plain. I inspired the same activity into three other plantations of which I had the management. If all the negroes had come from Africa within six months, if they had the love of independence that the Indians have, I should own that force must be employed; but ninetynine out of a hundred of the blacks are aware that without labor they cannot procure the things that are necessary for them; that there is no other method of satisfying their wants and their tastes. They know that they must work, they wish to do so, and they will do so."
Such was the conduct of the negroes for the first nine months after their liberation, or up to the middle of 1794. In the latter part of 1796, Malenfant says, "the colony was flourishing under Toussaint, the whites lived happily and in peace upon their estates, and the negroes continued to work for them." General Lecroix who published his "Memoirs for a History of St Domingo" in 1819, says, that in 1797 the most wonderful progress had been made in agriculture. "The Colony," says he, "marched as by enchantment towards its ancient splendor: cultivation prospered; every day produced perceptible proof of its progress." General Vincent,[1] who was a general of brigade of artillery in St Domingo and a proprietor of estates in the island, was sent by Toussaint to Paris in 1801 to lay before the Directory the new constitution which had been agreed upon in St Domingo. He arrived in France just at the moment of the peace of Amiens, and found that Bonaparte was preparing an armament for the purpose of restoring slavery in St Domingo. He remonstrated against the expedition; he stated that it was totally unnecessary and therefore criminal, for everything was going on well in St Domingo. The proprietors were in peaceable possession of their estates; cultivation was making rapid progress; the blacks were industrious and beyond example happy. He conjured him, therefore, not to reverse this beautiful state of things; but his efforts were ineffectual, and the expedition arrived upon the shores of St Domingo. At length, however the French were driven from the island. Till that time the planters had retained their property, and then it was, and not till then, that they lost their all. In 1804, Dessalines was proclaimed Emperor; in process of time a great part of the black troops were disbanded, and returned to cultivation again. From that time to this, there has been no want of subordination or industry among them."
The following account of Hayti at a later period is quoted from Mr Harvey's sketches of that island, during the latter part of the reign of Christophé:
"Those who by their exertions and economy were enabled to procure small spots of land of their own or to hold the smaller plantations at an annual rent, were diligently engaged in cultivating coffee, sugar, and other articles, which they disposed of to the inhabitants of the adjacent towns and villages. It was an interesting sight to behold this class of the Haytians, now in possession of their freedom, coming in groups to the market nearest which they resided, bringing the produce of their industry for sale; and afterwards returning, carrying back the necessary articles of living which the disposal of their commodities had enabled them to purchase; all evidently cheerful and happy. Nor could it fail to occur to the mind that their present condition furnished the most satisfactory answer to that objection to the general emancipation of slaves, founded on their alleged unfitness to value and improve the benefits of liberty.
"Though of the same race and possessing the same general traits of character as the negroes of the other West India islands, they are already distinguished from them by habits of industry and activity, such as slaves are seldom known to exhibit. As they would not suffer, so they do not require, the attendance of one acting in the capacity of a driver with the instrument of punishment in his hand."
"In Guadaloupe, the conduct of the freed negroes was equally satisfactory. The perfect subordination which was established and the industry which prevailed there, are proved by the official Reports of the Governor of Guadaloupe, to the French government. In 1793 liberty was proclaimed universally to the slaves in that island, and during their ten years of freedom, their governors bore testimony to their regular industry and uninterrupted submission to the laws."
"During the first American war, a number of slaves ran away from their North American masters and joined the British army. When peace came, it was determined to give them their liberty, and to settle them in Nova Scotia, upon grants of land, as British subjects and as free men. Their number, comprehending men, women and children, was two thousand and upwards. Some of them worked upon little portions of land as their own; others worked as carpenters; others became fishermen; and others worked for hire in various ways. In time, having embraced Christianity, they raised places of worship of their own, and had ministers of their own from their own body. They led a harmless life, and gained the character of an industrious and honest people from their white neighbors. A few years afterwards, the land in Nova Scotia being found too poor to answer, and the climate too cold for their constitutions, a number of them, to the amount of between thirteen and fourteen hundred, volunteered to form a new colony which was then first thought of at Sierra Leone, to which place they were accordingly conveyed. Many hundreds of the negroes who had formed the West Indian black regiments were removed in 1819 to Sierra Leone, where they were set at liberty at once, and founded the villages of Waterloo, Hastings and others. Several hundred maroons (runaway slaves and their descendants,) being exiled from Jamaica, were removed in 1801 to Sierra Leone, where they were landed with no other property than the clothes which they wore and the muskets which they carried in their hands. A body of revolted slaves were banished from Barbadoes in 1816, and sent also to Sierra Leone. The rest of the population of this colony consists almost entirely of negroes who have been recaptured from slave ships, and brought to Sierra Leone in the lowest state of misery, debility and degradation: naked, diseased, destitute, wholly ignorant of the English language, in this wretched, helpless condition they have been suddenly made free, and put into possession at once of the rights and privileges of British subjects. All these instances of sudden emancipation have taken place in a colony where the disproportion between black and white is more than a hundred to one. Yet this mixed population of suddenly emancipated slaves—runaway slaves—criminal slaves—and degraded recaptured negroes, are in their free condition living in order, tranquillity and comfort, and many of them in affluence."
"During the last American war, 774 slaves escaped from their masters, and were at the termination of the war settled in Trinidad as free laborers, where they are earning their own livelihood with industry and good conduct. The following extract of a letter, received in 1829 from Trinidad by Mr Pownall, will show the usefulness and respectability of these liberated negroes. 'A field negro brings four hundred dollars, but most of the work is done by free blacks and people from the main at a much cheaper rate; and as these are generally employed by foreigners, this accounts for their succeeding better than our own countrymen, who are principally from the old islands, and are unaccustomed to any other management than that of slaves; however, they are coming into it fast. In Trinidad, there are upwards of fifteen thousand free people of color; there is not a single pauper amongst them; they live independently and comfortably, and nearly half of the property of the island is said to be in their hands. It is admitted that they are highly respectable in character, and are rapidly advancing in knowledge and refinement.' Mr Mitchell, a sugar planter who had resided twentyseven years in Trinidad, and who is the superintendent of the liberated negroes there, says he knows of no instance of a manumitted slave not maintaining himself In a paper printed by the House of Commons in 1827, (No. 479,) he says of the liberated blacks under his superintendence, that each of them possessed an allotment of land which he cultivated, and on which he raised provisions and other articles for himself and his family; his wife and children aiding him in the work. A great part, however, of the time of the men (the women attending to the domestic menage) was freely given to laboring on the neighboring plantations, on which they worked not in general by the day, but by the piece. Mr Mitchell says that their work is well executed, and that they can earn as much as four shillings a day. If, then, these men who have land on which they can support themselves are yet willing to work for hire, how is it possible to doubt that in case of general emancipation, the freed negroes who would have no land of their own would gladly work for wages?"
"A few years ago, about 150 negro slaves, at different times, succeeded in making their escape from Kentucky into Canada. Captain Stuart, who lived in Upper Canada from 1817 to 1822, was generally acquainted with them, and employed several of them in various ways.—He found them as good and as trustworthy laborers, in every respect, as any emigrants from the islands, or from the United States, or as the natives of the country. In 1828, he again visited that country, and found that their numbers had increased by new refugees to about three hundred. They had purchased a tract of woodland, a few miles from Amherstburgh, and were settled on it, had formed a little village, had a minister of their own number, color, and choice, a good old man of some talent, with whom Captain Stuart was well acquainted, and though poor, were living soberly, honestly and industriously, and were peacefully and usefully getting their own living.—In consequence of the Revolution in Colombia, all the slaves who joined the Colombian armies, amounting to a considerable number, were declared free.—General Bolivar enfranchised his own slaves to the amount of between seven and eight hundred, and many proprietors followed his example. At that time Colombia was overrun by hostile armies, and the masters were often obliged to abandon their property. The black population (including Indians) amounted to nine hundred thousand persons. Of these, a large number was suddenly emancipated, and what has been the effect?—Where the opportunities of insurrection have been so frequent, and so tempting, what has been the effect? M. Ravenga declares that the effect has been a degree of docility on the part of the blacks, and a degree of security on the part of the whites, unknown in any preceding period of the history of Colombia."
"Dr Walsh[2] states that in Brazil there are six hundred thousand enfranchised persons, either Africans or of African descent, who were either slaves themselves or are the descendants of slaves. He says they are, generally speaking, 'well conducted and industrious persons, who compose indiscriminately different orders of the community. There are among them merchants, farmers, doctors, lawyers, priests and officers of different ranks. Every considerable town in the interior has regiments composed of them.' The benefits arising from them, he adds, have disposed the whites to think of making free the whole negro population."
"Mr Koster, an Englishman living in Brazil, confirms Mr Walsh's statement.[3] ’There are black regiments,’ he observes, 'composed entirely and exclusively of black Creole soldiers, commanded by black Creole officers from the corporal to the colonel. I have seen the several guard houses of the town occupied by these troops. Far from any apprehension being entertained on this score, it is well known that the quietude of this country, and the feeling of safety which every one possesses, although surrounded by slaves, proceed from the contentedness of the free people.'"
"The actual condition of the hundred thousand emancipated blacks and persons of color in the British West India Colonies, certainly gives no reason to apprehend that if a general emancipation should take place, the newly freed slaves would not be able and willing to support themselves. On this point the Returns from fourteen of the Slave Colonies, laid before the House of Commons, in 1826, give satisfactory information: they include a period of five years from January 1, 1821, to December 31, 1825, and give the following account of the state of pauperism in each of these colonies.
"Bahamas.—The only establishment in the colony for the relief of the poor, appears to be a hospital or poor house. The number passing through the hospital annually was, on the average, fifteen free black and colored persons and thirteen whites. The number of free black and colored persons is about double that of the whites; so that the proportion of white to that of colored paupers in the Bahamas, is nearly two to one.
"Barbadoes.—The average annual number of persons supported in the nine parishes, from which returns have been sent, is nine hundred and ninetyeight, all of whom, with a single exception, are white. The probable amount of white persons in the island is fourteen thousand five hundred—of free black and colored persons, four thousand five hundred.
"Berbice.—The white population appears to amount to about six hundred, the free black and colored to nine hundred. In 1822, it appears that there were seventeen white and two colored paupers.
"Demerara.—The free black and colored population, it is supposed, are twice the number of the whites. The average number of white pensioners on the poor fund appears to be fiftyone, that of colored pensioners twentysix. In occasional relief, the white paupers receive about three times as much as the colored.
"Dominica.—The white population is estimated at about nine hundred; the free black and colored population was ascertained, in 1825, to amount to three thousand one hundred and twentytwo. During the five years ending in November, 1825, thirty of the former class had received relief from the poor fund, and only ten of the latter, making the proportion of more than nine white paupers to one colored one in tha same number of persons.
"Jamaica is supposed to contain twenty thousand whites, and double that number of free black and colored persons. The returns of paupers from the parishes which have sent returns, exhibits the average number of white paupers to be two hundred and ninetyfive, of black and colored paupers, one hundred and fortyeight; the proportion of white paupers to those of the other class, according to the whole population, being as four to one.
"Nevis.—The white population is estimated at about eight hundred, the free black and colored at about eighteen hundred. The number of white paupers receiving relief is stated to be twentyfive; that of the other class, two; being in the proportion of twentyeight to one.
"St Christophers.—The average number of white paupers appears to be one hundred and fifteen; that of the other class, fourteen; although there is no doubt that the population of the latter class greatly outnumbers that of the former.
"Tortola.—In 1825 the free black and colored population amounted to six hundred and seven. The whites are estimated at about three hundred. The number of white paupers relieved appears to be twentynine: of the other class, four: being in proportion of fourteen to one.
"In short, in a population of free black and colored persons amounting to from eighty thousand to ninety thousand, only two hundred and twentynine persons have received any relief whatever as paupers during the years 1821 to 1825; and these chiefly the concubines and children of destitute whites; while of about sixty-five thousand whites, in the same time, sixteen hundred and seventyfive received relief The proportion, therefore, of enfranchised persons receiving any kind of aid as paupers in the West Indies, is about one in three hundred and seventy: whereas the proportion among the whites of the West Indies is about one in forty; and in England, generally one in twelve or thirteen—in some counties, one in eight or nine.
"Can any one read these statements, made by the colonists themselves, and still think it necessary to keep the negroes in slavery, lest they should be unable to maintain themselves if free?
"In 1823, the Assembly of Grenada passed a resolution, declaring that the free colored inhabitants of these colonies, were a respectable, well behaved class of the community, were possessed of considerable property, and were entitled to have their claims viewed with favor.
"In 1824, when Jamaica had been disturbed for months by unfounded alarms relating to the slaves, a committee of the legislative assembly declared that 'the conduct of the freed people evinced not only zeal and alacrity, but a warm interest in the welfare of the colony, and every way identified them with those who are the most zealous promoters of its internal security.' The assembly confirmed this favorable report a few months ago, by passing a bill conferring on all free black and colored persons the same privileges, civil and political, with the white inhabitants.
"In the orders issued in 1829, by the British Government, in St Lucia, placing all freemen of African descent upon the footing of equal rights with their white neighbors, the loyalty and good conduct of that class are distinctly acknowledged, and they are declared 'to have shown, hitherto, readiness and zeal in coming forward for the maintenance of order.' As similar orders have been issued for Trinidad, Berbice, and the Cape of Good Hope, it may be presumed that the conduct of the free blacks and colored persons in those colonies has likewise given satisfaction to Government.
"In the South African Commercial Advertiser of 9th of February, 1831, we are happy to find recorded one more of the numerous proofs which experience affords of the safety and expediency of immediate abolition.
"Three thousand prize negroes have received their freedom; four hundred in one day; but not the least difficulty or disorder occurred;—servants found masters—masters hired servants; all gained homes, and at night scarcely an idler was to be seen. In the last month, one hundred and fifty were liberated under precisely similar circumstances, and with the same result. These facts are within our own observation; and to state that sudden and abrupt emancipation would create disorder and distress to those you mean to serve, is not reason; but the plea of all men who are adverse to emancipation.
"As far as it can be ascertained from the various documents which have been cited, and from others, which, from the fear of making this account too long, are not particularly referred to, it appears that in every place and time in which emancipation has been tried, not one drop of white blood has been shed, or even endangered by it; that it has everywhere greatly improved the condition of the blacks, and in most places has removed them from a state of degradation and suffering to one of respectability and happiness. Can it, then, be justifiable, on account of any vague fears of we know not what evils, to reject this just, salutary and hitherto uninjurious measure; and to cling to a system which we know, by certain experience, is producing crime, misery and death, during every day of its existence?"
In Mexico, September 15, 1829, the following decree was issued; "Slavery is forever abolished in the republic; and consequently all those individuals, who, until this day, looked upon themselves as slaves, are free." The prices of slaves were settled by the magistrates, and they were required to work with their master, for stipulated wages, until the debt was paid. If the slave wished to change masters he could do so, if another person would take upon himself the liability of payment, in exchange for his labor; and provided the master was secured against loss, he was obliged to consent to the transaction. Similar transfers might take place to accommodate the master, but never without the consent of the servant. The law regulated the allowance of provisions, clothing, &c., and if the negro wished for more, he might have it charged, and deducted from his wages; but lest masters should take advantage of the improvidence of their servants, it was enacted, that all charges exceeding half the earnings of any slave, or family of slaves, should be void in law. The duties of servants were defined as clearly as possible by the laws, and magistrates appointed to enforce them; but the master was entrusted with no power to punish, in any manner whatever. It was expressly required that the masters should furnish every servant with suitable means of religious and intellectual instruction.
A Vermont gentleman, who had been a slave holder in Mississippi, and afterward resident at Metamoras, in Mexico, speaks with enthusiasm of the beneficial effects of these regulations, and thinks the example highly important to the United States. He declares that the value of the plantations was soon increased by the introduction of free labor. "No one was made poor by it. It gave property to the servant, and increased the riches of the master."
The republics of Buenos Ayres, Chili, Bolivia, Peru, Colombia, Guatimala and Monte Video, likewise took steps for the abolition of slavery, soon after they themselves came into possession of freedom. In some of these states, means were taken for the instruction of young slaves, who were all enfranchised by law, on arriving at a certain age; in others, universal emancipation is to take place after a certain date, fixed by the laws. The empire of Brazil, and the United States are the only American nations, that have taken no measures to destroy this most pestilent system; and I have recently been assured by intelligent Brazilians, that public opinion in that country is now so strongly opposed to slavery, that something effectual will be done toward abolition, at the very next meeting of the Cortes. If this should take place, the United States will stand alone in most hideous preëminence.
When Necker wrote his famous book on French finances, he suggested a universal compact of nations to suppress the slave trade. The exertions of England alone have since nearly realized his generous plan, though avarice and cunning do still manage to elude her vigilance and power. She has obtained from Spain, Portugal, France, Holland, and Denmark, a mutual right to search all vessels suspected of being engaged in this wicked traffic.[4] I believe I am correct in saying that ours is now the only flag, which can protect this iniquity from the just indignation of England. When a mutual right of search was proposed to us, a strong effort was made to blind the people with their own prejudices, by urging the old complaint of the impressment of seamen; and alas, when has an unsuccessful appeal been made to passion and prejudice? It is evident that nothing on earth ought to prevent cooperation in a cause like this. Besides, "It is useless for us to attempt to linger on the skirts of the age that is departing. The action of existing causes and principles is steady and progressive. It cannot he retarded, unless we would 'blow out all the moral lights around us;' and if we refuse to keep up with it, we shall be towed in the wake, whether we are willing or not."[5]
When I think of the colonies established along the coast of Africa—of Algiers, conquered and civilized—of the increasing wealth and intelligence of Hayti—of the powerful efforts now being made all over the world to sway public opinion in favor of universal freedom—of the certain emancipation of slaves in all British Colonies—and above all, the evident union of purpose existing between the French and English cabinets,—I can most plainly see the hand of God working for the deliverance of the negroes. We may resist the blessed influence, if we will; but we cannot conquer. Every year the plot is thickening around us, and the nations of the earth, either consciously or unconsciously, are hastening the crisis. The defenders of the slave system are situated like the man in the Iron Shroud, the walls of whose prison daily moved nearer and nearer, by means of powerful machinery, until they crushed all that remained within them.
But to return to the subject of emancipation. Nearly every one of the States north of Mason and Dixon's line once held slaves. These slaves were manumitted without bloodshed, and there was no trouble in making free colored laborers obey the laws.
I am aware that this desirable change must be attended with much more difficulty in the Southern States, simply because the evil has been suffered until it is fearfully overgrown; but it must not be forgotten that while they are using their ingenuity and strength to sustain it for the present, the mischief is increasing more and more rapidly. If this be not a good time to apply a remedy, when will be a better? They must annihilate slavery, or slavery will annihilate them.
It seems to be forgotten that emancipation from tyranny is not an emancipation from law; the negro, after he is made free, is restrained from the commission of crimes by the same laws which restrain other citizens: if he steals, he will be imprisoned: if he commits murder, he will be hung.
It will, perhaps, be said that the free people of color in the slave portions of this country are peculiarly ignorant, idle, and vicious? It may be so; for our laws and our influence are peculiarly calculated to make them bad members of society. But we trust the civil power to keep in order the great mass of ignorant and vicious foreigners continually pouring into the country; and if the laws are strong enough for this, may they not be trusted to restrain the free blacks?
In those countries where the slave codes are mild, where emancipation is rendered easy, and inducements are offered to industry, insurrections are not feared, and free people of color form a valuable portion of the community. If we persist in acting in opposition to the established laws of nature and reason, how can we expect favorable results? But it is pronounced unsafe to change our policy. Every progressive improvement in the world has been resisted by despotism, on the ground that changes were dangerous. The Emperor of Austria thinks there is need of keeping his subjects ignorant, that good order may be preserved. But what he calls good order, is sacrificing the happiness of many to the advancement of a few; and no doubt knowledge is unfavorable to the continuation of such a state of things. It is precisely so with the slave holder; he insists that the welfare of millions must be subordinate to his private interest, or else all good order is destroyed.
It is much to be regretted that Washington enfranchised his slaves in the manner he did; because their poverty and indolence have furnished an ever ready argument for those who are opposed to emancipation.[6] To turn slaves adrift in their old age, unaccustomed to take care of themselves, without employment, and in a community where all the prejudices were strongly arrayed against free negroes, was certainly an unhappy experiment.
But if slaves were allowed to redeem themselves progressively, by purchasing one day of the week after another, as they can in the Spanish colonies, habits of industry would be gradually formed, and enterprise would be stimulated, by their successful efforts to acquire a little property. And if they afterward worked better as free laborers than they now do as slaves, it would surely benefit their masters, as well as themselves.
That strong-hearted republican. La Fayette, when he returned to France in 1785, felt strongly urged by a sense of duty, to effect the emancipation of slaves in the Colony of Cayenne. As most of the property in the colony belonged to the crown, he was enabled to prosecute his plans with less difficulty than he could otherwise have done. Thirty thousand dollars were expended in the purchase of plantations and slaves, for the sole purpose of proving by experiment the safety and good policy of conferring freedom.[7] Being afraid to trust the agents generally employed in the colony, he engaged a prudent and amiable man at Paris to undertake the business. This gentleman, being fully instructed in La Fayette's plans and wishes, sailed for Cayenne. The first thing he did when he arrived, was to collect all the cart-whips, and other instruments of punishment, and have them burnt amid a general assemblage of the slaves; he then made known to them the laws and rules by which the estates would be governed. The object of all the regulations was to encourage industry by making it the means of freedom. This new kind of stimulus had a most favorable effect on the slaves, and gave promise of complete success. But the judicious agent died in consequence of the climate, and the French Revolution threw everything into a state of convulsion at home and abroad. The new republic of France bestowed unconditional emancipation upon the slaves in her colonies: and had she persevered in her promises with good faith and discretion, the horrors of St Domingo might have been spared. The emancipated negroes in Cayenne came in a body to the agents, and declared that if the plantations still belonged to General La Fayette they were ready and willing to resume their labors for the benefit of one who had treated them like men, and cheered their toil by making it a certain means of freedom.
I cannot forbear paying a tribute of respect to the venerable Moses Brown, of Providence, Rhode Island, now living in virtuous and vigorous old age. He was a slave owner in early life, and, unless I have been misinformed, a slave dealer, likewise. When his attention became roused to religious subjects, these facts troubled his conscience. He easily and promptly decided that a Christian could not consistently keep slaves; but he did not dare to trust his own nature to determine the best manner of doing justice to those he had wronged. He therefore appointed a committee, before whom he laid a statement of the expenses he had incurred for the food and clothing of his slaves, and of the number of years, during which he had had the exclusive benefit of their labors. He conceived that he had no right to charge them for their freedom, because God had given them an unalienable right to that possession, from the very hour of their birth; but he wished the committee to decide what wages he ought to pay them for the work they had done. He cordially accepted the decision of the committee, paid the negroes their dues, and left them to choose such employments as they thought best. Many of the grateful slaves preferred to remain with him as hired laborers. It is hardly necessary to add that Moses Brown is a Quaker.
It is commonly urged against emancipation that white men cannot possibly labor under the sultry climate of our most southerly States. This is a good reason for not sending the slaves out of the country, but it is no argument against making them free. No doubt we do need their labor; but we ought to pay for it. Why should their presence be any more disagreeable as hired laborers, than as slaves? In Boston, we continually meet colored people in the streets, and employ them in various ways, without being endangered, or even incommoded. There is no moral impossibility in a perfectly kind and just relation between the two races.
If white men think otherwise, let them remove from climates which nature has made too hot for their constitutions. Wealth or pleasure often induces men to change their abode; an emigration for the sake of humanity would be an agreeable novelty. Algernon Sidney said, "When I cannot live in my own country, but by such means as are worse than dying in it, I think God shows me that I ought to keep myself out of it."
But the slave holders try to stop all the efforts of benevolence, by vociferous complaints about infringing upon their property; and justice is so subordinate to self-interest, that the unrighteous claim is silently allowed, and even openly supported, by those who ought to blush for themselves, as Christians and as republicans. Let men simplify their arguments—let them confine themselves to one single question, "What right can a man have to compel his neighbor to toil without reward, and leave the same hopeless inheritance to his children, in order that he may live in luxury and indolence?" Let the doctrines of expediency return to the Father of Lies, who invented them, and gave them power to turn every way for evil. The Christian knows no appeal from the decisions of God, plainly uttered in his conscience.
The laws of Venice allowed property in human beings; and upon this ground Shylock demanded his pound of flesh, cut nearest to the heart. Those who advertise mothers to be sold separately from their children, likewise claim a right to human flesh; and they too cut it nearest to the heart.
The personal liberty of one man can never be the property of another. All ideas of property are founded upon the mutual agreement of the human race, and are regulated by such laws as are deemed most conducive to the general good. In slavery there is no mutual agreement; for in that case it would not be slavery. The negro has no voice in the matter—no alternative is presented to him—no bargain is made. The beginning of his bondage is the triumph of power over weakness; its continuation is the tyranny of knowledge over ignorance. One man may as well claim an exclusive right to the air another man breathes, as to the possession of his limbs and faculties. Personal freedom is the birthright of every human being. God himself made it the first great law of creation; and no human enactment can render it null and void. "If," says Price, "you have a right to make another man a slave, he has a right to make you a slave;" and Ramsay says, "If we have in the beginning no right to sell a man, no person has a right to buy him."
Am I reminded that the laws acknowledge these vested rights in human flesh? I answer, the laws themselves were made by individuals, who wished to justify the wrong and profit by it. We ought never to have recognised a claim, which cannot exist according to the laws of God; it is our duty to atone for the error; and the sooner we make a beginning, the better will it be for us all. Must our arguments be based upon justice and mercy to the slave holders only? Have the negroes no right to ask compensation for their years and years of unrewarded toil? It is true that they have food and clothing, of such kind, and in such quantities, as their masters think proper. But it is evident that this is not the worth of their labor; for the proprietors can give from one hundred to five and six hundred dollars for a slave, beside the expense of supporting those who are too old or too young to labor. They could not afford to do this, if the slave did not earn more than he receives in food and clothing. If the laws allowed the slave to redeem himself progressively, the owner would receive his money back again; and the negro's years of uncompensated toil would be more than lawful interest.
The southerners are much in the habit of saying they really wish for emancipation, if it could he effected in safety; but I search in vain for any proof that these assertions are sincere. (When I say this, I speak collectively; there are, no doubt, individual exceptions.)
Instead of profiting by the experience of other nations, the slave owners, as a body, have resolutely shut their eyes against the light, because they preferred darkness. Every change in the laws has rivetted the chain closer and closer upon their victims; every attempt to make the voice of reason and benevolence heard has been overpowered with threatening and abuse. A cautious vigilance against improvement, a keen-eyed jealousy of all freedom of opinion, has characterized their movements. There can be no doubt that the majority wish to perpetuate slavery. They support it with loud bravado, or insidious sophistry, or pretended regret; but they never abandon the point. Their great desire is to keep the public mind turned in another direction. They are well aware that the ugly edifice is built of rotten timbers, and stands on slippery sands—if the loud voice of public opinion could be made to reverberate through its dreary chambers, the unsightly frame would fall, never to rise again.
Since so many of their own citizens admit that the policy of this system is unsound, and its effects injurious, it is wonderful that they do not begin to destroy the "costly iniquity" in good earnest. But long continued habit is very powerful; and in the habit of slavery are concentrated the strongest evils of human nature—vanity, pride, love of power, licentiousness, and indolence.
There is a minority, particularly in Virginia and Kentucky, who sincerely wish a change for the better; but they are overpowered, and have not even ventured to speak, except in the great Virginia debate of 1832. In the course of that debate the spirit of slavery showed itself without disguise. The members talked of emancipation; but with one or two exceptions, they merely wanted to emancipate or rather to send away, the surplus population, which they could neither keep nor sell, and which might prove dangerous. They wished to get rid of the consequences of the evil, but were determined to keep the evil itself. Some members from Western Virginia, who spoke in a better spirit, and founded their arguments on the broad principles of justice, not on the mere convenience of a certain class, were repelled with angry excitement. The eastern districts threatened to separate from the western, if the latter persisted in expressing opinions opposed to the continuance of slavery. From what I have uniformly heard of the comparative prosperity of Eastern and Western Virginia, I should think this was very much like the town's poor threatening to separate from the town.
The mere circumstance of daring to debate on the subject was loudly reprimanded; and there was a good deal of indignation expressed that "reckless editors, and imprudent correspondents, had presumed so far as to allude to it in the columns of a newspaper." Discussion in the Legislature was strongly deprecated until a plan had been formed; yet they must have known that no plan could be formed, in a republican government, without previous discussion. The proposal contained within itself that self-perpetuating power, for which the schemes of slave owners are so remarkable.
Mr Gholson sarcastically rebuked the restless spirit of improvement, by saying "he really had been under the impression that he owned his slaves. He had lately purchased four women and ten children, in whom he thought he had obtained a great bargain; for he supposed they were his own property, as were his brood mares." To which Mr Roane replied, "I own a considerable number of slaves, and am perfectly sure they are mine; and I am sorry to add that I have occasionally, though not often, been compelled to make them feel the impression of that ownership. I would not touch a hair on the head of the gentleman's slave, any sooner than I would a hair in the mane of his horse."
Mr R. likewise remarked, "I think slavery as much a correlative of liberty as cold is of heat. History, experience, observation and reason, have taught me that the torch of liberty has ever burned brighter when surrounded by the dark and filthy, yet nutritious atmosphere of slavery! I do not believe in the fanfaronade that all men are by nature equal. But these abstract speculations have nothing to do with the question, which I am willing to view as one of cold, sheer state policy, in which the safety, prosperity, and happiness of the whites alone are concerned."
Would Mr Roane carry out his logic into all its details? Would he cherish intemperance, that sobriety might shine the brighter? Would he encourage theft, in order to throw additional lustre upon honesty? Yet there seems to be precisely the same relation between these things that there is between slavery and freedom. Such sentiments sound oddly enough in the mouth of a republican of the nineteenth century!
When Mr Wirt, before the Supreme Federal Court, said that slavery was contrary to the laws of nature and of nations, and that the law of South Carolina concerning seizing colored seamen, was unconstitutional, the Governor directed several reproofs at him. In 1825, Mr King laid on the table of the United States Senate a resolution to appropriate the proceeds of the public lands to the emancipation of slaves, and the removal of free negroes, provided the same could be done under and agreeable to, the laws of the respective States. He said he did not wish it to be debated, but considered at some future time. Yet kindly and cautiously as this movement was made, the whole South resented it, and Governor Troup called to the Legislature and people of Georgia, to "stand to their arms." In 1827 the people of Baltimore presented a memorial to Congress, praying that slaves born in the District of Columbia after a given time, specified by law, might become free on arriving at a certain age. A famous member from South Carolina called this an "impertinent interference, and a violation of the principles of liberty!" and the petition was not even committed. Another Southern gentleman in Congress objected to the Panama mission because Bolivar had proclaimed liberty to the slaves.
Mr Hayne, in his reply to Mr Webster, says: "There is a spirit, which, like the father of evil, is constantly walking to and fro about the earth, seeking whom it may devour; it is the spirit of false philanthropy. When this is infused into the bosom of a statesman (if one so possessed can be called a statesman) it converts him at once into a visionary enthusiast. Then he indulges in golden dreams of national greatness and prosperity. He discovers that 'liberty is power,' and not content with vast schemes of improvement at home, which it would bankrupt the treasury of the world to execute, he flies to foreign lands to fulfil 'obligations to the human race, by inculcating the principles of civil and religious liberty,' &c. This spirit has long been busy with the slaves of the South; and it is even now displaying itself in vain efforts to drive the government from its wise policy in relation to the Indians."Governor Miller, of South Carolina, speaking of the tariff and "the remedy," asserted that slave labor was preferable to free, and challenged the free states to competition on fair terms. Governor Hamilton of the same State, in delivering an address on the same subject, uttered a eulogy upon slavery; concluding as usual that nothing but the tariff—nothing but the rapacity of Northerners, could have nullified such great blessings of Providence, as the cheap labor and fertile soil of Carolina. Mr Calhoun, in his late speech in the Senate, alludes in a tone of strong disapprobation, and almost of reprimand, to the remarkable debate in the Virginia Legislature; the occurrence of which offence he charges to the opinions and policy of the north.
If these things evince any real desire to do away the evil, I cannot discover it. There are many who inherit the misfortune of slavery, and would gladly renounce the miserable birthright if they could; for their sakes, I wish the majority were guided by a better spirit and a wiser policy. But this state of things cannot last. The operations of Divine Providence are hastening the crisis, and move which way we will, it must come in some form or other; if we take warning in time, it may come as a blessing. The spirit of philanthropy, which Mr Hayne calls 'false,' is walking to and fro in the earth; and it will not pause, or turn back, till it has fastened the golden band of love and peace around a sinful world.—The sun of knowledge and liberty is already high in the heavens—it is peeping into every dark nook and corner of the earth—and the African cannot be always excluded from its beams.
The advocates of slavery remind me of a comparison I once heard differently applied: Even thus does a dog, unwilling to follow his master's carriage, bite the wheels, in a vain effort to stop its progress.
- ↑ Clarkson's Thoughts, p. 2
- ↑ Walsh's Notes on Brazil, vol. ii. page 365.
- ↑ Amelioration of Slavery, published in No. 16 of the Pamphleteer.
- ↑ The British government actually paid Spain 400,000 pounds, as an indemnity to those engaged in the slave trade, on condition that the traffic should be abolished by law throughout her dominions.
- ↑ Speech of Mr Brodnax of Virginia.
- ↑ With all my unbounded reverence for Washington, I have, I confess, sometimes found it hard to forgive him for not manumitting his slaves long before his death. A fact which has lately come to my knowledge, gave me great joy; for it furnishes a reason for what had appeared to me unpardonable. It appears that Washington possessed a gang of negroes in right of his wife, with which his own negroes had intermarried. By the marriage settlement, the former were limited, in default of issue of the marriage, to the representatives of Mrs Washington at her death; so that her negroes could not be enfranchised. An unwillingness to separate parents and children, husbands and wives, induced Washington to postpone the manumission of his own slaves. This motive is briefly, and as it were accidentally, referred to in his will.
- ↑ It is now reported that the Hon. Mr Wirt has purchased a plantation in Florida, with the same benevolent intent. Such a step, is worthy of that noble minded and distinguished man.