SECTION VI.
SLAVERY IN AMERICA — ITS ORIGIN — AND THE PROBABLE MANNER OF ITS REMOVAL
The subject of slavery in the United States has been too often spoken of in the language of mere feeling — nay, it may be said, of passion. Writers and speakers, uninformed, many of them, alike as to its origin and its real present condition, have indulged themselves in violent denunciations, such as could possibly serve no good purpose, but which rather tended to exasperate the master, and consequently to rivet more firmly the shackles of the slave. Zeal without knowledge, feeling without understanding, ever defeat their own ends. Mere passion is blind; and dashing recklessly forwards, it more commonly rushes to its own destruction, than accomplishes that of its adversary. What is our purpose? Is it to pour forth declamation? or is it to effect a useful end, — to do real and practical good? It is easy enough to denounce any evil: the light of absolute truth held up to evil shows clearly its deformity; and when we have ourselves no part in it, it is very easy and very natural to get up an excitement of feeling, and a ready outcry against it. But is it strictly just, it may be, asked, to look at any evils of our fellow-men in this way 1 Could we bear to have the same bright light of abstract truth turned upon us? Have we no evils and sins of our own, which, if the Divine justice were to call us to account for, as rigorously as we are ready to call our fellow-men to account for theirs, would bring down fearful condemnation on our heads? "Cast first the beam out of thine own eye," said the Savior, "and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote from thy brother's eye." It is well that we have a more lenient as well as a wiser Judge of our actions, than weak man, or we should all fare hardly enough. Happily, there is One, who knows all the palliating circumstances connected with our disordered condition; who knows how we came into it in the first place — sometimes through no fault of our own; and who knows, furthermore, what efforts we have used against the evil, and who has seen us, perchance, though often falling, yet rising again and striving to do better. Our All wise Judge can alone be perfectly just, as well as good, because He alone knows and can make allowance for all our weaknesses, our unavoidable errors, the defective nature of the instruments we have to work with, and the difficulty of the task to be accomplished. Whereas harsh and ignorant man looks only at the general appearance, the mere surface of things; and if that looks wrong, he is ready, forgetting his own sins, to pronounce upon it a sweeping condemnation. This is neither mercy nor justice; and it was in view of this uncharitable tendency on the part of man, that the Divine Savior gave the command, "Judge not, that ye be not judged." In order to form an opinion with any degree of justness concerning slavery in America, we must not only be possessed of true and accurate information as to its actual condition, but we must also recur to its origin and history, inquire how it came there; that thus a just share of the blame, if blame there be, may be laid upon its originators, and not the whole of it be thrown — as by the unreflecting multitude it is too apt to be done — on those who happen to have been born where it exists. Now, looking at the subject from this last point of view, it may justly be said, that slavery is the misfortune rather than the fault of America. It is owing mainly to her situation, as a part of the New or Western World, that she has slavery, and England not. Had England been situated where Virginia or where Cuba is, — in the New, instead of in the Old World, —-would not England be as full of African slaves at this moment as they are? Was it not Englishmen who in great part supplied America with the slaves she has — English ships, with English crews, sailing from English ports, sent forth by English owners, under the full approval of the English Government?[1] In the year 1786, England had engaged in the slave-trade no fewer than 130 vessels (and this was full fourteen years after the English courts had declared that no slave could be held in England itself). In 1713, she made a treaty with Spain to supply the Spanish colonies, in thirty years, with 144,000 slaves.[2] Now, had England been situated on the American continent or coast, would not these English ships have brought the slaves home, into their own territory, as the Cubans now do into theirs? — and thus would not England have been filled with African slaves, just as Cuba or the United States now are? Where, then, would have been the boast concerning the free English soil":[3] We may thus see that the fact of Britain's being new free, while a. portion of America is unhappily under the curse of slavery, is owing to nothing
inappropriate, then, the praise bestowed by Cowper on his native country, in the lines which follow those just quoted:
'That's noble and bespeaks a nation proud
And jealous of the blessing."
Plea, Conversation VII.
In view of these facts, too, any taunts or reproaches against America on the subject of slavery, — as Mr. Freeman justly remarks, "come with a peculiarly ill grace" from England.
We occasionally see in English journals, and in the books of British travelers in America, extracts from Southern newspapers, containing advertisements for the recovery of runaway slaves; and these are commented on in terms of astonishment and indignation. But let such writers peruse the following advertisements, selected from old English newspapers, published while slavery existed in England itself: —
"A black boy, about 15 years of age, named John White, ran away from Colonel Kirke, the 15th inst.; he has a silver collar about his neck, upon which is the Colonel's coat of arms and cypher; he has upon his throat a great scar. Whosoever brings the aforesaid boy to Colonel Kirke's house near the Privy Garden, will be rewarded. — London Gazette. March, 1665."
"To be sold, a negro boy, about 14 years old, warranted free from any distemper, and has had those fatal to that color; has been used two years to all kinds of household work, and to wait at table; his price is £25, and would not be sold, but the person he belongs to is leaving off business. Apply to the bar of the George Coffee House in Chancery Lane, over against the gate — London Advertiser, 1756."
These advertisements may be seen, re-published, as curiosities, in the Glasgow Herald of Sept. 17, 1856.
It was not till 1772 (just three years before the commencement of the American Revolutionary War) that, by a decision of the Court oi King's Bench, the sale of a negro in England was declared illegal. Now, Cowper's Task, in which is contained the often quoted British boast that "no slave can breathe in England, &c." was published in 1788, and thus was founded on a condition of things which had existed but thirteen years, and which had been brought about, not by any marked revolution in public opinion, nor established by any deliberate decision of the British Parliament, but simply by the construction of a court of law. ever other than the difference of local situation — and not in any degree ascribable to any superiority in the character of the inhabitants! Then, what ground, in truth, is there for boasting? Few think of these things — because, as before observed, the multitude do not reflect; in fact, they do not know the history or origin of things; they look merely at the present appearance, and acquit or condemn accordingly. But the educated and the just-minded should look more thoroughly and judge more justly!
But it may be said, perhaps, that England has exculpated herself by emancipating her own slaves, and that therefore she may justly call upon America to emancipate hers, or may justifiably reproach her for continuing a course of wrong which she herself has given up. But, pause a moment! Are the two cases at all parallel? Is it true that England, has done what she calls upon America to do? By no means: the cases are altogether different. England had no slaves to give up — England had no deep-rooted institution of slavery within her. own borders, as America has. What England has done, in fact, is simply this — to exercise a power which she happened to possess over certain other countries, and to take away slavery from them. For the West India Colonies, though nominally or politically belonging to her, and hence under her power — nevertheless, as far as the institution of slavery was concerned, stood in the relation to her of distant and foreign countries, with whom, though she had a political connection, she had very little more social sympathy than with the United States themselves. So that she could, afar off, coolly look at the evil of slavery existing in those colonies, pronounce it wrong, and, having the power, could and did proceed to remove it. In this she had scarcely more sacrifice to make than she would have in seeing it removed from the United States, or any other part of America. The twenty millions which she undertook to pay by way of remuneration, was indeed, so far, a sacrifice, — but it was a sacrifice trifling indeed, and scarcely felt at all, compared with that which would be required of a country removing slavery from itself; for in that case, not only would it be necessary to make a far greater pecuniary sacrifice, but that would be the least part of it: the grand difficulty lies in giving up old habits, changing long-rooted institutions, completely inverting a long-established social order, — all of which things, we know, it is most difficult for men to do. Had the English Colonies themselves — or had the slave-owners in those Colonies — voluntarily given up their slaves, that would indeed have been in some measure a parallel case with what is required of America: or had Great Britain possessed the institution of slavery on her own soil, in London and Yorkshire, in Edinburgh and Glasgow, and then had shown the magnanimity and moral courage to pass an act of Parliament, uprooting at once that old institution, and, contrary to all long-cherished customs, feelings, and social habits, had given up and set free at once three millions of slaves — that would indeed have been a parallel case to America's. But is there any likelihood that this would have been done? When Great Britain finds it so hard to make even trivial changes in her own long-established institutions, deep-rooted usages and customs, — is there the least probability that she would have been able, all at once, to make so vital and radical a change as this? If not, then she should be sparing of her reproaches against America, for this is just her difficulty.[4]
But, in truth, moreover, due credit has never been given to America for the serious and, to a considerable extent, successful efforts which she has already made to rid herself of this evil. Very early, and while yet in her colonial state, did she, from her own religious sense of justice, make these efforts — taking the lead, in fact, of all the world in this respect. In the first place, she opposed at the outset the introduction of the slaves whom the mother-country for her own selfish ends would thrust upon her, and she strove by various means to stop or check. the infamous trade. The Colony of Virginia, for instance, passed no less than twenty-three acts, tending to suppress this traffic — all of which acts were negatived by the English Government.[5] In 1772, before the Declaration of Independence, the Assembly of Virginia went so far as to set forth, in a respectful petition to the king, the inhumanity of the slave-trade, and to suggest that "it might endanger the very existence of his American dominions." And to show her sincerity — in 1778, as soon as she got the power into her own hands — in the very midst of the war of independence — the same Colony passed an act making the slave-trade punishable by death.[6] This was nearly thirty years before the slave-trade was abolished in Great Britain. Other Colonies followed the example of Virginia in the effort to exclude or check the introduction of slaves. New York laid a duty upon their importation as early as 1753, Pennsylvania in 1762, and New Jersey in 1769.
The United States, as a nation, also, was the first to prohibit the prosecution of the slave-trade. In the year 1794 — thirteen years before any act on the subject was passed by Great Britain — it was enacted by the Congress of the United States, that "no person in the United States should fit out any vessel there, for the purpose of carrying on any traffic in slaves." In 1800, it. was enacted that "it should be unlawful for any citizen of the United States to have any property in any vessel employed in transporting slaves, from one foreign country to another, or to serve on board any vessel so employed," and any of the commissioned vessels of the United States were authorized to seize and take any American vessel found engaged in the slave-trade. In 1807, it was enacted, that after the first of January, 1808, "it should not be lawful for any one (whether American or foreigner) to bring into the United States or the territories thereof, any negro, mulatto, or person of color, with intent to hold or sell him as a slave; "and heavy penalties were imposed on the violators of this or the other acts of similar import. This was the very year in which, after twenty years' struggle, the act was passed by the British parliament for the abolition of the slave-trade. Thus the American and British acts, completely abolishing the African slave-trade, date from precisely the same period, — though in her two previous acts for its partial abolition (that is, abolition as far as her own citizens were concerned), America has the precedence.[7] Finally, in 1820, the American Congress passed an act, declaring that any citizen of the United States found engaged in the slave-trade should be adjudged a pirate, and on conviction should suffer death. A similar act was not passed in Great Britain till 1824: here, again, America had the precedence and set the example.[8] Do not these facts prove a sincere purpose and earnest endeavor, on the part of Americans, both in their Colonial and in their National capacities, to do all in their power to put a check to the evil, and stop the further progress of a wrong, the commencement of which it was not in their power to prevent?
But the question is often asked, why does not the Government of the United States abolish slavery as well as forbid the slave-trade? To this it is to be replied, that the American Government has no power to do so: the Congress of the United States has no power whatever over slavery Within the limits of the different States. It should be understood that the United States is a Confederacy, composed at present of thirty-three different States, each of which is sovereign and independent as to all its internal concerns. To understand this — it is to be remembered that before the War of Independence there were thirteen distinct Colonies, entirely independent of, and unconnected with, each other, yet all subject to the mother country, Great Britain. Each Colony had its own government, its governor, and its House of Assembly, — very much as Canada now has — by which all its internal affairs were regulated, subject, however, to the veto of the Government at home. At the commencement of the War of Independence, the thirteen Colonies united in a league or Confederacy, for purposes of mutual aid and defence. They appointed a general body, called a Congress, composed of representatives from the different Colonies, to regulate the general concerns of the Confederacy, each Colony, however, reserving to itself the management of its own internal affairs, as before. After their independence was attained, the present Constitution of the United States was adopted, in 17 89, which retains still nearly all the general features of the original Confederacy. The Congress, composed like the British Parliament of an upper and a lower house, called a Senate and a House of Representatives, has power over matters of a general or national character, such as questions of peace and war, intercourse with foreign nations, regulation of import duties, and so forth; but it is provided, in the Constitution, that each State shall have the exclusive regulation of all its internal concerns, precisely as in former Colonial times: over these, therefore, the national Congress has no control whatever. Each State has its own Legislative Assembly, which enacts all laws and regulates all matters within its own confines.
Now, some of the States have slavery existing within their borders, and some have not. At present a majority of the States, namely eighteen out of the thirty-three are Free States; in these, slavery has either been abolished or has never existed: the other fifteen are Slave-holding States. Moreover, as appears by the census of 1850, — in the Free States the population is thirteen millions and upwards, whereas the white population in the Slave States is but little more than six millions. Thus it appears that less than one-third of American citizens are slave-owners, or even dwellers in the States where slavery exists. Is it right, then, to stigmatize the whole nation for the doings or for the condition of a small minority? — to cast upon all Americans a reproach which, at worst, belongs to less than one-third of their number, and which even with those, as already shown, may be justly considered rather their misfortune than their fault, since it was imposed upon them by others?[9]
But, to the citizens of the Free States, not only is the negative credit due, of being free from the reproach of slavery, but to many of those States great positive praise is due, for having actually, at a. great sacrifice, abolished slavery Within their respective limits. Hardly had the yoke of subjection to Great Britain been thrown off, when the Northern States set themselves earnestly and conscientiously to this task (for, through the influence of the mother country, slaves existed, it is to be remembered, in all the. Colonies, even in Massachusetts and in the city of Boston). As early as the year 1780, in the very midst of the War of Independence, the State of Pennsylvania, one of the largest and most populous of the States, set the example, by passing an Act for the gradual abolition of slavery within her boundaries. "This has the merit," says Mr. Freeman, of being the earliest legislative proceeding of the kind in any country."[10] This noble example was followed, at different periods, by all the other States to the north and east of Pennsylvania, namely, New York, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. Thus, seven of the original thirteen States have already abolished slavery within their limits.
And the good work would doubtless have gone on, had not a most unwise system of violent attack and denunciation been commenced by a party at the North, — composed at first of a few individuals, who were determined that slavery should be put an end to at once, without considering the impossibility of such a thing, under the circumstances. "One by one," remarks a correspondent of the London Times,[11] "The more northern States abolished slavery—all of them by gradual emancipation—and the process was going on with healthful progress, until a faction arose, which demanded the immediate emancipation of the Southern slaves. This it was impossible to achieve, and consequently folly to demand." The effect of this unwise course, on the part of a portion of the citizens of the Free States (urged on, too, with equal inconsiderateness, by societies and public meetings in Great Britain) has been to put a dead stop, in the Slave States, to all movements in reference to the abolition of slavery. Formerly—before this violence commenced—public meetings were held from time to time in Virginia, Kentucky, and other Slave States, for the purpose of devising some means for the removal of slavery within their respective limits, and bills providing for gradual emancipation were even introduced into the Legislatures. A bill to this effect, it is understood, brought into the Legislature of Kentucky, lost its passage by only one vote, and in all probability would in a year or two have actually passed; but the system of violent attack and denunciation having in the meantime sprung up, the favorable movement was checked at once, and at length completely stopped. Any one who knows human nature might have predicted this result. Men were not disposed to be driven and scourged to their duty; they did not need to have such an influence brought to bear upon them, and they would not submit to it. Abuse certainly never had the effect of softening men's hearts, nor was it ever an aid, with men of independence and self-respect, in the accomplishment of any good purpose. To give respectable individuals the appellations of "robbers" and "man-stealers" because they happened to be born in a part of the country where slavery existed, and upon plantations on which their fathers had dwelt before them, and amidst a condition of things which, though bad in itself, they had no share in producing, and saw no means at once of remedying — such language could have no possible effect but to excite feelings of indignation, and to close the ears of citizens of the South against every allusion to the subject.[12]
Such has been the disastrous effect of this most unwise course. And not only this, — but it has operated injuriously on the condition of the slaves themselves, by increasing the severity of the masters, — compelling them to take extraordinary precautions against insurrection, and thus depriving the negroes of many privileges they had formerly enjoyed. Thus do violence and fanaticism ever defeat their own ends: as the Apostle affirms, "the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God."
It is greatly to be regretted, however, that the wiser and nobler-minded of the citizens of the South should suffer themselves to be turned from the manifest path of duty on which they had entered, by such attacks as these. The true man goes straight on in the path of right, allowing himself neither to be stopped by opposition, nor urged on faster than he sees to be wise by goading, nor turned from his course in any direction either by shouts or sneers: he keeps right on, gently but firmly, in the path that conscience marks out, trusting in his God, and sure that a blessing will at length crown his faithful efforts.
A course very different from that of the northern fanatics has been taken by the authoress of that remarkable work, Uncle Tom's Cabin. Instead of closing the ears and clenching the hands of the citizens of the South, by violent and bitter attacks, she has striven to touch their hearts and arouse their sympathies by a series of affecting pictures, such as we are sure will reach the feelings of thousands and tens of thousands of lofty-minded men and tender-hearted women in the slave-holding States. Anxious to be just as well as compassionate, she has evidently sought to give faithfully both sides of the picture; showing the many ameliorating circumstances in the slave-relation as it really exists, and making it a very different thing from the scene of universal wailing and lashing, in which it has appeared to the excited imaginations of many. She has presented to us a view of the truly cheerful and peaceful cabin of "Uncle Tom," in Kentucky, together with the merriment of Andy and "black Sam," and the easy and contented condition of all the people of Mr. Selby's plantation — a true specimen, doubtless, of hundreds of others. She has brought before us, too, the representative of another large class — the frank and noble-hearted St. Clare, the considerate and affectionate master, conscious of all the wrongs and evils of the system, yet seeing no distinct way of removing it. Here, too, "Uncle Tom" has a pleasant home, with the little angel Eva to light his path and point him to the skies But then, in the next place, she sets forth — in a manner that goes to the heart — the terrible evil of the system itself, which, like a devouring monster, can break into these paradises, and seizing its victim, carry him away to be tortured to death in the den of a Legree. The authoress has treated the subject in a truly philosophical manner. It is the enormous and irremediable evils of the system as a system — of the institution as an institution — which she seeks to expose; not merely presenting scenes of suffering and cruelty, which thousands of slave-holders may justly deny having anything to do with, and which they would feel as great an abhorrence of as any, — but by the course of her story she seeks to make manifest, what none can deny, namely, that the system itself, in permitting human beings to be sold to the highest bidder, renders all at any time liable to the extremest cruelties, either through the insolvency or death of even the kindest master. It is the essential wrong of the system, as manifested in its capabilities and possibilities, that she seeks to bring out; and in so treating her subject, she has shown a mind able to grasp its central principle. While, at the same time, the dramatic power she has evinced in the various scenes set forth in illustration of this principle, the alternating humor and pathos with which the story is told, and above all, the truly religious and Christian spirit that vivifies and elevates the whole, make the work one of such true and sanctified genius, as justly entitles it to the world-wide admiration it has obtained.
But what distinguishes this writer from most of the former opponents of slavery, is her freedom from all bitterness, and the just and Christian spirit in which she makes allowance for the difficulties of the slaveholders' position, and for the partial insensibility to the evils of the system which education and habit naturally engender. "Some have supposed it," she says, "an absurd refinement to talk about separating principles and persons, or to admit that he who upholds a bad system can be a good man. Systems most unjust and despotic have been defended by men personally just and humane. It is a melancholy consideration, but no less true, that there is almost no absurdity and no injustice that has not, at some period of the world's history, had the advantage of some good man's virtues in its support."[13] The excellence of the spirit in which she writes is well represented in the following extract, — which it is to be hoped may teach a salutary lesson to many accustomed to indulge themselves in language of bitter denunciation: "This holy controversy must be one of principle, not of sectional bitterness. We must not suffer it to degenerate, in our hands, into a violent prejudice against the South; and to this end, we must keep continually before our minds the more amiable features and attractive qualities of those with whose principles we are obliged to conflict. If they say all manner of evil against us, we must reflect that we expose them to great temptation to do so, when we assail institutions to which they are bound by a thousand ties of interest and early association, and to whose evils habit has made them in a great degree insensible. The Apostle gives us this direction, in cases where we are called upon to deal with offending brethren, 'Consider thyself, lest thou also be tempted.' We may apply this to our own case, and consider that if we had been exposed to the temptations which surround our friends at the South, we might have felt, and thought, and acted as they do."[14]
The wise, gentle, and Christian course pursued by this writer, together with the genius and power of her work itself, will be found, we believe, to have considerable effect, in the first place, in ameliorating the condition of the slaves: the softening of heart which it will produce in the breasts of hundreds and thousands in the slave-holding States, will be manifested in their kinder treatment of those who are still in their hands. It is probable, also, that the able manner in which she has set forth the evils of the system will result in some endeavors, on the part of the nobler — minded of the Southern people, to make a reformation in the laws of the slave-holding States on this subject.-An earnest effort made in this direction would have undoubtedly great effect in lessening the pains of slavery. With only such a degree of self-denial as every man of principle may justly be called upon to make, and which every legislator should consider it his glory to manifest, laws might be passed, abolishing or greatly modifying the shameful slave-markets, checking the internal slave-trade by forbidding slaves to be brought from other States for sale, and forbidding the separation of families — as of husband from wife, or of parents from children under age. Such regulations exist even in Russia — why should they not in America? Even in Africa, domestic slaves, as they are called, or those born in the house, cannot be sold or very severely punished, but for some signal offence, of which they must be first convicted by a kind of public trial. Cannot some regulations be passed, putting at least a degree of restraint on the absolute will of tyrannical masters, thus tying the hands of such wretches as Legree? It is to be hoped, indeed, that there are few such; yet that they exist, every observer of human nature in any part of the world must be satisfied. Few, indeed, in the present fallen condition of humanity, can bear, without injury to themselves as well as wrong to others, to have human beings in a state of absolute subjection to their will. Such power can scarcely fail to be abused.
But, in the second place, we believe the effect of these mild yet powerful representations will be, still further, to rouse the heart and thought of the Christian men of the South, of whom there are, doubtless, hundreds of thousands, — to the question whether there be not some mode in which a system of things, so plainly wrong in itself, can be gradually removed, in a manner to be. truly beneficial to all parties concerned. Where there is a will, there is a way. It is a sound theological principle, that every evil — after it is seen by the light of truth to be such — may be sooner or later removed. To think otherwise would be to make the good Creator the author or upholder of evil; for it would be to charge the Governor of the Universe with having provided no way of escape from sin and misery. But He always provides a way: man has only to seek, and he will find it. Let the noblest men of the South, then, give their minds to this task: what greater glory could there be for a legislator than to accomplish it? It must, indeed, be a slow and gradual work; for since there are fifteen different slave-holding States, all entirely independent of each other, at least fifteen different Acts must in any case be passed, before slavery could be generally abolished. But let some one State but lead the way, and others will soon be found ready to follow. Who shall it be? Which State will Open this campaign against wrong? Which will have the moral courage to set this ball in motion?. Kentucky, the State of Henry Clay! Will not she have the magnanimity — disregarding the denunciations of opponents — to take up the question where she left it, and pass a law ordaining that henceforth every little human being, white or black, born into existence within the limits of that State, shall be free? Such a step would raise Kentucky high in the world's regard. Or old Virginia, "the mother of Presidents" — will she take the lead in this good work? Indeed, she has already taken the lead — or at least some of her most sons were among the first to take the initiatory steps. As early as 1777, a plan was proposed by Mr. Jefferson, in the legislature of that State, for emancipating all the slaves born after that period, educating them — the males to the age of twenty-one, and the females to that of eighteen — and establishing colonies of them in some suitable place. Let Virginia resume now this plan of her eminent citizen, and carry it into execution; and her glory will be greater than that of being "the mother of Presidents," — she will be the mother of thousands of men — freemen, made such by her own act.
The example thus set by either of these would soon be followed by the two remaining border States, Maryland and Missouri, and then by others further south, Tennessee, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas. And to this course they are all urged, not only by principle, but also by manifest self-interest. Free labor is universally allowed to be, in the long run, far more profitable than slave labor. "That labor," says Mr. Freeman, "we should suppose most profitable, in which the laborer knows that he will derive the profits of his industry; his employment depending on his diligence, and his reward upon his assiduity. Then there is every motive to excite to exertion, and to animate to perseverance. Therefore, when the choice exists, to employ at an equal price free or slave labor, the former will be decidedly preferred, because it is regarded as more capable, more diligent, more faithful, more worthy of confidence. — 'The fact is,' says one of her own distinguished citizens, 'slavery is the bane and ruin of one portion of our land, and the advantage of free labor and industry has exalted the other portion. The natural consequence is, a morbid sensibility and ever wakeful jealousy on the part of the depressed, and an increasing desire for greater gain and aggrandizement on the part of the other. Yes! it is slavery that sinks the South! See the wide-spread ruin which the avarice of our ancestral government has produced, as witnessed in a sparse population of freemen, deserted habitations, fields without culture; and, strange to tell, even the wolf, driven back long since by the approach of man, now returns, after the lapse of an hundred years, to howl over the desolations of slavery.' — The lands worn out, in a great measure under the ungrateful cultivation of slaves; the population of freemen declining, or wending their westward way; and those interests neglected which would have been cultivated by a free, white, and working population, the South feels but too sensibly every effort which other sections make to sustain themselves, as if oppressive of her, — whilst all the time, the evil, the root of evil, is slavery. The South has injured, and is crushing herself, by cherishing an evil which will yet be found to be more than can be borne. She cannot rise, while the evil remains. She feels it, and the other States see it to be so."[15]
Now, let any one of the Southern States — Virginia, Kentucky, Maryland, or any other — only pass such an Act as has been described, simply a prospective Act, declaring that all children born the limits of the State after a certain day should be free — and at once she would feel new life in her veins. At once, by the simple passage of such an Act, she would step, in a manner, out of the ranks of the Slave States into those of the Free. For by so doing she changes at once her course — her line of direction: now it is retrograde, — then, it would be forward. By that step, she shows her good-will to the cause, her just purpose, her determination to pursue the right path. And just as the "prodigal" was received at once by his father with delight, simply by abandoning his sinful indulgence and turning back to his father's house; — just as the repentant sinner is beheld by angels with joy, simply for his repenting, his acknowledgment of wrong and the giving up of his evil purpose, — though he has not had time as yet to shake off bad habits and form good ones, — so would the passage of such an Act by any one of the slave-holding States bring down upon her the blessings and the congratulations of all good men. At once would they say, — "She has turned from the path of wrong to that of right; she has manifested a good purpose and intent; she has set out in the right direction; there is no fear of her now — all the rest is but the work of time." The States of, the North could with justice utter no more denunciations against her — their lips would be closed; for this was precisely the way in which they themselves got out of the swamp of slavery; it was by prospective acts, and in this gradual manner, that they all delivered themselves from that dark incubus, and, setting out with new energies, advanced to the height of prosperity which they are now enjoying. In truth, as before remarked, by the passage of such an Act, a State would by right, pass, from the side of the Slave States to that of the Free. For, let it be observed, it is not the mere fact of having slaves within its borders, that constitutes what is called a "Slave State:" but it is such from the continuance of slavery being the fixed policy of the State. The moment that policy is abandoned — the moment slavery is given up as a system — that moment the State crosses the line, and steps upon the terra firma of Freedom. This is proved from the facts of the case. For, many years after the Northern States were termed and regarded as Free States, they still had, many or most of them, slaves within their borders. It was only so late, for instance, as the year 1846, that the State of New Jersey passed an Act liberating a considerable number of slaves that yet remained within her limits. At the census of 1840, there remained in the Free States 1,102 slaves, which number we are glad to see from the census of 1850 is now reduced to 225.[16] As to the border State of Delaware, which, by the census-tables for 1850, contains yet 2,289 slaves, and is there reckoned among the slave-holding States, — there seems to be a doubt, in speaking of her, whether to count her among the Slave or the Free States, though in common parlance, we believe, she is often placed among the latter. In fact, so gradually do the lines melt into each other, that the precise limits where slavery ends and freedom begins can hardly be told; — and the reason is, that when the spirit of slavery is broken — when the system, as such, is given up — the monster is in fact dead; the form may remain, but the malicious life is not there. In such case, the remaining bonds, as in New Jersey and Delaware, are little more than nominal.[17]
And this is the way, we conceive, in which slavery is to come to an end in the remaining Slave States of America, — namely, by a gradual decline, similar to that which has taken place in the States that are now Free. The process has simply to go on as it began. No reasonable man — no one who knows anything of human nature — can entertain the expectation (however desirable it may seem) that many hundreds of thousands of slave-holders, in fifteen different States of the Union, should at once change all their ways of feeling, thinking, and doing, give up all their long-established social habits and arrangements, and sacrifice property (or what they have always been accustomed to consider as legitimate property) to the enormous amount of between two or three hundred millions sterling (a thousand or fifteen hundred millions of dollars). Such an expectation is chimerical. The case of the English West India planters is, as before shown, an entirely different one. In that case the owners did not give up their slaves at all: they were taken from them by force, and against the protestations of the proprietors, by a superior power to which they happened to be subject — namely, the British Parliament. And the latter felt themselves bound to make at least partial amends, by the payment of twenty millions sterling to the owners. But to what Power are the owners in the Slave States of America subject? To none whatever, except to themselves, or to legislatures chosen by themselves. As already explained, the general Congress has no power whatever in the matter; and the slightest attempt to interfere would be a violation of the Constitution which holds the States together, and the Union would be virtually dissolved. And in what respect would the slaves be the better off in that case? In the Union, or out of the Union, the different slave-holding States are severally supreme within their own limits. The governments or legislatures of those States are composed of slave-owners, or appointed by them. Consequently, it is most evident that emancipation, if it is ever to take place, must be a voluntary act on the part of the owners. Now, again, we ask, is it in human nature to expect a sudden change and revolution in all the habits, feelings, and views of the many hundreds of thousands of persons of whom the slaveholders consist? If not, then, is it not plain, that emancipation, in the very nature of the case, must be a gradual thing?[18]
Moreover, it is by no means certain that a sudden change in the condition of so large a population (upwards of three millions) would be productive of real and lasting benefit. All great changes, to be truly beneficial, must be gradual: it is the law of Providence; it is the law of Divine order. And a violation of that law, even with the best intentions, must always calamity. The course of Divine Providence is and has always been, to bear patiently with evils, removing them gently and little by little, till they can be gradually superseded by something better: whereas the course of hasty man is to pluck out an evil violently by the roots, though he leave a death-wound in its place. If Providence so dealt with us or any one of us, we should perish. But He is patient and long-suffering, gently acting upon us, here a little and there a little, removing our evils and disorderly states of mind, one by one, introducing at the same time something better in its stead, thus gradually remoulding and reforming the whole man. And just so must we do in the treatment of the body politic — society at large — which is, as it were, a collective man. We should seek to remove its disorders and purge off its humors gradually and little by little: so shall we effect a permanent cure; whereas a hasty and violent course will only lead to far greater suffering or to destruction. "A general emancipation of slaves," remarks President Porter (of the Andover Theological Institution), "to be consistent with such a regard to their good and the public good as humanity and religion demand, must plainly be the work of time. It must be accomplished by a wise system of moral influence and prospective legislation, and must allow opportunity for a preparatory change of the habits of a whole community."[19] But, after all, the grand difficulty in the case, is not so much that of emancipating the negroes, as of disposing
of them after they are emancipated. This has always been the difficult point, with the reflecting: and those who study the subject thoroughly, will always be met by this difficulty. The danger of setting afloat in the community so vast a discordant element as a body of three millions of people, — and the number continually increasing, — who, in the nature of things, can never amalgamate with the general mass, — might well trouble, as it has troubled, the minds of the wisest statesmen and thinkers of America. And in the contemplation of it, they have been almost driven to despair for their country; and have felt disposed to "curse the day" when Britain, in her selfish disregard of the future and the rights of others, and in her eagerness for gain, introduced this terrible evil into her colonies. This difficulty, moreover, has been, in the minds of many,
the firmest stronghold of slavery. It has been argued, and with much appearance of truth, that two distinct was. haw never been found to exist together for any considerable length of time, except in a state of subjection to one to the other. Put them on an equality, and they will contend with each other till one or the other is subjugated or exterminated. The following which or: this point are from the pen of an able writer:
"But even if we were to suppose the Legislature [of a slave holding state], and consequently a majority of the people who have chosen them, — to divest themselves of these feelings or prejudices, and venture on the great experiment [of emancipation], who can pretend to any that it would he a safe one? When, in every community, men are found splitting into parties, on point of difference often so minute as to be unintelligible to a stranger — who can foresee how much they would be aggravated where the line of separation has but drawn by nature herself: and where sensible impressions might impart their own peculiar vividness to the feelings of party animosity? This visible difference between the two mm tends now to preserve public tranquillity, operating on the minds both of master and slave. and confirms the authority of the master and slave, and confirms the authority of the one and the submission of the other. The master more easily persuades himself that he is naturally superior (an opinion which the most philosophical of the citizens of the South conscientiously and the slave can be more readily brought to believe that the inferiority of which he must necessarily be conscious, is the work of nature rather than of man; and he is, on that account, more resigned to his condition. But when he is once admitted to a political equality, much of this prestige would soon disappear. The effects of property, education, natural talent, would soon dispel the greater part of their own sense of inferiority, without proportionally altering the opinions of the whites; and the sullen ill-will, which even now occasionally exists, would be exchanged for the more bitter and implacable animosity that arises between equals and rivals struggling for the mastery. History affords little light upon this subject; but the fierce contests between the Saracenic and Gothic races in Spain, — and yet more, between the blacks and the whites of St. Domingo, which ended only in the extermination of the weaker party, — seem to be too much in accordance with the ordinary principles of our nature, not to warn us against so fearful an experiment."[20]
Certainly, the present condition of the great mass of the free colored population in the United States, affords but little encouragement to the sincere friends of emancipation and of the African race. Their degraded intellectual and moral condition, — which is to be ascribed in great part, no doubt, to their anomalous situation, as being neither slaves nor possessing the usual rights and prospects of freemen, — has excited in many minds a question whether the blacks, emancipated under such circumstances, are real gainers in any great degree, either as to mental improvement or physical comfort, by the change.
"The circumstance," says Mr. Freeman, "that there are so few blacks that, with their freedom, avoid poverty and vice, nobly resisting the natural tendency of their condition, has led some to suppose, that however undesirable in itself slavery may be, the blacks generally gain but little, and in most instances are great losers, by emancipation. The free blacks are, as a whole, exceedingly corrupt, depraved, and abandoned. There are, indeed, many honorable exceptions among them, and it is often a pleasure which I enjoy, of bearing testimony to these exceptions; but the vicious and degraded habits and propensities of this class are known to every man of attentive observation. It has been asserted, that of free blacks collected in our cities and large towns, a great portion are found in abodes of wretchedness and vice, and become tenants of poorhouses and prisons. As a proof of this tendency of their condition, the following striking facts, among others, have been mentioned. In the State of Massachusetts, where the colored population is small, only one seventy-fourth part of the whole population, — about one sixth of all the convicts in the State-prison are blacks. In Connecticut one part ofthirty-fourth the population is colored, and one third part of the convicts. In New-York one thirty-fifth part are blacks; and one fourth of the convicts in the City State-prison are blacks. In New Jersey the proportion is one thirteenth colored, and of the convicts one third. In Pennsylvania one thirty-fourth part of the population is colored; and more than one third part of the convicts is black. We might pursue further these illustrations of the degradation of the free blacks in the non-slave-holding States, but it is unnecessary. Suffice it to say, that as appears from these statements (which are found in the First Annual Report of the Prison Discipline Society), about one-quarter part of all the expense incurred by these States for the support of their prisons, is for colored convicts. The bill of expense in three of these States, namely, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New York, for an average period of less than eighteen years, was 164,000 dollars, upon convicts taken from a population of only 54,000 colored persons."[21]
This is, indeed, a fearful picture; and almost sufficient, if considered by itself, to dishearten the friends of emancipation, and deter them from further efforts, when they are seen to be followed by such lamentable results. In the slave-holding States the condition of the free blacks is said to be still worse, if possible, inasmuch as the influences surrounding them are still more debasing. "It would be easy," says Mr. Freeman, "to multiply instances showing the rapid deterioration, generally, of slaves, as respects morality, industry, and all virtue, when set free, without the stimulus afforded by a change of locality, in which encouraging prospects of due elevation may be presented. We will adduce the following case. The late President Madison, in a letter to a gentleman, published just before his decease, writes as follows: — 'You express a wish to obtain information in relation to the history of the emancipated people of color in Prince Edward [County Virginia]: I presume you refer, more especially, to those emancipated by the late Richard Randolph. More than twenty-five years ago, I think, they were liberated; at which time they numbered about one hundred, and were settled on small parcels of land of from ten to twenty-five acres to each family. As long as the habits of industry, which they had acquired while slaves, lasted, they continued to increase in numbers, and lived in some degree of comfort. But as soon as this was lost, and most of those who had been many years in slavery either died or became old and infirm, and a new race, raised in idleness and vice, sprung up, they began not only to be idle and vicious, but to diminish instead of increasing, and have continued to diminish in numbers very regularly every year, and that, too, without emigration; for they have, almost without exception, remained together, in the same situation as at first placed, to this day. Idleness, poverty, and dissipation are the agents which continue to diminish their numbers, and to render them wretched in the extreme, as well as a great pest and heavy tax upon the neighborhood in which they live. There is so little of industry, and so much dissipation among them, that it is impossible for the females to rear their children; and the operations of time, profligacy, and disease, more than keep pace with any increase among them. While they are a very great pest and heavy tax upon the community, it is at the same time most obvious that they themselves are infinitely the worse for the exchange from slavery to liberty, — if, indeed, their condition deserve that name.'"[22] From this distressing statement, we may learn the important truth — which many in their zeal are apt to forget — that freedom alone, without the intelligence and the disposition, as well as the opportunity to use it properly, — may become rather a curse than a blessing [23] And from the picture here presented,which is probably not a singular one, we may gather a very distinct view of the reason why, under Divine Providence, the state of slavery is permitted to exist, until such time as it can be removed, .without producing a still greater depth of moral evil than already exists in connection with the system. The reason why tyranny and despotism are permitted in the political world — the reason why the chains of the nations are not at once broken by the Divine power — is, without doubt, because it is seen by Omniscience that the nations are not yet prepared for freedom — that they are not yet in a state to possess liberty without abusing it — thus that there would be danger of their turning the blessing into a curse. The great truth should be ever kept in mind — and the understanding and recollection of this will afford an explanation of a thousand permissions of evils in this life — that the great end, it may be mid the single end, which the good Creator has in view for all men, and for every individual man, is his salvation — that is, his happiness in eternity. His state and condition in time are made altogether subservient to this end. What matters it, — a little sickness, a little pain, or trouble of any kind for these few years, in comparison with our well-being through the thousands and millions of years, the long ages of eternity? Hence it is, that health or sickness, wealth or poverty, liberty or bondage, are respectively given or permitted to us, according as in the Divine wisdom they are seen to be conducive to this end. Poor "Uncle Tom," with his body gashed with lashes, and his soul tried to its depths, — yet turning his dying eyes to his blessed Savior, and crying, "Lord, I come," and then soaring aloft, up-borne by angels, to his eternal home, — is he not better off, infinitely, — I do not say, than his murderer, Legree — but even than one of those colored freemen, described by President Madison, sunk in sloth, profligacy, and vice? And thus it is, that the Divine looks at all our several states and conditions, in reference always to the eternal future.
Then, till it be seen by Infinite Wisdom, that the emancipation of the colored race can be brought about without moral injury, without producing, on the whole, even a lower state of degradation than already exists, we may be sure that, it will not, in His Divine Providence, be permitted to take place. And we may be equally sure, that just so soon as the same Divine Wisdom sees that a way can be Opened for that emancipation, consistently with the best spiritual and eternal interests of both blacks and whites, their deliverance from bondage will be effected. God has not forgotten nor forsaken them: He knows what He is doing; and in His own good time He will bring His great purposes to pass.
The interesting question then arises, Is there no such way opened or opening? Is there no prospect, even in the dim distance, of that glittering gate through which the African crowds are to pass from slavery to freedom? We answer — Yes! there is. In the midst of the midnight gloom, which the pictures just presented throw over the mind, — suddenly the clouds disperse, and a star of hope gleams in the morning sky. It is Liberia. Across the Atlantic waste, that bright land glitters to our mental view, like a light-house guiding the tempest-tossed mariner to a haven of refuge. This is the gate of freedom, which God has opened; and it stands open wide to all who are willing to enter. There the colored man can be free, and yet moral and religious. There, free from the baneful over-shadowing of the white race, he can enjoy true liberty; there he can become a true man, with all worldly encouragements and prospects to urge him on in the path of activity and usefulness, — and Heaven beckoning in the distance. Compare the elevated condition of the citizens of Liberia with the abject state of the free blacks, scattered amongst the whites of America, — and see if the former be not the true home which God has pared for the colored race.
Yes! this is the true gate of freedom. Compass the field of slavery often as you will, and you will find no other outlet. From Africa they came, and thither they must return, if they would find a true home and lasting happiness. The Free States of America afford no proper asylum for the emancipated slave. They are indeed fast shutting their doors against them altogether: one after another, they are passing laws forbidding the entrance of blacks into their borders — whether freeborn or emancipated Ohio, some time ago, passed such laws of exclusion. Within a short time, the States of Illinois and Indiana have not only made similar regulations, but introduced provisions of this character into their newly revised Constitutions, showing that it is intended as the settled policy and purpose of those States to exclude a colored population. Delaware, which but lately revised its State Constitution, introduced a similar stringent provision, and the new State of Oregon has done the same.[24] Even Canada, the last refuge of the fugitive slave, is beginning to murmur and show symptoms of uneasiness at the rapid increase of its colored population, and seems preparing to adopt measures for its exclusion.[25]
Now, the laws of the slave-holding States, or of most of them, absolutely forbid emancipation, unless the slaves emancipated be at the same time removed beyond the limits of the State. But we perceive, from the
regulations of the Free States, just described, that emancipated slaves will no longer be able to find a retreat within those States. In consequence, there appears no prospect for them but a condition of hopeless slavery.[26] In this well-nigh desperate state of things, the star of Liberia once more appears amid the gloom To the despairing she holds out hope: to the bound she offers deliverance and peace. This is the gate of freedom which God has opened, and it is vain to seek for any other. And through this gate, although so lately opened, how many have already passed to the enjoyment of liberty and prosperity! No sooner had the Colonization Society commenced its great undertaking, than the far-sighted Clarkson saw the good that would at once result to the cause so dear to his heart. "For myself," he says (to adduce once more his memorable words), "I am free to say, that of all things that have been going on in our favor since 1787, when the abolition of the slave-trade was seriously proposed, that which is going on in the United States is the most important. It surpasses everything that has yet occurred. No sooner had your colony been established on Cape Montserado, than there appeared a disposition among the owners of slaves to give them freedom voluntarily and without compensation, and allow them to be sent to the land of their fathers, so that you have many thousands redeemed, without any cost for their redemption. To me this is truly astonishing. Can this have taken place without the spirit of God."[27] — "Among the most promising and encouraging circumstances attending the career of this society," remarks the late benevolent Matthew Carey of Philadelphia, "are the numerous manumissions that have taken place in almost all the Slave States, on the express condition of the freed people being sent to Liberia. These manumissions have occurred on a scale that the most sanguine friends of the cause could not have anticipated. Entire families have been blest with their freedom, from the most pure motives, a conviction of the immorality and injustice of slavery; and in most cases ample provision has been made for the expense of their passage, and in some, for their support also, in Liberia."
We will now adduce some particular instances of this generous conduct on the part of slave-owners, which will show distinctly the manner in which the simple existence of such a place of refuge as Liberia operates in favour of emancipation.
"Colonel, Smith, an old Revolutionary officer of Sussex County, Virginia, ordered in his will, that all his slaves, seventy or eighty in number, should be emancipated; and bequeathed above 5,000 dollars, to defray the expense of transporting them to Liberia. Patsey Morris, of Louisa County, Virginia, directed by will that all her slaves, sixteen in number, should be emancipated, and left 500 dollars to fit them out, and defray the expense of their passage. Dr. Bradley, of Georgia, left forty-nine slaves free, on condition of their removal to Liberia. A gentleman in North Carolina, last year, gave freedom to all his slaves, fourteen in number, and provided 20 dollars each, to pay their passage to Liberia. William Fitzhugh bequeathed freedom to all his slaves, after a certain fixed period, and ordered that their expenses should be paid to whatsoever place they should think proper to go; and as an encouragement to them to emigrate to the American colony on the coast of Africa, "where," adds the will, "I believe that their happiness will be more permanently secured, I desire not only that the expenses of their emigration be paid, but that the sum of 50 dollars be paid to each one so emigrating, on his or her arrival in Africa." David Shriver, of Frederick County, Maryland, ordered by his will that all his slaves, thirty in number, should be emancipated, and that proper provision should be made for the comfortable support of the infirm and aged, and for the instruction of the young in reading, writing, and arithmetic, and in some art or trade by which they might acquire the means of support. Rev. Robert Cox, of Suffolk County, Virginia, provided by his will for the emancipation of all his slaves, upwards of thirty, and left several hundred dollars to pay their passage to Liberia. A lady near Charlestown, Virginia, liberated all her slaves, ten in number, to be sent to Liberia 5 and moreover purchased two, whose families were among her slaves: for the one of whom she gave three hundred and fifty dollars, and for the other four hundred and fifty. Mrs. J, of Merry County, Virginia, and her two sons, one a clergyman and the other a physician, offered the Colonization Society sixty slaves, to be conveyed to Liberia. Rev. Fletcher Andrew gave freedom to twenty, who constituted nearly all his property, for the same purpose. Nathaniel Crenshaw, near Richmond, liberated sixty slaves, with a view to have them sent to Liberia. Mr. Isaac Ross, of Mississippi, an officer in the war of the Revolution, recently left all his slaves, one hundred and seventy in number, under the following conditions, namely, that after the death of his daughter (now a widow) the slaves who may be over twenty-one years of age shall decide whether they will remain in bondage, or go to Africa: if they determine to go to Africa, all the property is to be sold, and the proceeds, together with the proceeds of the crops till that time (12,000 or 15,000 dollars excepted) are to be expended in their transportation and comfortable settlement in the Colony of Liberia, and the establishment of an institution of learning in some part of the colony. A gentleman of Louisiana left thirty, to go to Liberia, and directed his executors to pay their passage, as well as an outfit of tools, implements of husbandry, provisions and clothes for one year, and to two of them he gave 500 dollars each. In Virginia, recently, one person has manumitted twenty-three, another fifty, another sixteen, and a fourth twenty-five; and many others, with similar and smaller numbers: but all were manumitted on condition of their going to Africa. ‘In the State of Tennessee many similar examples have been given during the past year: one man liberated twenty-three, and another twenty-one, supplying them with ample funds, and also providing clothing for them, and furnishing them with suitable tools, and for paying the expense of their removal to Africa. The Legislature of that State, also, has promised the sum of ten dollars each, toward defraying the expenses of those who shall go to Liberia. Again, a Mr. Turpin, of South Carolina, some time since emancipated all his slaves, and gave them his estate, valued at 329,000 dollars. Eighteen were liberated by a Mrs. Greenfield, near Natchez, Mississippi, on the condition of their going to Africa; E. B. Randolph, of Columbus, liberated twenty, on the same condition; William Foster, Esq., twenty-one; another twenty-eight; a gentleman in Kentucky, sixty; a lady in the same State, forty; nearly all young — with very few exceptions, under forty years of age. The Society of Friends, in North Carolina, had liberated, in 1835, no less than six hundred and fifty-two."[28] "Numerous applications," continues Mr. Freeman, "are constantly before the Society or its auxiliaries, for assistance in emigrating to Africa. A large number of slaves are, by the decision of their masters, free in prospect, and in course of preparation for liberty; whilst others will be free the moment they can find-a passage to Liberia." — "Within one year, it is said that more than 2,000 slaves have been offered to the Colonization Society from five different States, with the desire expressed on the part both of master and slave, for a passage to Liberia."[29]
Now, what do we see here? Here is action; this is doing something, and not merely talking, and passing resolutions at public meetings. Here is the thing we have been long seeking for — emancipation — actually in existence and in active operation: and this, too, in the best possible manner, — not effected by force, nor by imperative legislative enactment, but by simply giving an opportunity for the consciences and hearts of slave-holders, already touched, to put forth their generous desires and intentions into act. Is not this truly God's plan? Is not this truly a Divine working? Can we not see the hand of Providence here? "One instance," justly remarks Mr. Freeman, "of bona fide emancipation, in the midst of the slave-holding States, evidenced by self-denying exertions to place the emancipated blacks in a land where they may be truly free and blessed, will have more effect in free — ing others, than a hundred auxiliaries at the North, or tens of thousands of speeches and resolves which never reach the eye or ear of a single slave-holder, or if they do, serve only to irritate, and shut up every avenue to conviction." And so it is: "God's ways are not as our ways, neither are His thoughts as our thoughts." We set out on a course of action, planned, as we believe, from benevolent motives, — and we push on, in our own strength, determined to overcome every obstacle, and by main force to break down all opposition, and to effect our object at every hazard: — and what is the result? we accomplish nothing: we find ourselves, after all our efforts, farther from the point aimed at than when we set out. And why? Because we have gone forward in our own strength, not in the Lord's strength: because both the plan, and the manner of its execution are from our own narrow and shortsighted understandings, made still narrower by our own obstinate wills. All this time — unobserved or despised by us — the Omnipotent and All-wise Providence is really effecting the same benevolent object, in His own quiet and peculiar manner, so working as, while accomplishing the end in view, to benefit all and injure none.
The truth of this may be strikingly seen in the present instance. Men — urged, doubtless, by benevolent motives — set their hearts on the abolition of slavery. And setting about it in their own strength, they rushed on, determined to accomplish their object at all risks, and without regard to consequences, — pouring forth violent words and imprecations, making wild gesticulations, and striking right and left, thinking, by these means, to knock off the poor slaves' chains. But, alas! the effect of all this violence was found, in the end, only to rivet those chains the tighter, to make the heavy burden heavier, and in fact, actually to check the course of emancipation where it had already begun. In the meantime, an individual, or a few individuals, humble, good men, not setting out in their own strength, not satisfied that they knew all and could accomplish all, but looking up trembling to the Lord on high, and praying to be guided by His Wisdom and led by His hand, gently and quietly commenced an undertaking which was plainly most unobjectionable both in its end and in its proposed means; attacking nothing, assaulting no one, proposing a plan which seemed to them called for at the time, and calculated to do great good, yet forcing no one, but leaving all free to avail themselves of its benefits or not, as they chose. The Constitution of the American Colonization Society simply proposed "to promote and execute a plan for colonizing, with their own consent, the free people of color, in Africa, or such other place as Congress shall deem expedient." That is the whole professed object: nothing is said about slaves, nothing about the slave-trade, nothing about civilizing Africa: it confined itself to a simple and obvious duty, that of affording the free people of color, who were seen to be in a depressed and degraded state, an opportunity to become men — to become truly free. All great things have small beginnings, — so had this; yet, beginning in this simple and humble way, this Society has been led on by Divine Providence to the accomplishment, already, of great deeds; and promises in the end to regenerate and bless with freedom and happiness two great Continents. Truly may we say, in the words of the distinguished Dr. Beecher,[30] that this is "God's Society." "I do not think," said he, in his Colonization address at Pittsburgh, "I do not think that a Society, heaven moved as this Society was, by such wisdom as Samuel J. Mills was blessed with, — by such wisdom as he commanded into its service, — moved on by such faith and prayer, and so blessed of heaven as this has been in its past labors, and still is, — could have been born of wisdom from beneath. I would say of this Society, it is God's Society. In its commencement it was his; in its progress it has been his; and the station it now occupies in the midst of all the difficulties which have grown out of inexperience and the peculiar nature of the subject — as well as its success in Africa — all show it to be his.[31]
The same vigorous writer — Dr. Beecher — in the following striking passage, presents a comprehensive view of the whole matter which we have been laboring to set forth in these pages — namely, the reason for the Divine permission of the slave — trade and slavery, the after-return of those slaves to Africa by the process of colonization, and the final civilizing and Christianizing of that whole Continent. "There is no such thing," he begins by remarking, "as raising the human mind without nationality. You must have the whole machinery of society, or you will never do it. —As to the poor African, he never can rise without space to move in, and motives to action. If you refuse to remove him, you will have an equal number of paupers thrown upon your shores, and then you must support both. The ways of God are high and dreadful. He takes the wickedest of men, and causes them to accomplish his own purpose. "Their hearts think not so, neither do they mean so;" but in their wickedness they do that which God blesses and overrules for good. The coast of Africa has been environed with dangers: it is almost inaccessible to the approach of the white man; and that whole Continent has yet to be civilized and Christianized. And how is it to be done? God has permitted what has come to pass. He has suffered its inhabitants to be brought here as slaves — and the transposition has scarcely increased their miseries. God is not in a hurry to accomplish His designs. By bringing them into a Christian land, He has prepared the way for their being thrown back, in a Christianized condition, on their native shore. I believe that colonization, too, is destined to stop the slave-trade. Your colonies will stand like a chain of light from point to point, along the whole dark coast of benighted Africa; and from the colonies will your missionaries go into the interior, until they shall have spread a belt of salvation over that benighted portion of the globe."[32] All these great purposes are now beginning to be accomplished. As wisely remarked by Dr. Beecher, God is not in haste to accomplish His designs. No! He, who foresees all things is never in haste; for He prepares all the means in due time, and in the exact time best to accomplish the end. Just as fast as will be for the good of all concerned, for whites and for blacks, for America and for Africa, will the slaves be released and the free blacks be removed. We may aid in this cause if we will, but we cannot stop it. The ball is already in motion, and will roll on. God is pushing it, and guiding it, too: those who seek to check it, will be only crushed beneath it. But why should any wish to check it? It harms none: it moves on only to bless. No thinking man — if he will lay aside prejudice — but must see that it is better for the colored race to separate from the whites, and go to a land where they can stand upon their own feet, in true dignity and independence. No Christian and conscientious man, but will admit, that in the long run it will be best both for blacks and whites, that slavery should cease, and that nothing but freedom, joined with light and religion, should exist upon the earth. And finally, no benevolent man and lover of his kind, but must wish to see Africa elevated in the scale of nations, its chains broken, its ignorance dispelled, and the blessings of civilization and true religion spread over it from shore to shore. Then, let all unite in this great enterprise. Laying aside the language of attack and reproach on the one side, and refraining from threat and retort on the other, let Americans of the North and of the South unite in this holy cause. While the North employs its exertions in helping off the colored population within its own borders, and aiding them to emigrate to the home of their Withers, where alone they can be truly free — the South, while performing the same service to the free blacks there, should also be left to deliberate in freedom, and without undue interference from the North, on the best means of emancipating the slave, and of preparing him, at the same time, for that freedom which every one, surely, who loves his neighbor as himself, would wish him to enjoy. And, depend upon it, there are pure consciences and warm hearts enough at the South to undertake this high enterprise, if we will but leave them to them- selves. The instances already given of the numbers who have shown themselves ready to emancipate, the moment they could see the way opened, — is proof enough of this. And such emancipation, like "mercy,' will be "twice blessed:" it will benefit alike the freer and the freed. Individuals will take the first steps in the cause — and the noblest minded will be foremost. As the great Webster gave to the nation the motto — "Liberty and Union one and inseparable," so the motto of the friend of Liberty will be "Emancipation and Colonization." As the cause moves on, communities and States will take it up. Already Maryland, Mississippi, Louisiana, and other States have their own colonies on the African shores. More and more colonies will be formed, lining the whole coast, and extirpating the slave-trade for ever. State-treasuries will be opened in aid of the good work; and at length, perhaps, with general consent, the national aid will be given. Already a line of steam-ships to Africa has been proposed. America will come up as one man to the work: — and what good purpose can they not accomplish, when to it they give their hands and hearts? — till, at length, where, some years since, a few scores or hundreds only of the colored population were seen creeping over to Africa, — a whole fleet will be on its rejoicing way across the sea, carrying thousands and tens of thousands yearly on their return to their free and happy home.[33]
BELL AND BAIN, PRINTERS, GLASGOW
- ↑ "The first slaves were brought into Virginia by a Dutch ship, in 1620; but after that date the English had nearly a monopoly of the traffic. So late as 1807, Dr. Chalmers, then a young man, witnessed the departure of a slave-ship from Liverpool, on her voyage to Africa, when "the ladies," he says, " waved their handkerchief: from the shore, to sanctify what was infamous, and deck the splendid villainy of the trade." — See Hanna's Life of Chalmers, vol. i., ch. 6.
- ↑ Freeman's Plea for Africa, Conversation XL — In like manner, the French Guinea Company, in the year 1702, contracted to supply the Spanish West Indies, in ten years, with 38,000 negroes. In truth, all, or nearly all the nations of Europe, English, French, Italians, Dutch, Danes, Spanish, Portuguese, have been concerned more or less, in the African slave-trade. None of them, then, can with justice cast reproaches on America; for if she has been guilty of receiving the stolen goods, they have been guilty of the still greater crime of taking them.
- ↑ "When England," remarks Mr. Freeman, "introduced slavery into her American colonies, she had as much free labor at home as the landholders wished to employ; and it has been on this account, and this only, that the past was enabled to say,
'Slaves cannot breathe in England; if their lungs
Receive our air, that moment they are free;
They touch our country, and their shackles fall.'"The fact is, that respiration could go on well enough in those parts of her dominions where free labor was not to be obtained. In America was a widely extended territory, with a soil and climate adapted to the raising of the most profitable articles of commerce. In order to render the colonies an immediate and productive source of revenue, which was the settled policy of England, and on which she placed great reliance, — an immediate supply of labor was necessary. As an expedient to provide for her colonial wants, she commenced filling her colonies with African slaves. She would not tolerate slavery at home, and yet would provide for and establish the evil among her distant children — How
- ↑ The following remarks on this head from a London journal contain, we think, much truth:
"Can we forget our own position? It is scarcely different from that of a newly reformed drunkard, remonstrating with a youth whom he himself has corrupted, — England forced slavery upon America. Her statesmen plotted, her diplomatists bargained, and her armies fought, to secure the detestable monopoly of supplying the New World with negroes. — From the guilt of slavery itself, how long have we been free? scarce fifteen years. And how was that guilt removed? Only by the indomitable perseverance of a few nobler spirits, who, in despite of neglect and odium, gradually worked up the nation to the great measure of abolition. — If, instead of having 800,000 slaves, we, like America, had four times that number; if, instead of being confined to distant dependencies, we had the institution interlaced with all our social arrangements at home; if, instead of being able to buy off the evil with a sacrifice which was almost imperceptible, — we had, with less resources, to incur a far mightier cost; and if we saw or believed that even the agitation of the subject was jeopardizing a Constitution which stood between us and anarchy, who will be bold enough to say, that we should, even at the present time, have cleared ourselves wholly from the crime?" — London Inquirer, June, 1851.
- ↑ Freeman's Plea, Conversation XIII. See also Walsh's Appeal, sect. ix.
- ↑ Ibid.
- ↑ It thus appears, that no slaves have been allowed to be introduced into the United States for nearly half a century; and yet some British writers and speakers on this subject are so ill informed as to suppose that the foreign slave-trade is still actively carried on there. How can they expect to address American slave-owners with effect, while thus ignorant of the simplest facts of the case?
- ↑ "In 1805," says the distinguished Professor Silliman, "I went on board of a new slave-ship in Liverpool. It was just finished, and had not then been employed. I went below deck, and examined the narrow cells and the chains, which were as yet unstained with blood, but they were all ready for the victims, which, no doubt, were found and transported from Africa into slavery in that very ship. Our English friends, when they taunt us Americans on the subject, should remember they forced slavery upon us, when we were their colonies. George III, in 1774, disallowed an act of the legislature of Virginia, prohibiting the slave-trade, because he said it would be very injurious to the commerce of his Majesty's subjects. The reformation is rather too recent to justify recrimination on the child." — Visit to Europe in 1851.
So late as 1807, Dr. Chalmers (as already mentioned) witnessed the departure of a slave-ship from Liverpool to Africa — when "the ladies," he says, "waved their handkerchiefs from the shore, to sanctify what was infamous, and deck the splendid villainy of the trade." — See Hannas' Life of Chalmers, vol. i., chap. 5.
So slow, in England, was the growth of right public sentiment on this subject! Long before this the Americans had abolished the slave-trade, so far as their own ships were concerned.
- ↑ "Much denunciation has been uttered on the subject of the "Fugitive slave law" (as it is called), by persons who are probably ignorant of the real grounds on which that act was passed. The greatest reluctance was felt and expressed by many of the representatives from the Free States, to pass any Act by which fugitives should be returned to bondage, but there was no escaping from it but by the violation of their oath. In the original compact between the States, — called the "Constitution of the United States" (which every public officer is sworn faithfully to maintain), there is the following provision (Article in, Section 2): "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." Thus the law already existed; for the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The Act, above referred to, was simply a law to carry into execution this provision of the Constitution.
- ↑ Plea for Africa, Conversation XIII.
- ↑ Of June 21, 1858.
- ↑ "In a certain paper," says Mr. Freeman, "the writer having selected passages from the writings of such men as Mr. Clay, Gen. Harper, President Caldwell, and others, exclaims — 'Ye crafty calculators! ye hard-hearted incorrigible sinners! ye greedy and relentless rovers! ye contemners of justice and mercy! ye trembling, pitiful, pale-faced usurpers! my soul spurns you with unspeakable disgust.' I cannot think that good men, even among abolitionists, can approve of this language." — Plea, Conversation IX. No! such violence and grossness of abuse as this could never avail in any cause, and is never needed in a good cause: the spirit that could indite such a sentence was not from above.
- ↑ Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin, part in, chap. x.
- ↑ Key, part iv., chap. x.
- ↑ Plea for Africa, Conversation VII.
- ↑ Indeed, there are now properly none, as these 225, in the State of New Jersey, are made apprentices, by the Act of that State to abolish slavery, passed April 18, 1846.
- ↑ We here append a tabular view of the number of slaves in several of what are now the Free States, for every decimal period since 1790, — showing how gradual has been the emancipation: —
1790. 1800. 1810. 1820. 1830. 1840. 1850. New Hampshire, 58 8 0 0 0 1 0 Rhode Island, 952 381 108 48 17 5 0 Connecticut, 2,759 951 810 97 25 17 0 New York, 21,324 20,343 15,017 10,088 75 4 0 New Jersey, 11,428 12,422 10,851 7,657 2,254 674 225 Pennsylvania, 3,787 1,706 795 211 403 64 0 Slave-holding States. Delaware, 8,887 6,158 4,177 4,509 3,292 2,605 2,290 Maryland, 103,036 105,635 111,502 107,398 102,294 89,737 90,368 In examining this table we may note that two of the slave-holding States, Delaware and Maryland (if Delaware be properly reckoned among these), are pursuing the me course as the States already free — the number of slaves in Delaware having declined from 8,887 in the year 1790, to 2,290 in the year 1850; while those of Maryland have declined
It is also to be noted as remarkable, that the number of slaves in the Free States should all have reached the figure 0 just at the year 1850 — the middle of the century. By the end of the century, we trust that the number in many more States may have reached the same figure.
- ↑ "The abolition of slavery," remarks the London Times, "is a problem which has puzzled every American statesman since the Declaration of Independence. The manumission of American slaves, and the realization of the right and equality of freemen, can be a work only of time. Slaves, by precipitate and ill-regulated emancipation, may be abandoned to still worse conditions of human existence, and the oath! and immediate abolition of slavery might often defeat its own end. All disinterested and enlightened persons in a Free State must be enemies of slavery, but the practicability of abolition is the question." — London Times: Review of "Stirling's Letters from the Slave States," April 10, 1858.
- ↑ The following letter of the late distinguished statesman, Henry Clay. sets the subject in a rational light, showing the distress which would result to numbers of the slaves themselves, from a sudden change in their condition. It was addressed to several political friends, who wrote to him in 1844 on the subject of emancipating his slaves. They expressed their high admiration of his character, their pleasure on learning that he had given freedom to his man Charles, and their desire that he would extend the same boon to those that still remained on his hands. Mr. Clay replied as follows: — "Ashland, January 8, 1845.
"Gentlemen, — I have perused your friendly letter in the spirit in which it was written. I was glad that the emancipation of my servant Charles meets your approbation. A degree of publicity has been given to the fact, which I neither expected nor desired. I am not in the habit of making any parade of my domestic transactions; but since you have adverted to one of them, I will say that I had previously emancipated Charles's mother and sister, and acquiesced in his father's voluntary abandonment of my service, who lives with his wife near me. Charles continues to reside with me, and the effect of his freedom is no other than that of substituting fixed wages, which I now pay him, for the occasional allowances and gratuities which I gave him.
"You express a wish that I would emancipate the rest of my slaves. Of these, more than half are utterly incapable of supporting themselves, from infancy, old age, or helplessness. They are in families. What could they do, if I were to send them forth into the world? Such a measure would be extremely crud, instead of humane. Our law, moreover, does not admit of emancipation, without security that the timed slave shall not be a public charge.
"In truth, gentlemen. the question of my emancipating the slaves yet remaining with me, involves many considerations of duty, relation, and locality, of which, without meaning any disrespect to you, I think you are hardly competent to judge. At all events, I, who alone am responsible to the world, to God, and to my own conscience, must reserve to myself the exclusive judgment.
"I firmly believe that the cause of the extinction of negro slavery, far from being advanced, has been retarded by the agitation of the subject at the North. This remark is not intended for those who, like you, are moved by benevolent impulses, and do not seek to gratify personal or political ambition.
"I am, with great respect, your friend and obedient servant,
"H. Clay."This letter is confirmatory of some just observations on the subject by the Rev. Mr. Freeman. He says: "There is a relation, the Southerner will tell you, between the owner of slaves, and the unhappy beings who are thrown around him, which is far more complicated and far less easily dissolved, than a mind, unacquainted with the whole subject in all its bearings, is apt to suppose — a relation growing out of the very structure of society. Go, for instance, to the slave-holder, and propose to him to emancipate his slaves. He feels the evils of slavery as strongly, and perhaps, more so, than you can feel them; and who can say that he has not as much benevolence in his heart as we in ours? The laws of his State, framed according to the dictates of the best judgment of legislators, forbid emancipation, except under certain restrictions, which are deemed absolutely necessary to prevent pauperism, wretchedness, and crime, and utter min: and here are human beings dependent upon him for protection, and government, and support. The relation he did not voluntarily assume. He was born the legal proprietor of his slaves, as much as he was born the subject of civil government, — and it is his duty, and a duty which he cannot well avoid, to make the best provision for them in his power. Too frequently, it would be just as humane, to throw them overboard at sea, as to set them free in this country. Moreover, if he turn them out to shift for themselves, he turns out upon the community those who will in all probability become, most of them, vagabonds, paupers, felons, a pest to society. He will tell you, that as a Christian, as a patriot, as a philanthropist, as an honest man, and a humane friend of the blacks, he finds insuperable obstacles to the accomplishment of what you propose." — Plea for Africa, Conversation VIII.
- ↑ "Tucker‘s Life of Jefferson, vol. i., chap. v. "It is thought by the South, and by many at the North," remarks Mr. Freeman, "that immediate emancipation would render it necessary for the whites to exterminate the blacks, or abandon the Southern soil. The late abolition of slavery in the West India Colonies is pleaded as a refutation of this idea; but those who are best qualified to judge assert that the emancipation of the slaves upon the West India estates, is a very different thing from the immediate emancipation of two [three] millions of slaves in the Southern country; and that — without raising the question of the ultimate effect upon the whites in the West Indies — the banishment of the blacks, or the expatriation or annihilation of the whites of the South, would be the necessary consequence of immediate and universal emancipation here." — Plea, Conversation XVIII.
- ↑ Plea for Africa, Conversations XVII. and XVIII.
- ↑ Plea, Appendix, p. 339.
- ↑ In this connection, it may be observed, that the mere escape of a slave across the line into Canada, is apt to be considered quite a sufficient guarantee of his usefulness and happiness. The following brief statement, however, by an English clergyman, sets the matter in a different and probably truer light [he is speaking of a negro woman belonging to his parish in Canada]: — "Her husband had been a slave in the States, and had made a premature liberation of himself by crossing the boundary line. Yet he could not gain a living by his skill and labor. He was a helpless and dependent creature. I perceived the necessity of conveying useful instruction to people inured to slavery, before emancipation and the rights of freedom are bestowed. Liberty to the captive is assuredly no blessing where this has not been previously provided." — Rev. Isaac Fidler's United States and Canada, p. 381.
- ↑ The law of Illinois is very severe in its terms. It provides that "every negro or mulatto, bond or free, who shall come into the State and remain ten days, with the evident intention of residing therein, shall be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor, and be fined fifty dollars; and if the fine is not paid forthwith, he or she is to be sold at public auction to any person who will pay the fine and costs for the shortest time; and the purchaser shall have the right to compel the negro or mulatto to work for and serve out such time. And if the offender does not leave the State within ten days from the expiration of his servitude, he or she is liable to a second prosecution, the penalty being increased to one hundred
- ↑ * In a New York journal of the 7th June, 1853, we find the following statement, which is indicative of the state of feeling beginning to arise in Canada, in reference to the increase of blacks: —
"A petition has been presented to the Canadian Legislature from the Municipal Council of Kent, representing that by reason of the rapid increase of the colored population of the said County, by immigration from the United States, many evils are resulting and are likely to result to the said County, and praying for the adoption of certain measures in reference thereto."
- ↑ Professor Stowe (husband of the authoress of "Uncle Tom‘s Cabin"), in showing the ineffectiveness of attempts at emancipation, unless united with colonization, that is, removal to Africa — states the following striking case: — "In 1770, the Friends [Quakers] in the United States declared slavery to be inconsistent with the principles of Christianity, and prohibited it to the members of their body. The Friends of the Yearly Meeting of North Carolina, including a part of Tennessee and Virginia, amounting to many thousands, petitioned the Legislature of North Carolina for permission to emancipate their slaves. It was refused. They continued to press the subject with petition after petition for forty years, and with no better success. They, at length, without law, emancipated their slaves upon the soil; and what was the consequence? More than one hundred of those emancipated slaves were taken up and sold into perpetual and hopeless bondage, under the laws of the State. Emancipation on the soil was plainly impossible, in the existing state of public feeling. After various expedients, and having expended in ten years more than 20,000 dollars in procuring asylums for their slaves in the Free States, those Free States made enactments preventing this intrusion of free blacks upon them. Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, were applied to in vain: the door was shut. Some years since they embarked one hundred of their liberated slaves for Pennsylvania. They were refused a landing in the State. They went over to New Jersey. The same refusal met them there. They were then left to float up and down the Delaware river, without a spot of dry land to set their feet upon, till the Colonization Society took them up, and gave them a resting place in Liberia. They [the Friends] have now five hundred slaves left whom they are anxious to liberate. And what shall they do? shall they get the laws of the State altered? They labored after that for forty years, and more than one whole generation of black men died in bondage, while their masters were striving to effectuate immediate emancipation. Immediate emancipation they found to be so slow a process, that they were obliged to resort to colonization in order that something might be done immediately." — Freeman's Plea for Africa, Appendix, p. 846.
- ↑ See Freeman's Plea, Conversation XIX.
- ↑ "Freeman's Plea, Appendix, p. 341.
- ↑ Ibid., p. 161.
- ↑ Father of Mrs. Stowe.
- ↑ Freeman's Plea, Conversation XXVIII.
- ↑ Freeman's Plea, Appendix, p. 337. Similar sentiments have also been expressed by Dr. Beecher's distinguished daughter, Mrs. Stowe, putting her thoughts into the mouth of her admirably drawn character, George Harris, in a letter addressed to his colored friends: — "The desire and yearning of our soul," he says, "is for an African nationality. I want a people that shall have a tangible, separate existence of its own, and where am I to look for it? Not in Hayti; for in Hayti they had nothing to start with: a stream cannot rise above its fountain. The race that formed the character of the Haytians was a worn out, effeminate one; and, of course. the subject race will be centuries in rising to anything. Where, then, shall I look? On the shores of Africa I see a Republic — a Republic formed of picked men, who, by energy and self-educating force, have, in many cases, raised themselves above a condition of slavery. Having gone through a preparatory stage of feebleness, this Republic has at last become an acknowledged nation on the face of the earth — acknowledged both by France and England. There it is my wish to go, and find myself a people.
"I am aware, now, that I shall have you all against me. But before you strike, hear me. During my stay in France, I have followed up, with intense interest, the history of my people in America. I have noted the struggle between Abolitionist and Colonizationist, and have received some impressions, as a distant spectator, which could never have occurred to me as a participator. I grant that this Liberia may have subserved all sorts of purposes, by being played off, in the hands of our oppressors, against us. Doubtless the scheme may have been used, in unjustifiable ways, as a means of retarding our emancipation. But the question to me is — Is there not a God above all man's schemes? May He not have overruled their designs, and founded for us a nation by them? In these days a nation is born in a day. A nation starts now, with all the great problems of republican life and civilization wrought out to its hand; it has not to discover, but only to apply. Let us, then, all take hold together with all our might, and see what we can do with this new enterprise; and the whole splendid continent of Africa opens before us and our children. Our nation shall roll the tide of civilization and Christianity along its shores, and plant there mighty republics, that, growing with the rapidity of tropical vegetation, shall be for all coming ages." — Uncle Tom's Cabin, chap. xliii.
These wishes seem to be now undergoing their accomplishment. A Cincinnati paper, of July 11, 1860, says: "The Africans of the United States are beginning to see the importance of Liberia, and are moving towards that point. They are inaugurating societies among themselves to promote emigration. The Colonization Society reports that they never before had so many applications for passage to the Coast of Africa, and that more emigrants will sail this year than within the last five years."
- ↑ It is estimated that in ten years, from 1848 to 1858, upwards of four miillons of persons emigrated from Europe to America. Now, this is a greater number than the whole colored population of the United States, — showing, thus, that their removal is a thing in itself entirely practicable.
dollars; and so on, with an addition of fifty dollars to the penalty for every offence."
In regard to Indiana, a New York paper of the date of June 28, 1853, states that "the free negroes of that State are leaving it in hundreds in consequence of the rigid enforcement of the 18th Article of the New Constitution, by which all colored persons who came into that State since November 1, 1851, are required to leave it under heavy penalties."
The terms of the Delaware provision are as follows: — "That no free negro or mulatto, not now an inhabitant of the State, or who shall leave the State with an intention to change his residence, shall, after the adoption of this Constitution, settle in this State, or come into or remain within the State, more than ten days. All contracts made with any free negro or mulatto, coming into this State, contrary to the provisions of this section, shall be void; and any person who shall employ such negro or mulatto, or otherwise encourage him to remain in this State, shall be fined in a sum not less than twenty nor more than five hundred dollars." The Constitution of Oregon, just adopted, forbids the entrance of colored persons into the State, or their holding real estate therein, or even making contracts, or maintaining suits in any Court of the State.