A distinguished foreigner, after travelling in the Southern States,
remarked that the very aspect of the country bore testimony to the
temerity of the nullifiers, who, defenceless and exposed as they are,
could not dare to hazard a civil war; and surely no people in the world
have more cause to shrink from an appeal to arms. We find at the South
no one element of military strength. Slavery, as we have seen, checks
the progress of population, of the arts, of enterprise, and of industry.
But above all, the laboring class, which in other countries affords the
materials of which armies are composed, is regarded among you as your
most deadly foe; and the sight of a thousand negroes with arms in their
hands, would send a thrill of terror through the stoutest hearts, and
excite a panic which no number of the veteran troops of Europe could
produce. Even now, laws are in force to keep arms out of the hands of a
population which ought to be your reliance in danger, but which is your
dread by day and night, in peace and war.
During our revolutionary war, when the idea of negro emancipation had
scarcely entered the imagination of any of our citizens--when there were
no "fanatic abolitionists," no "incendiary publications," no
"treasonable" anti-slavery associations; in those palmy days of slavery,
no small portion of the Southern militia were withdrawn from the defence
of the country to protect the slaveholders from the vengeance of their
own bondmen! This you would be assured was abolition slander, were not
the fact recorded in the national archives. _The Secret Journal of
Congress_ (Vol. I., p. 105) contains the following remarkable and
instructive record:--
"_March 29th, 1779._--The Committee appointed to take into
consideration the _circumstances of the Southern States_, and
the ways and means for _their_ safety and defence, report, That
the State of South Carolina (as represented by the delegates of
the said State, and by Mr. Huger, who has come hither at the
request of the Governor of said State, on purpose to explain the
particular circumstances thereof,) is UNABLE to make any
effectual efforts with militia, by reason of the great
proportion of citizens _necessary to remain at home, to prevent
insurrection among the negroes_, and to prevent the desertion of
them to the enemy. That the state of the country, and the great
number of these people among them, expose the inhabitants to
_great danger_, from the endeavors of the enemy to excite them
to revolt or desert."
At the first census, in 1790, eleven years after this report, and when
the slaves had unquestionably greatly increased their numbers, they were
only 107,094 _fewer_ than the whites. If, then, these slaves exposed
their masters "to great danger," and the militia of South Carolina were
obliged to _stay at home_ to protect their families, not from the
foreign invaders, but the domestic enemies, what would be the condition
of the little blustering nullifying State, with a foreign army on her
shores, and 335,000 slaves ready to aid it, while her own white
population, _militia_ and all, is but as two whites to three blacks?
You well know that slaveholders, in answer to the abolitionists, are
wont to boast of the fidelity and attachment of their slaves; and you
also well know, that among themselves they freely avow their dread of
these same faithful and attached slaves, and are fertile in expedients
to guard against their vengeance.
It is natural that we should fear those whom we are conscious of having
deeply injured, and all history and experience testify that fear is a
cruel passion. Hence the shocking severity with which, in all slave
countries, attempts to shake off an unrighteous yoke are punished. So
late even as 1822, certain slaves in Charleston were _suspected_ of an
_intention_ to rise and assert their freedom. No overt act was
committed, but certain blacks were found who professed to testify
against their fellows, and some, it is said, confessed their intentions.
On this ensued one of the most horrible judicial butcheries on record.
It is not deemed necessary, in the chivalrous Palmetto State, to give
grand and petit juries the trouble of indicting and trying slaves, even
when their lives are at stake. A court, consisting of two Justices of
the Peace and five freeholders, was convened for the trial of the
accused, and the following were the results of their labors:--
July 2 6 hanged,
" 12 2 "
" 26 22 "
" 30 4 "
August 9 1 "
--
Total 35 "
Now, let it be remembered, that this sacrifice of human life was made by
one of the lowest tribunals in the State; a tribunal consisting of two
petty magistrates and five freeholders, appointed for the occasion, not
possessing a judicial rank, nor professing to be learned in the law; in
short, a tribunal which would not be trusted to decide the title to an
acre of ground--we refer not to the individuals composing the court, but
to the court itself;--a court which has not power to take away the land
of a white man, hangs black men by dozens!
Listen to the confessions of the slaveholders with regard to their happy
dependents; the men who are so contented under the patriarchal system,
and whose condition might well excite the envy of northern laborers,
"the great democratic rabble."
Governor Hayne, in his message of 1833, warned the South Carolina
Legislature, that "a state of _military preparation_ must always be with
us a state of perfect _domestic_ security. A profound peace, and
consequent apathy, may expose us to the danger of _domestic
insurrection_." So it seems the happy slaves are to be kept from
insurrection by a state of military preparation. We have seen that,
during the revolutionary _war_, the Carolina militia were kept at home
watching the slaves, instead of meeting the British in the field; but
now it seems the same task awaits the militia in a season of profound
peace. Another South Carolinian[12] admonishes his countrymen thus: "Let
it never be forgotten that our negroes are truly the Jacobins of the
country; that they are the anarchists, and the domestic enemy, THE
COMMON ENEMY OF CIVILIZED SOCIETY, AND THE BARBARIANS WHO WOULD, IF THEY
COULD, BECOME THE DESTROYERS OF OUR RACE."
[12] The author of "A Refutation of the Calumnies inculcated
against the Southern and Western States."
Again, "Hatred to the whites, with the exception, in some cases,
of attachment to the person and family of the master, is nearly
universal among the black population. We have then a FOE,
cherished in our very bosoms--a foe WILLING TO DRAW OUR
LIFE-BLOOD whenever the opportunity is offered; in the mean time
intent on doing us all the mischief in his power."--_Southern
Religious Telegraph._
In a debate in the Kentucky Legislature, in 1841, Mr. Harding, opposing
the repeal of the law prohibiting the importation of slaves from other
States, and looking forward to the time when the blacks would greatly
out-number the whites, exclaimed:
"In such a state of things, suppose an insurrection of the
slaves to take place. The master has become timid and fearful,
the slave bold and daring--the white men, overpowered with a
sense of superior numbers on the part of the slaves, cannot be
embodied together; _every man must guard his own hearth and
fireside_. No man would even dare for an hour to leave his own
habitation; if he did, he would expect on his return to find his
wife and children massacred. But the slaves, with but little
more than the shadow of opposition before them, armed with the
consciousness of superior force and superior numbers on their
side, animated with the hope of liberty, and maddened with the
spirit of revenge, embody themselves in every neighborhood, and
furiously march over the country, visiting every neighborhood
with all the horrors of civil war and bloodshed. And thus the
yoke would be transferred from the black to the white man, and
the master fall a bleeding victim to his own slave."
Such are the terrific visions which are constantly presenting themselves
to the affrighted imaginations of the slaveholders; such the character
which, _among themselves_, they attribute to their own domestics.
Attend to one more, and that one an extraordinary confession:
"We, of the South, are emphatically surrounded by a dangerous
class of beings--degraded and stupid savages, who, if they
could but once entertain the idea, that immediate and
unconditional death would not be their portion, would re-act
the St. Domingo tragedy. But a consciousness, with all their
stupidity, that a ten-fold force, superior in discipline, _if
not in barbarity_, would gather from the _four corners of the
United States_, and slaughter them, keeps them in subjection.
But to the _non-slaveholding States_ particularly, are we
indebted for a permanent safeguard against insurrection.
Without their assistance, the white population of the South
would be _too weak_ to quiet the innate desire for liberty,
which is ever ready to act itself out with every rational
creature."--_Maysville Intelligencer._
And now we ask you, fellow-citizens, if all these declarations and
confessions be true--and who can doubt it--what must be your inevitable
condition, should your soil be invaded by a foreign foe, bearing the
standard of EMANCIPATION?
In perfect accordance with the above confession, that to the
non-slaveholding States the South is indebted for a permanent safeguard
against insurrection, Mr. Underwood, of Kentucky, uttered these pregnant
words in a debate, in 1842, in Congress, "THE DISSOLUTION OF THE UNION
WILL BE THE DISSOLUTION OF SLAVERY."
The action of the Federal Government is, we know, controlled by the
slave interest; and what testimony does that action bear to the military
weakness of the South? Let the reports of its high functionaries answer.
The Secretary of War, in his report for 1842, remarked, "The works
intended for the more remote Southern portion of our territory,
particularly require attention. Indications are already made of designs
of the worst character against that region, in the event of hostilities
from a _certain quarter_, to which we cannot be insensible." The
Secretary's fears had been evidently excited by the organization of
_black_ regiments in the British West Indies, and the threats of certain
English writers, that a war between the two countries would result in
the liberation of the slaves. The report from the Quarter-Master,
General Jessup, a Southern man, betrays the same anxiety, and in less
ambiguous terms: "In the event of a war," says he, "with either of the
great European powers possessing colonies in the West Indies, there will
be danger of the peninsula of Florida being occupied by BLACKS from the
Islands. A proper regard for the security of our _Southern States_
requires, that prompt and efficient measures be adopted to prevent such
a state of things." The Secretary of the Navy, a slaveholder, _hints_
his fears in cautious circumlocution. Speaking of the event of a war
with any considerable maritime power, he says, "It would be a war of
incursions aimed at _revolution_. The first blow would be struck at us
through our _institutions_;" he means, of course, "the peculiar
institution." He then proceeds to show that the enemy would seek success
"in arraying, what are supposed to be, the hostile elements of our
_social system_ against each other;" and he admits, that "even in the
best event, war on our own soil would be the more expensive, the more
embarrassing, and the more HORRIBLE in its effects, by compelling us at
the same time to oppose an enemy in the field, and _to guard_ against
all attempts to _subvert our social system_." In plain language, an
invading enemy would strike the first blow at the slave system, and thus
aim at revolution,--a revolution that would give liberty to two and a
half millions of human beings; and that such a war would be very
embarrassing to the slaveholders, and the more horrible, because, as
formerly in South Carolina, a large share of their military force would
necessarily be employed, not in fighting the enemy, but in guarding the
SOCIAL, that is, the "patriarchal system."
No persons are more sensible of their hazardous situation than the
slaveholders themselves, and hence, as is common with people who are
secretly conscious of their own weakness, they attempt to supply the
want of strength by a bullying insolence, hoping to effect by
intimidation what they well know can be effected in no other way. This
game has long been played, and with great success, in Congress. It has
been attempted in our negotiations with Great Britain, and has signally
failed.
Your aristocracy, whatever may be their vaunts, are conscious of their
military weakness, and shrink from any contest which may cause a foreign
army to plant the standard of emancipation upon their soil. The very
idea of an armed negro startles their fearful imaginations. This is
disclosed on innumerable occasions, but was conspicuously manifested in
a debate in the Senate. In July, 1842, a Bill to regulate enlistments in
the naval service being under consideration, Mr. CALHOUN proposed an
amendment, that negroes should be enlisted only as _cooks_ and
_stewards_. He thought it a matter of _great consequence_ not to admit
blacks into our vessels of national defence. Mr. BENTON thought _all
arms_, whether on land or sea, ought to be borne by the white race.
Mr. BAGBY. "In the Southern portion of the Union, the great object was
to _keep arms and a knowledge of arms_ out of the hands of the blacks.
The subject addressed itself to every Southern heart. Self-preservation
was the first law of nature, and the South must look to that."
On the motion of Mr. PRESTON, the bill was so amended as to include the
army.
And think you that men, thus in awe of their own dependents, shuddering
at a musket in the hands of a black, and with a population of two
millions and a half of these dreaded slaves, will expose themselves to
the tremendous consequences of a union between their domestic and
foreign enemies? Of the four who voted against the British treaty,
probably not one would have given the vote he did, had he not known to a
certainty that the treaty would be ratified.
Think not we are disposed to ridicule the fears of the slaveholders, or
to question their personal courage. God knows their perils are real, and
not imaginary: and who can question, that with a hostile _British_ army
in the heart of Virginia or Alabama, the whole slave region would
presently become one vast scene of horror and desolation? Heretofore the
invaders of our soil were themselves interested in slave property: _now_
they would be zealous emancipationists, and they would be accompanied by
the most terrific vision which could meet the eye of a slaveholder,
regiments of _black troops_, fully equipped and disciplined. Surely such
a state of things might well appal the bravest heart, and palsy the
stoutest arm. But, fellow-citizens, what, in such a catastrophe, would
be your condition? Your fate and that of your wives and children would
then be linked to that of your lordly neighbors. One indiscriminate ruin
would await you all. But _you_ may avert these accumulated horrors. You
may change two and a half millions of domestic and implacable enemies
into faithful friends and generous protectors. No sooner shall the
negroes cease to be oppressed, than they will cease to hate. The
planters of Jamaica were formerly as much afraid of their slaves, as
your planters now are of theirs. But the Jamaica slaves, now freemen,
are no long dreaded; on the contrary, they form the chief military force
of the island; and should a foreign foe attack it, would be found its
willing and devoted defenders. It rests with _you_ to relieve your
country of its most dangerous enemy, to render it invulnerable to
foreign assaults, and to dissipate that fearful anticipation of wrath
and tribulation, which now broods over and oppresses the mind of every
white who resides in a slave country.
We have called your attention to the practical influence of slavery on
various points deeply affecting your prosperity and happiness. These
are:
1. Increase of population.
2. State of education.
3. Industry and enterprise.
4. Feeling toward the laboring classes.
5. State of religion.
6. State of morals.
7. Disregard for human life.
8. Disregard for constitutional obligations.
9. Liberty of speech.
10. Liberty of the press.
11. Military weakness.
You will surely agree with us, that in many of these particulars, the
States to which you belong are sunk far below the ordinary condition of
civilized nations. The slaveholders, in their listlessness and idleness,
in their contempt for the laws, in their submission to illegal and
ferocious violence, in their voluntary surrender of their constitutional
rights, and above all in their disregard for human life, and their
cruelty in taking it, are, as a civilized and professedly a Christian
community, without a parallel, unless possibly among some of the
anarchical States of South America.
When compelled to acknowledge the superior prosperity of the free
States, the slaveholders are fond of imputing the difference to tariffs,
or to government patronage, or to any other than the true cause.
Let us then inquire, whether the inferior and unhappy condition of the
slave States can indeed be ascribed to any natural disadvantage under
which they are laboring, or to any partial or unjust legislation by the
Federal Government?
In the first place, the slave States cannot pretend that they have not
received their full share of the national domain, and that the
narrowness of their territorial limits have retarded the development of
their enterprise and resources. The area of the slave States is nearly
_double_ that of the free. New York has acquired the title of the
_Empire_ State; yet she is inferior in size to Virginia, Missouri,
Georgia, Louisiana, or North Carolina.
Nor can it be maintained that the free States are in advance of the
slave States, because from an earlier settlement they had the start in
the race of improvement. Virginia is not only the largest, but the
_oldest_ settled State in the confederacy. She, together with Delaware,
Maryland, North Carolina and South Carolina, were all settled before
Pennsylvania.
Nor will any slaveholder admit, for a moment, that Providence has
scattered his gifts with a more sparing hand at the South than at the
North. The richness of their soil, the salubrity of their climate, the
number and magnitude of their rivers, are themes on which they delight
to dwell; and not unfrequent is the contrast they draw between their own
fair and sunny land, and the ungenial climate and sterile soil of the
Northern and Eastern States. Hence the moral difference between the two
sections of our republic must arise from other than natural causes. It
appears also that this difference is becoming wider and wider. Of this
fact we could give various proofs; but let one suffice.
At the first census in 1790, the free population of the
present free States and Territories was 1,930,125
" of the slave States and Territories, 1,394,847
---------
Difference, 535,278
By the last census, 1840, the same population in the
free States and Territories was 9,782,415
In the slave States and Territories, 4,793,738
---------
Difference, 4,988,677
Thus it appears that in 1790 the free population of the South was 72 per
cent. of that of the North, and that in 1840 it was only 49 per cent.;
while the difference in 1840 is more than _nine_ times as great as it
was in 1790.
Thus you perceive how unequal is the race in which you are contending.
Fifty years have given the North an increased preponderance of about
four and a half millions of free citizens. Another fifty years will
increase this preponderance in a vastly augmented ratio. And now we ask
you, why this downward course? Why this continually increasing disparity
between you and your Northern brethren? Is it because the interests of
the slaveholders are not represented in the national councils? Let us
see. We have already shown you that your _free_ population is only 49
per cent. of that of the Northern States; that is, the inhabitants of
the free States are more than _double_ the free inhabitants of the slave
States. Now, what is the proportion of members of Congress from the two
sections?
In the Senate, the slave States have precisely as many as the free; and
in the lower House, their members are 65 per cent. of those from the
free States.[13]
[13] 135 from the free and 88 members from the slave States.
According to _free_ population, the South would have only 66
members.
The Senate has a veto on every law; and as one half of that body are
slaveholders, it follows, of course, that no law can be passed without
their consent. Nor has any bill passed the Senate, since the
organization of the government, but by the votes of slaveholders. It is
idle, therefore, for them to impute their depressed condition to unjust
and partial legislation, since they have from the very first controlled
the action of Congress. Not a law has been passed, not a treaty
ratified, but by their votes.
Nor is this all. Appointments under the federal government are made by
the President, with the consent of the Senate, and of course the
slaveholders have, and always have had, a veto on every appointment.
There is not an officer of the federal government to whose appointment
slaveholding members of the Senate have not consented. Yet all this
gives but an inadequate idea of the political influence exercised by the
_people_ of the slave States in the election of President, and
consequently over the policy of his administration. In consequence of
the peculiar apportionment of Presidential Electors among the States,
and the operation of the rule of _federal numbers_--whereby, for the
purpose of estimating the representative population, five slaves are
counted as three white men--most extraordinary results are exhibited at
every election of President. In the election of 1848, the Electors
chosen were 290: of these 169 were from the free, and 121 from the slave
States.
The popular vote in the free States was 2,029,551
or one elector to 12,007 voters.
The popular vote in the slave States was 845,050
or one elector to 7,545 voters.[14]
[14] South Carolina had 9 electors, chosen by the Legislature.
These are deducted in the calculation.
Even this disproportion, enormous as it is, is greatly aggravated in
regard to particular States.
New York gave 455,761 votes, and had 36 electors.
Virginia }
Maryland } gave 242,547 " " 36 "
N. Carolina }
Ohio gave 328,489 " " 28 "
Delaware }
Georgia }
Louisiana }
Alabama } gave 237,811 " " 38 "
Arkansas }
Florida }
Texas }
These facts address themselves to the understanding of all, and prove,
beyond cavil, that the slave States have a most unfair and unreasonable
representation in Congress, and a very disproportionate share in the
election of President.
Nor can these States complain that they are stinted in the distribution
of the _patronage_ of the national government. The rule of _federal
numbers_, confined by the Constitution to the apportionment of
representatives, has been extended, by the influence of the
slaveholders, to other and very different subjects. Thus, the
distribution among the States of the surplus revenue, and of the
proceeds of the public lands, was made according to this same iniquitous
rule.
It is not to be supposed that the slaveholders have failed to avail
themselves of their influence in the federal government. A very brief
statement will convince you, that if they are now feeble and emaciated,
it is not because they have been deprived of their share of the loaves
and fishes.
By law, midshipmen and cadets, at West Point, are appointed according to
the Federal ratio; thus have the slaveholders secured to themselves an
additional number of officers in the Army and Navy, on account of their
slaves.
Reflect for a moment on the vast patronage wielded by the President of
the United States, and then recollect, that should the present incumbent
(General Taylor) serve his full term, the office will have been filled
no less than _fifty-two_ years out of sixty-four by slaveholders![15]
[15] Except one month by General Harrison.
Of 21 Secretaries of State, appointed up to 5th March, 1849, only six
have been taken from the free States.
For 37 years out of 60, the chair of the House of Representatives has
been filled and its Committees appointed by slaveholders.
Of the Judges of the Supreme Court, 18 have been taken from the slave,
and but 14 from the free States.
In 1842, the United States were represented at foreign Courts by 19
Ministers and Charges d'Affaires. Of these fat Offices, no less than 13
were assigned to slaveholders!
Surely, surely, if the South be wanting in every element of
prosperity--if ignorance, barbarity and poverty be her characteristics,
it is not because she has not exercised her due influence in the general
government, or received her share of its honors and emoluments.