revolting details. Christine, with her baby and Matty, were put in
safe quarters for the night. Notwithstanding the intense anxiety that
filled their minds, and a superstitious fear in Christine's heart that
the worst had not yet come, an unaccountable drowsiness oppressed
them, and before long both fell into a deep death-like sleep.
Morning broke over the green earth. The sun gilded the mountain-tops,
and bathing the trees in splendor, was greeted with ten thousand
bird-songs. He kissed the dewy flowers, and their fragrance rose as
incense on the morning air. He looked into the windows of happy homes,
and wakened golden-haired children to renew their joyous sports, and
mothers, whose
"---- souls were hushed with their weight of bliss
Like flowers surcharged with dew,"
sent up their morning thanksgiving to "Him who never slumbers," for
His protection of their "laughing dimpled treasures." Suddenly a warm
ray fell upon the face of the sleeping slave-mother. She wakened with
a start, and with one wild shriek of agony sprang from the bed. Her
babe was gone.
Why need we dwell upon what followed? What pen can describe the
anguish of the heart-broken mother, when she knew that while under the
influence of opiates which she had unwittingly taken, her boy had been
taken from her, and that she should look upon her darling's face no
more. Mother! look at the darling nestler upon your own bosom, and ask
yourself how you would have felt in Christine's place.
After the first burst of agony was over, she did not give way
outwardly to grief. One might have thought she did not grieve. But she
carried all her sorrows in her heart, till they had eaten out her
life.
On the morning of Eleanore St. Laurent's bridal day, Christine was
sent for to perform some service for her young mistress. But the spoil
had been taken out of the hands of the spoiler--the bruised heart was
at rest. The outraged soul had gone with its complaints to the bar of
the Eternal.
[Illustration: (signature) Anne P. Adams.]
The Intellectual, Moral, and Spiritual Condition of the Slave.
The American slave is a human being. He possesses all the attributes
of mind and heart that belong to the rest of mankind. He has intellect
with which to think, sensibility with which to feel, and toil which
prompts him to vigorous and manly action. Nor is he destitute of the
sublime faculty of reason, which is related to eternal and absolute
truths. Imagination and fancy, too, he possesses, in a very large
degree. But all these faculties, which nature has bestowed upon the
slave in common with other men, by a decree of slavery fixed and
unalterable like the laws of the Medes and Persians, are undeveloped,
and the results, therefore, of their activities are not to be found.
How mean then it must be to reproach the unfortunate slave with a lack
of intellectual qualities, such as characterize men generally. In
proof of the statement, that slaves have these qualities, it is only
necessary to refer to the many fugitives who, by their great thoughts,
their masterly logic, and their captivating eloquence, are astonishing
both the Old and the New World. Education is what the white man needs
for the development of his intellectual energies. And it is what the
black man needs for the development of his. Educate him, and his mind
proves itself at once as profound and masterly in its conceptions, and
as brisk and irresistible in its decisions, as the mind of any other
man.
But, in addition to his intellectual, the slave possesses a moral
nature, capable of the highest development and the most refined
culture. A conscience tender and acute, the voice of God in his soul
bidding him to choose the right and avoid the wrong, is his lawful
inheritance bestowed upon him by his Heavenly Father. This no one can
deny who knows aught of the love of moral truth manifested by the
slaves of this country. God has not left the slaves without moral
sense. Nor has he denied him the spiritual faculty which, when
cultivated, enables him to recognize God in his spiritual
manifestations, to discern and appreciate spiritual truths, and to
feel and relish the gentle distillations of the spirit of divine love
as they fall upon his heart like dew upon the grateful earth. The
moral and spiritual nature of the slave, however, like his
intellectual, goes uneducated and untrained. Deep, dark, and
impenetrable is the gloom which enshrouds the mind and soul of the
slave. No ray of light cheers him in his midnight darkness. No one is
allowed to fetch him the blessings of education, and no preacher of
righteousness is suffered to illumine his dark mind by the
presentation of sacred truth.
It is indeed true that slavery is a political, a civil, and a
commercial evil. It is true that it is most excruciating and frightful
in its effects upon the physical nature of its victim. But slavery is
seen in its more awful wickedness and terrible heinousness, when we
contemplate the vast waste of intellect, the vast waste of moral and
spiritual energy, which has been caused by its poisonous touch.
And yet the power of the State, and the influence of the Church, are
given to its support. Many of our leading statesmen are engaged in
devising and furthering plans for the extension of its territorial
area, thereby hoping to perpetuate and eternize its bloody existence,
while the majority of our most distinguished divines find employment
in constructing discourses, founded upon perverse expositions of
sacred writ, calculated to establish and fix in the minds of the
people the impression that slavery is a divine institution.
Although this mighty power of the State, and influence of the Church,
be opposed to the slave, let him not despair, but be full of hope. For
God is upon his side, truth is upon his side, and a multitude of good
and able men and women are engaged in working out his redemption.
[Illustration: (signature) J. Mercer Langston]
OBERLIN, August 27, 1853.
The Bible vs. Slavery.
"Nothing," says Dr. Spring, "is more plain to my mind than that the
word of God recognizes the relation between master and slave as one of
the established institutions of the age; and, that while it addresses
slaves as Christian men, and Christian men as slaveholders, it so
modifies the whole system of slavery as to give a death-blow to all
its abuses, and breathes such a spirit, that in the same proportion in
which its principles are imbibed, the yoke of bondage will melt away,
all its abuses cease, and every form of human oppression will be
unknown. The Bible is no agitator. It changes human governments only
as it changes the human character. It aims at transforming the
dispositions and hearts of men, and diffusing through all human
institutions the supreme love of God, and the impartial love of man."
Now, this either means that the Bible requires that all institutions
be adjusted and harmonized with the moral law--the law of love--or it
means nothing. For, we maintain, that slavery is _per se_ wrong, where
the enslaver has no direct warrant from heaven, or the enslaved has
not forfeited liberty by crime on principles of recognized and
universal equity; and the whole Bible forbidding wrong must be held as
forbidding slavery, or any arbitrary and inhuman tamperings with the
inalienable rights of a fellow-creature.
If slavery is not a wrong in itself, irrespective of what are called
its abuses, then all that is essential in it may be retained from age
to age; and all the amelioration which the Christian law superinduces
may be such as to consist with the violation of the natural
prerogatives of humanity, and with the denial to man of the essential
and dearest privileges of social and domestic life, with the denial of
the rights of conscience too. For slavery, as distinguished from
service by contract, is this thing and no other:--it is labor
undefined, unrewarded, on the condition of being used as vendible
property, and every independent right of the slave, as an
intellectual and moral being, is ignored. By practical indulgence
such rights may be sometimes conceded. But the slave-law ceases as
such when these are recognized.
Now, we hold it a libel on the Bible to affirm that it sanctions such
slavery. We must warn you of the fallacy that lies in this distinction
of the thing itself, and its abuse. What is called the abuse here is
the essence and the characteristic of the subject. Service as well as
slavery may be abused. Everything may be abused. But, the claim of the
slaveholder is itself the abuse of the God-ordained relation of master
and servant. Can men be regarded as a chattel?--that is the
question--and so regarded without his consent, and his family treated
as such permanently, without his consent, or even with it?
It comes of this bad interpretation of the Christian law, that in the
nineteenth century slavery still remains,--is cherished. It is not
that the principles of Christianity do not tend to extinguish it. But
men, forcing their false interpretation on the Scriptures, plead their
authority for a system or institution, to which their whole spirit is
opposed,--and which confesses its unscriptural character by keeping
out Christian light, and forbidding the Scriptures with the slave.
To talk of the spirit of Christianity, in distinction from its express
or implied law against slavery, is as if one would trust for the
extinction of sin against the sixth or seventh commands of the
decalogue, by general inculcation of meekness or purity, without
denouncing murder and defining it, or defining between allowed and
disallowed affinity in the marriage law. We may if we do not proscribe
theft, and bring the positive law of God to bear against it, and bring
a law into harmony with the divine, be understood, while we talk only
of the abuses of property, as warning rather against spending stolen
goods in a bad way, than against theft itself? But the design of the
moral law is to define rights, as well as to govern the use of them;
and it requires that not only the tempers of men, but the institutions
of society, be adjusted by the law of equity and charity. It forbids
not only the abuse of just power, but all false usurpations of power,
and classes man-stealers and extortioners as murderers.
Who, if he but examines the laws of social and relative duty, as laid
down in the New Testament Epistles, may not discern that the relation
of master and servant is recognized side by side with the permanent
relations of parent and child, husband and wife, which rest on the law
of nature; just because it is not the temporary, unnatural, and
violent relation of slaveholder and slave which is recognized, but
that of master and servant by contract. The other, its very apologists
allow, will pass away; but these duties are enhanced in a law of
permanent application, and rest on natural principles, common to all
times and all nations.
[Illustration: (signature) Michael Willis]
"The Work Goes Bravely on."
Like all Reforms which have for their object the amelioration of man's
condition; the advancement of the Redeemer's kingdom; the cause of
human freedom has encountered many oppositions calculated to impede
its progress. It has temporarily suffered from cruel defection within,
and the most virulent persecution without the camp.
John, the forerunner of Jesus, had for his portion "locusts and wild
honey." But those who have stood forth in the sunlight, the advocates
of the crushed and bleeding bondman; whose motto is, "Our country is
the world, and our countrymen all mankind," have had no _honey_ for
_their_ portion. Oh no! they have ever dwelt among the tempest and the
storm, with thunder, lightning, and whirlwind, to feed upon.
Some have been called, for the advocacy of the truth, to wing their
flight from the prison-house to Heaven; and others, to bare their
bosoms to the red-hot indignation of relentless mobs, arrayed in
murderous panoply. They have gone; but, thank God, "THE WORK GOES
BRAVELY ON!"
The great men of the nation, the mighty men, the chief priests and
rulers, have risen in their strength, and resolved to crush, as with
an avalanche, the irrepressible aspirations of the bondman's heart for
FREEDOM; they have attempted to padlock the out-gushing sympathies of
humanity; to trample in the dust the sacred guarantees of the
palladium of their own liberties, but their "terribleness hath
deceived them, and the pride of their heart," for the desolating angel
hath sealed _their_ lips in the silence of the tomb, and we, the
recipients of their crushing cruelties, thank God "THE WORK GOES
BRAVELY ON."
[Illustration: (signature) Wm. James Watkins]
Slaveholding not a Misfortune but a Crime.
LONDON, September 2, 1853.
"For your movement on behalf of the slave, I have profound respect. I
assure you of my unfeigned sympathies and of my earnest prayers. In my
view, you deserve the high esteem of all who love and serve God.
Nothing would be deemed by me a greater honor than co-operation with
you actively in your work of faith and your labor of love. With full
consent of all that is within me, do I range myself among those who
deem American slavery not a sad misfortune, but a heinous crime: a
crime all the more heinous, because justified and even perpetrated by
men who call themselves the servants of Christ.
"I am, madam, yours respectfully,
[Illustration: (signature) William Brock]
The Frugality of Slaveholding.
There is nothing in the universe that can deserve the name or do the
work of valid LAW but the commandment and the ordinance of the living
God. All human enactments, adjudications and usages not founded on
these, are of no legal force, and should be trampled under foot. The
practice of slaveholding, for this reason, can never be legalized, and
all legislative or judicial attempts to sustain it are rebellion
against God, and treason against civil society. To teach otherwise,
would be to set up other gods above Jehovah, to promulgate the
fundamental principle of atheism, and proclaim war against the
liberties of mankind.
[Illustration: (signature) Wm. Goodell]
"Ore Perennius."
I ask no prouder inscription for my humble tomb, than "Here lies the
Friend of the Oppressed."
[Illustration: (signature) David Paul Brown Sept. 28, 1859]
The Mission of America.
BRUNSWICK, Maine, September 30, 1853.
MISS JULIA GRIFFITH,
My Dear Madam, your letter of September 23d I have received. I regret
exceedingly that it is not in my power to furnish the article you have
done me the honor to solicit, for the "Autographs for Freedom."
Particularly do I regret this now, when the great conflict between
aristocracy and democracy is about being renewed all over the
continent of Europe, and when despots are pointing with exultation to
the unparalleled enormities of our "peculiar institutions," and the
friends of republican equality, in all lands, are disheartened by our
example. Would the slaveholders of the south but consent to place
those who till their lands, under the protection of wholesome and
impartial law, and pay them honest wages, it would ere long cause
human rights to be respected in every corner of the globe. It should
be the mission of America, by the silent influence of a glorious
example, to revolutionize all despotisms. We have a vast continent to
subdue and to adorn, and we need the aid of millions more of willing
hands to accomplish the magnificent enterprise. With much esteem I am
truly yours,
[Illustration: (signature) John S. C. Abbott.]
[Illustration: Lewis Tappan, esq. (Engraved by J. C. Buttre)]
Disfellowshipping Slaveholders.
The late Dr. Chalmers, not long before his death, spoke with
disapprobation of Abolitionists in the United States, "for
undertaking," as he said, "to decide, without sufficient evidence,
upon the irreligious character of ministers and church-members.
_They_, forsooth, undertake to exclude men from the Lord's table, who
are in good and regular standing in the church of Christ, because they
happen to hold slaves! _They_ pretend to decide who, and who are not
Christians!" It is marvellous that so learned and so distinguished a
man should have fallen into such a mistake; and, on hearsay, ventured
to utter a most calumnious accusation against the friends of the
slave.
The Abolitionists might, perhaps, make decisions in the case not wide
of the mark, founded upon the rule given by Jesus Christ: "By their
fruits ye shall know them." But, in declaring that slaveholders ought
not to be fellowshipped as Christians, they do not say whether a
slaveholder is or is not a Christian. On the contrary, they leave each
one with his Maker, the INFALLIBLE JUDGE. But this they do:--they hold
that no slaveholder, professing to be a Christian, is entitled to
Christian FELLOWSHIP, _because_ slaveholding is a sin, and should
subject the offender to discipline. Neither Dr. Chalmers nor any other
divine could deny the propriety of this, provided they believed that
slaveholding is a sin, or an ecclesiastical offence. The apostle Paul
directed that Christians should not _eat_ with an _extortioner_. A
slaveholder is an extortioner. If, then, a Christian may not eat a
common meal with such an offender, may he sit at the Lord's table with
him? I trow not.
LEWIS TAPPAN.
A Leaf from my Scrap Book.
MAY, 1849.
SAMUEL R. WARD AND FREDERICK DOUGLASS.
Perhaps a fitter occasion never presented itself, nor was more
properly availed of, for the exhibition of talent, than when Frederick
Douglass and Samuel R. Ward debated the "question" whether the
Constitution was or not a pro-slavery document.
With the "question" at issue we have, at present, nothing to do; and
with the arguments so far only as they exhibit the men.
Both eminent for talent of an order (though differing somewhat in
cast) far above the common level of great men.
If any inequalities existed, they served rather to heighten than
diminish the interest of the occasion, giving rise to one of the
severest contests of mind with mind that has yet come to my notice.
Douglass, sincere in the opinions he has espoused, defends them with a
fervor and eloquence that finds scarcely a competitor.
In his very look--his gesture--in his whole manner, there is so much
of genuine, earnest eloquence, that they leave no time for reflection.
Now you are reminded of one rushing down some fearful steep, bidding
you follow; now on some delightful stream, still beckoning you onward.
In either case, no matter what your prepossessions or oppositions, you
for the moment, at least, forget the justness or unjustness of his
cause and obey the summons, and loath, if at all, you return to your
former post.
Not always, however, is he successful in retaining you. Giddy as you
may be with the descent you have made, delighted as you are with the
pleasure afforded, with the elysium to which he has wafted you, you
return too often dissatisfied with his and your own impetuosity and
want of firmness. You feel that you had had only a dream, a pastime,
not a reality.
This great power of momentary captivation consists in his eloquence of
manner--his just appreciation of words.
In listening to him, your whole soul is fired--every nerve
strung--every passion inflated--every faculty you possess ready to
perform at a moment's bidding. You stop not to ask why or wherefore.
'Tis a unison of mighty yet harmonious sounds that play upon your
imagination; and you give yourself up, for a time, to their
irresistible charm.
At last, the _cataract_ which roared around you is hushed, the
_tornado_ is passed, and you find yourself sitting upon a bank (at
whose base roll but tranquil waters), quietly meditating that why,
amid such a display of power, no greater effect had really been
produced.
After all, it must be admitted, there is a power in Mr. Douglass
rarely to be found in any other man.
With copiousness of language, and finish of diction, when even ideas
fail, words come to his aid--arranging themselves, as it were, so
completely, that they not only captivate, but often deceive us for
ideas; and hence the vacuum that would necessarily occur in the
address of an ordinary _speaker_ is filled up, presenting the same
beautiful harmony as do the lights and shades of a picture.
From Mr. Douglass, in this, perhaps, as much as in any other respect,
does Mr. _Ward_ differ. Ideas form the basis of all Mr. Ward utters.
Words are only used to express those ideas.
If words and ideas are not inseparable, then, as mortar is to the
stones that compose the building, so are his words to his ideas.
In this, I judge, lays Mr. Ward's greatest strength. Concise without
abruptness--without extraordinary stress, always clear and forcible;
if sparing of ornament, never inelegant. In all, there appears a
consciousness of strength, developed by close study and deep
reflection, and only put forth because the occasion demanded,--a power
not only to examine but to enable you to see the fairness of that
examination and the justness of its conclusions.
You feel Douglass to be right, without always seeing it; perhaps it is
not too much to say, when Ward is right you see it.
His appeals are directed rather to the understanding than the
imagination; but so forcibly do they take possession of it, that the
heart unhesitatingly yields.
If, as we have said, Mr. Douglass seems as one whirling down some
steep descent whose very impetuosity impels;--ere you are aware of it,
it is the quiet serenity of Mr. Ward, as he points up the rugged
ascent, and invites you to follow, that inspires your confidence and
ensures your safety. Step by step do you with him climb the rugged
steep; and, as you gain each succeeding eminence, he points you to new
scenes and new delights;--now grand--sublime; now picturesque and
beautiful;--always real. Most speakers fail to draw a perfect figure.
This point I think Mr. Ward has gained. His figures, when done, stand
out with prominence, possessing both strength and elegance.
Douglass' imagery is fine--vivid--often gaudily painted. Ward's
pictures--bold, strong, glowing.
Douglass speaks right on; you acknowledge him to have been on the
ground--nay, to have gone over the field; _Ward_ seeks for and finds
the corners; sticks the stakes, and leaves them standing; we know
where to find them.
Mr. Douglass deals in generals; Mr. Ward reduces everything to a
point.
Douglass is the _lecturer_; Ward the _debater_. Douglass powerful in
invective; Ward in argument. What advantage Douglass gains in mimicry
Ward recovers in wit.
Douglass has sarcasm, Ward point.
Here, again, an essential difference may be pointed out:--
Douglass says much, at times, you regret he uttered. This, however, is
the real man, and on reflection you like him the better for it. What
Ward says you feel to be but a necessity, growing out of the
case,--that it ought to have been said--that you would have said
precisely the same yourself, without adding or diminishing a single
sentence.
Douglass, in manner, is at all times pleasing; Ward seldom less so;
often raises to the truly majestic, and never descends below
propriety. If you regret when Douglass ceases to speak, you are
anxious Ward should continue.
Dignity is an essential quality in an orator--I mean true dignity.
Douglass has this in an eminent degree; Ward no less so, coupled with
it great self-possession. He is never disconcerted--all he desires he
says.
In one of his replies to Mr. Douglass I was struck with admiration,
and even delight, at the calm, dignified manner in which he expressed
himself, and his ultimate triumph under what seemed to me very
peculiar circumstances.
Douglass' was a splendid effort--a beautiful effusion. One of those
outpourings from the deeps of his heart of which he can so admirably
give existence to.
He had brought down thunders of well-merited applause; and sure I am,
that a whisper, a breath from almost any other opponent than Mr. Ward,
would have produced a tumult of hisses.
Not so, however, now. The quiet, majestic air, the suppressed richness
of a deep-toned, but well-cultivated voice, as the speaker paid a few
well-timed compliments to his opponents, disturbed not, as it had
produced, the dead stillness around.
Next followed some fine sallies of wit, which broke in on the calm.
He then proceeded to make and accomplished one of the most finished
speeches to which I have ever listened, and sat down amidst a perfect
storm of cheers.