It is pretended by certain sophists and visionary theorists, that the
RIGHT does not exist to enslave the barbarian; that to assert such
right is fatal to the principle of human equality. To which I answer,
that barbarity is not humanity, but its opposite, and the right of the
one to control the other is supported by law, founded upon the
immutable principles of justice. The experience of mankind has
demonstrated, and the judgment of mankind has decided, that certain
acts are wrong in themselves; that to kill is an act abhorrent to the
soul of man, and as it is also a violation of natural right, the
murderer shall die--that in his death an element of chaos and
destruction, in him, is annihilated--and the principle or element of
murder in the wicked be thereby repressed. Here is an instance wherein
the right is asserted, to take, not only the liberty, but the life of
an individual. Some deny this right, but they do not deny the right to
deprive the murderer of his liberty. All will agree that the murderer
shall, at least, be deprived of his liberty. So with other crimes.
There is a tolerable agreement in civilized communities, that for
certain crimes men shall be deprived of their natural right to
freedom. So, the principle is established, that communities have the
right to deprive men of their liberties. Laws are established and
executed by this principle. Every State, and almost every small
community, endorses this principle, and constantly illustrates it by
the punishment of offenders against law, who are confined in jails and
prisons. And it is folly to deny a right founded upon the universal
usage and experience of mankind. So with nations. Did we not repress
the wrong exercised against us by Mexico and Algeria? Did we not even
deny the right of maritime isolation to Japan, on the score of cruelty
or neglected hospitality to our shipwrecked mariners? Suppose she slay
our ambassador, or our resident minister; would we not still further
force upon her, in a summary manner, those well-known rules of law,
and amenities of civilization, and principles of justice, which are
proclaimed to be right by the united voice of nations?
We are considering the subject of the enslavement of the African race
in this Republic. We are inquiring into the RIGHT of African Slavery.
We have asserted the right of slavery, as founded upon the principle
that universal right holds a just and hereditary control over wrong;
and as the African is a race of barbarians, and barbarism is wrong,
it follows that it is the right of civilization to hold the African
subject to those rules of justice which pertain to civilization, and
to protect him from the injustice, violence, and degradation, which
are the concomitants of barbarism. To deny this is to deny the
superiority of RIGHT over _wrong_. He who denies this, becomes the
advocate of barbarism; for, barbarism being below civilization, he
asserts its equality with civilization, and thus becomes its apologist
and advocate.