With respect to the Divine interposition, two epochs have been assigned,

when this difference of colour has been imagined to have been so

produced. The first is that, which has been related, when the curse was

pronounced on a branch of the posterity of _Ham_. But this argument

has been already refuted; for if the particular colour alluded to were

assigned at this period, it was assigned to the descendants of

_Canaan_, to distinguish them from those of his other brothers, and

was therefore _limited_ to the former. But the descendants of

_Cush_[080], as we have shewn before, partook of the same colour; a

clear proof, that it was neither assigned to them on this occasion, nor

at this period.

The second epoch is that, when mankind were dispersed on the building of

_Babel_. It has been thought, that both _national features and

colour_ might probably have been given them at this time, because

these would have assisted the confusion of language, by causing them to

disperse into tribes, and would have united more firmly the individuals

of each, after the dispersion had taken place. But this is improbable:

first, because there is great reason to presume that Moses, who has

mentioned the confusion of language, would have mentioned these

circumstances also, if they had actually contributed to bring about so

singular an event: secondly, because the confusion of language was

sufficient of itself to have accomplished this; and we cannot suppose

that the Deity could have done any thing in vain: and thirdly, because,

if mankind had been dispersed, each tribe in its peculiar hue, it is

impossible to conceive, that they could have wandered and settled in

such a manner, as to exhibit that regular gradation of colour from the

equator to the poles, so conspicuous at the present day.

These are the only periods, which there has been even the shadow of a

probability for assigning; and we may therefore conclude that the

preceding observations, together with such circumstances as will appear

in the present chapter, will amount to a demonstration, that the

difference of colour was never caused by any interposition of the Deity,

and that it must have proceeded therefore from that _incidental

co-operation of causes_, which has been before related.

What these causes are, it is out of the power of human wisdom positively

to assert: there are facts, however, which, if properly weighed and put

together, will throw considerable light upon the subject. These we shall

submit to the perusal of the reader, and shall deduce from them such

inferences only, as almost every person must make in his own mind, on

their recital.

The first point, that occurs to be ascertained, is, "What part of the

skin is the seat of colour?" The old anatomists usually divided the skin

into two parts, or lamina; the exteriour and thinnest, called by the

Greeks _Epidermis_, by the Romans _Cuticula_, and hence by us

_Cuticle_; and the interiour, called by the former _Derma_,

and by the latter _Cutis_, or _true skin_. Hence they must

necessarily have supposed, that, as the _true skin_ was in every

respect the same in all human subjects, however various their external

hue, so the seat of colour must have existed in the _Cuticle_, or

upper surface.

Malphigi, an eminent Italian physician, of the last century, was the

first person who discovered that the skin was divided into three lamina,

or parts; the _Cuticle_, the _true skin_, and a certain

coagulated substance situated between both, which he distinguished by

the title of _Mucosum Corpus_; a title retained by anatomists to

the present day: which coagulated substance adhered so firmly to the

_Cuticle_, as, in all former anatomical preparations, to have come

off with it, and, from this circumstance to have led the ancient

anatomists to believe, that there were but two lamina, or divisible

portions in the human skin.

This discovery was sufficient to ascertain the point in question: for it

appeared afterwards that the _Cuticle_, when divided according to

this discovery from the other lamina, was semi-transparent; that the

cuticle of the blackest negroe was of the same transparency and colour,

as that of the purest white; and hence, the _true skins_ of both

being invariably the same, that the _mucosum corpus_ was the seat

of colour.

This has been farther confirmed by all subsequent anatomical

experiments, by which it appears, that, whatever is the colour of this

intermediate coagulated substance, nearly the same is the apparent

colour of the upper surface of the skin. Neither can it be otherwise;

for the _Cuticle_, from its transparency, must necessarily transmit

the colour of the substance beneath it, in the same manner, though not

in the same degree, as the _cornea_ transmits the colour of the

_iris_ of the eye. This transparency is a matter of ocular

demonstration in white people. It is conspicuous in every blush; for no

one can imagine, that the cuticle becomes red, as often as this happens:

nor is it less discoverable in the veins, which are so easy to be

discerned; for no one can suppose, that the blue streaks, which he

constantly sees in the fairest complexions, are painted, as it were, on

the surface of the upper skin. From these, and a variety of other

observations[081], no maxim is more true in physiology, than that _on

the mucosum corpus depends the colour of the human body_; or, in

other words, that the _mucosum corpus_ being of a different colour

in different inhabitants of the globe, and appearing through the cuticle

or upper surface of the skin, gives them that various appearance, which

strikes us so forcibly in contemplating the human race.

As this can be incontrovertibly ascertained, it is evident, that

whatever causes cooperate in producing this different appearance, they

produce it by acting upon the _mucosum corpus_, which, from the

almost incredible manner in which the cuticle[082] is perforated, is as

accessible as the cuticle itself. These causes are probably those

various qualities of things, which, combined with the influence of the

sun, contribute to form what we call _climate_. For when any person

considers, that the mucous substance, before-mentioned, is found to vary

in its colour, as the _climates_ vary from the equator to the

poles, his mind must be instantly struck with the hypothesis, and he

must adopt it without any hesitation, as the genuine cause of the

phænomenon.

This fact[083], _of the variation of the mucous substance according to

the situation of the place_, has been clearly ascertained in the

numerous anatomical experiments that have been made; in which, subjects

of all nations have come under consideration. The natives of many of the

kingdoms and isles of _Asia_, are found to have their _corpus

mucosum_ black. Those of _Africa_, situated near the line, of

the same colour. Those of the maritime parts of the same continent, of a

dusky brown, nearly approaching to it; and the colour becomes lighter or

darker in proportion as the distance from the equator is either greater

or less. The Europeans are the fairest inhabitants of the world. Those

situated in the most southern regions of _Europe_, have in their

_corpus mucosum_ a tinge of the dark hue of their _African_

neighbours: hence the epidemick complexion, prevalent among them, is

nearly of the colour of the pickled Spanish olive; while in this

country, and those situated nearer the north pole, it appears to be

nearly, if not absolutely, white.

These are facts[084], which anatomy has established; and we acknowledge

them to be such, that we cannot divest ourselves of the idea, that

_climate_ has a considerable share in producing a difference of

colour. Others, we know, have invented other hypotheses, but all of them

have been instantly refuted, as unable to explain the difficulties for

which they were advanced, and as absolutely contrary to fact: and the

inventors themselves have been obliged, almost as soon as they have

proposed them, to acknowledge them deficient.

The only objection of any consequence, that has ever been made to the

hypothesis of _climate_, is this, _that people under the same

parallels are not exactly of the same colour_. But this is no

objection in fact: for it does not follow that those countries, which

are at an equal distance from the equator, should have their climates

the same. Indeed nothing is more contrary to experience than this.

Climate depends upon a variety of accidents. High mountains, in the

neighbourhood of a place, make it cooler, by chilling the air that is

carried over them by the winds. Large spreading succulent plants, if

among the productions of the soil, have the same effect: they afford

agreeable cooling shades, and a moist atmosphere from their continual

exhalations, by which the ardour of the sun is considerably abated.

While the soil, on the other hand, if of a sandy nature, retains the

heat in an uncommon degree, and makes the summers considerably hotter

than those which are found to exist in the same latitude, where the soil

is different. To this proximity of what may be termed _burning

sands_, and to the sulphurous and metallick particles, which are

continually exhaling from the bowels of the earth, is ascribed the

different degree of blackness, by which some _African_ nations are

distinguishable from each other, though under the same parallels. To

these observations we may add, that though the inhabitants of the same

parallel are not exactly of the same hue, yet they differ only by shades

of the same colour; or, to speak with more precision, that there are no

two people, in such a situation, one of whom is white, and the other

black. To sum up the whole--Suppose we were to take a common globe; to

begin at the equator; to paint every country along the meridian line in

succession from thence to the poles; and to paint them with the same

colour which prevails in the respective inhabitants of each, we should

see the black, with which we had been obliged to begin, insensibly

changing to an olive, and the olive, through as many intermediate

colours, to a white: and if, on the other hand, we should complete any

one of the parallels according to the same plan, we should see a

difference perhaps in the appearance of some of the countries through

which it ran, though the difference would consist wholly in shades of

the same colour.

The argument therefore, which is brought against the hypothesis, is so

far from being, an objection, that we shall consider it one of the first

arguments in its favour: for if _climate_ has really an influence

on the _mucous substance_ of the body, it is evident, that we must

not only expect to see a gradation of colour in the inhabitants from the

equator to the poles, but also different[085] shades of the same colour

in the inhabitants of the same parallel.

To this argument, we shall add one that is incontrovertible, which is,

that when the _black_ inhabitants of _Africa_ are transplanted

to _colder_, or the _white_ inhabitants of _Europe_ to _hotter_

climates, their children, _born there_, are of a _different

colour from themselves_; that is, lighter in the first, and

darker in the second instance.

As a proof of the first, we shall give the words of the Abbé

Raynal[086], in his admired publication. "The children," says he, "which

they, (the _Africans_) procreate in _America_, are not so

black as their parents were. After each generation the difference

becomes more palpable. It is possible, that after a numerous succession

of generations, the men come from _Africa_ would not be

distinguished from those of the country, into which they may have been

transplanted."

This circumstance we have had the pleasure of hearing confirmed by a

variety of persons, who have been witnesses of the fact; but

particularly by many intelligent[087] Africans, who have been parents

themselves in _America_, and who have declared that the difference

is so palpable in the _northern provinces_, that not only they

themselves have constantly observed it, but that they have heard it

observed by others.

Neither is this variation in the children from the colour of their

parents improbable. _The children of the blackest Africans are born

white_[088]. In this state they continue for about a month, when they

change to a pale yellow. In process of time they become brown. Their

skin still continues to increase in darkness with their age, till it

becomes of a dirty, sallow black, and at length, after a certain period

of years, glossy and shining. Now, if climate has any influence on the

_mucous substance_ of the body, this variation in the children from

the colour of their parents is an event, which must be reasonably

expected: for being born white, and not having equally powerful causes

to act upon them in colder, as their parents had in the hotter climates

which they left, it must necessarily follow, that the same affect cannot

possibly be produced.

Hence also, if the hypothesis be admitted, may be deduced the reason,

why even those children, who have been brought from their country at an

early age into colder regions, have been observed[089] to be of a

lighter colour than those who have remained at home till they arrived at

a state of manhood. For having undergone some of the changes which we

mentioned to have attended their countrymen from infancy to a certain

age, and having been taken away before the rest could be completed,

these farther changes, which would have taken place had they remained at

home, seem either to have been checked in their progress, or weakened in

their degree, by a colder climate.

We come now to the second and opposite case; for a proof of which we

shall appeal to the words of Dr. Mitchell[090], in the Philosophical

Transactions. "The _Spaniards_ who have inhabited _America_

under the torrid zone for any time, are become as dark coloured as our

native _Indians_ of _Virginia_, of which, _I myself have

been a witness_; and were they not to intermarry with the

_Europeans_, but lead the same rude and barbarous lives with the

_Indians_, it is very probable that, in a succession of many

generations, they would become as dark in complexion."

To this instance we shall add one, which is mentioned by a late

writer[091], who describing the _African_ coast, and the

_European_ settlements there, has the following passage. "There are

several other small _Portuguese_ settlements, and one of some note

at _Mitomba_, a river in _Sierra Leon_. The people here

called _Portuguese_, are principally persons bred from a mixture of

the first _Portuguese discoverers_ with the natives, and now

become, in their _complexion_ and _woolly quality_ of their

hair, _perfect negroes_, retaining however a smattering of the

_Portuguese_ language."

These facts, with respect to the colonists of the _Europeans_, are

of the highest importance in the present case, and deserve a serious

attention. For when we know to a certainty from whom they are descended;

when we know that they were, at the time of their transplantation, of

the same colour as those from whom they severally sprung; and when, on

the other hand, we are credibly informed, that they have changed it for

the native colour of the place which they now inhabit; the evidence in

support of these facts is as great, as if a person, on the removal of

two or three families into another climate, had determined to ascertain

the circumstance; as if he had gone with them and watched their

children; as if he had communicated his observations at his death to a

successor; as if his successor had prosecuted the plan, and thus an

uninterrupted chain of evidence had been kept up from their first

removal to any determined period of succeeding time.

But though these facts seem sufficient of themselves to confirm our

opinion, they are not the only facts which can be adduced in its

support. It can be shewn, that the members of the _very same

family_, when divided from each other, and removed into different

countries, have not only changed their family complexion, but that they

have changed it to _as many different colours_ as they have gone

into _different regions of the world_. We cannot have, perhaps, a

more striking instance of this, than in the _Jews_. These people,

are scattered over the face of the whole earth. They have preserved

themselves distinct from the rest of the world by their religion; and,

as they never intermarry with any but those of their own sect, so they

have no mixture of blood in their veins, that they should differ from

each other: and yet nothing is more true, than that the _English

Jew_[092] is white, the _Portuguese_ swarthy, the _Armenian_

olive, and the _Arabian_ copper; in short, that there appear

to be as many different species of _Jews_, as there are countries

in which they reside.

To these facts we shall add the following observation, that if we can

give credit to the ancient historians in general, a change from the

darkest black to the purest white must have actually been accomplished.

One instance, perhaps, may be thought sufficient. _Herodotus_[093]

relates, that the _Colchi were black_, and that they had _crisped

hair_. These people were a detachment of the _Æthiopian_ army

under _Sesostris_, who followed him in his expedition, and settled

in that part of the world, where _Colchis_ is usually represented

to have been situated. Had not the same author informed us of this

circumstance, we should have thought it strange[094], that a people of

this description should have been found in such a latitude. Now as they

were undoubtedly settled there, and as they were neither so totally

destroyed, nor made any such rapid conquests, as that history should

notice the event, there is great reason to presume, that their

descendants continued in the same, or settled in the adjacent country;

from whence it will follow, that they must have changed their complexion

to that, which is observable in the inhabitants of this particular

region at the present day; or, in other words, that the _black

inhabitant of Colchis_ must have been changed into the _fair

Circassian_[095].

As we have now shewn it to be highly probable, from the facts which have

been advanced, that climate is the cause of the difference of colour

which prevails in the different inhabitants of the globe, we shall now

shew its probability from so similar an effect produced on the _mucous

substance_ before-mentioned by so similar a cause, that though the

fact does not absolutely prove our conjecture to be right, yet it will

give us a very lively conception of the manner, in which the phænomenon

may be caused.

This probability may be shewn in the case of _freckles_, which are

to be seen in the face of children, but of such only, as have the

thinnest and most transparent skins, and are occasioned by the rays of

the sun, striking forcibly on the _mucous substance_ of the face,

and drying the accumulating fluid. This accumulating fluid, or

perspirable matter, is at first colourless; but being exposed to violent

heat, or dried, becomes brown. Hence, the _mucosum corpus_ being

tinged in various parts by this brown coagulated fluid, and the parts so

tinged appearing through the _cuticle_, or upper surface of the

skin, arises that spotted appearance, observable in the case recited.

Now, if we were to conceive a black skin to be an _universal

freckle_, or the rays of the sun to act so universally on the

_mucous substance_ of a person's face, as to produce these spots so

contiguous to each other that they should unite, we should then see, in

imagination, a face similar to those, which are daily to be seen among

black people: and if we were to conceive his body to be exposed or acted

upon in the same manner, we should then see his body assuming a similar

appearance; and thus we should see the whole man of a perfect black, or

resembling one of the naked inhabitants of the torrid zone. Now as the

feat of freckles and of blackness is the same; as their appearance is

similar; and as the cause of the first is the ardour of the sun, it is

therefore probable that the cause of the second is the same: hence, if

we substitute for the word "_sun_," what is analogous to it, the

word _climate_, the same effect may be supposed to be produced, and

the conjecture to receive a sanction.

Nor is it unlikely that the hypothesis, which considers the cause of

freckles and of blackness as the same, may be right. For if blackness is

occasioned by the rays of the sun striking forcibly and universally on

the _mucous substance_ of the body, and drying the accumulating

fluid, we can account for the different degrees of it to be found in the

different inhabitants of the globe. For as the quantity of perspirable

fluid, and the force of the solar rays is successively increased, as

the climates are successively warmer, from any given parallel to the

line, it follows that the fluid, with which the _mucous substance_

will be stained, will be successively thicker and deeper coloured; and

hence, as it appears through the cuticle, the complexion successively

darker; or, what amounts to the same thing, there will be a difference

of colour in the inhabitants of every successive parallel.

From these, and the whole of the preceding observations on the subject,

we may conclude, that as all the inhabitants of the earth cannot be

otherwise than the children of the same parents, and as the difference

of their appearance must have of course proceeded from incidental

causes, these causes are a combination of those qualities, which we call

_climate_; that the blackness of the _Africans_ is so far

ingrafted in their constitution, in a course of many generations, that

their children wholly inherit it, if brought up in the same spot, but

that it is not so absolutely interwoven in their nature, that it cannot

be removed, if they are born and settled in another; that _Noah_

and his sons were probably of an _olive_ complexion; that those of

their descendants, who went farther to the south, became of a deeper

olive or _copper_; while those, who went still farther, became of a

deeper copper or _black_; that those, on the other hand, who

travelled farther to the north, became less olive or _brown_, while

those who went still farther than the former, became less brown or

_white_; and that if any man were to point out any one of the

colours which prevails in the human complexion, as likely to furnish an

argument, that the people of such a complexion were of a different

species from the rest, it is probable that his own descendants, if

removed to the climate to which this complexion is peculiar, would, in

the course of a few generations, degenerate into the same colour.

Having now replied to the argument, "that the Africans are an inferiour

link of the chain of nature," as far as it depended on their

_capacity_ and _colour_, we shall now only take notice of an

expression, which the _receivers_ before-mentioned are pleased to

make use of, "that they are made for slavery."

Had the Africans been _made for slavery_, or to become the property

of any society of men, it is clear, from the observations that have been

made in the second part of this Essay, that they must have been created

_devoid of reason_: but this is contrary to fact. It is clear

also, that there must have been, many and evident signs of the

_inferiority of their nature_, and that this society of men must

have had a _natural right_ to their dominion: but this is equally

false. No such signs of _inferiority_ are to be found in the one,

and the right to dominion in the other is _incidental_: for in what

volume of nature or religion is it written, that one society of men

should _breed slaves_ for the benefit, of another? Nor is it less

evident that they would have wanted many of those qualities which they

have, and which brutes have not: they would have wanted that _spirit

of liberty_, that _sense of ignominy and shame_[096], which so

frequently drives them to the horrid extremity of finishing their own

existence. Nor would they have been endowed with a _contemplative

power_; for such a power would have been unnecessary to people in

such a situation; or rather, its only use could have been to increase

their pain. We cannot suppose therefore that God has made an order of

beings, with such mental qualities and powers, for the sole purpose of

being used as _beasts_, or _instruments_ of labour. And here,

what a dreadful argument presents itself against you _receivers_?

For if they have no understandings as you confess, then is your conduct

impious, because, as they cannot perceive the intention of your

punishment, your severities cannot make them better. But if, on the

other hand, they have had understandings, (which has evidently appeared)

then is your conduct equally impious, who, by destroying their faculties

by the severity of your discipline, have reduced men; who had once the

power of reason, to an equality with the brute creation.

* * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 073: Genesis, ch. iv. 15.]

[Footnote 074: Genesis, ch. ix. 25, 26, 27.]

[Footnote 075: Jeremiah says, ch. xiii. 23, "Can the Æthiopian change

his colour, or the leopard his spots?" Now the word, which is here

translated _Æthiopian_, is in the original Hebrew "_the descendant of

Cush_," which shews that this colour was not confined to the descendants

of _Canaan_, as the advocates for slavery assert.]

[Footnote 076: It is very extraordinary that the advocates for slavery

should consider those Africans, whom they call negroes, as the

descendants of _Canaan_, when few historical facts can be so well

ascertained, as that out of the descendants of the four sons of Ham, the

descendants of Canaan were the only people, (if we except the

Carthaginians, who were a colony of Canaan, and were afterwards ruined)

who did not settle in that quarter of the globe. Africa was

incontrovertibly peopled by the posterity of the three other sons. We

cannot shew this in a clearer manner, than in the words of the learned

Mr. Bryant, in his letter to Mr. Granville Sharp on this subject.

"We learn from scripture, that Ham had four sons, _Chus, Mizraim, Phut_,

and _Canaan_, Gen. x. 5, 6. _Canaan_ occupied _Palestine_, and the

country called by his name: _Mizraim, Egypt_: but _Phut_ passed deep

into _Africa_, and, I believe, most of the nations in that part of the

world are descended from him; at least more than from any other person."

_Josephus_ says, "_that Phut was the founder of the nations in Libya,

and the people were from him called (phoutoi) Phuti_." Antiq. L. 1. c.

7. "By _Lybia_ he understands, as the _Greeks_ did, _Africa_ in general:

for the particular country called _Lybia Proper_, was peopled by the

_Lubim_, or _Lehabim_, one of the branches from _Mizraim_, (Labieim ex ou

Libnes) Chron. Paschale, p. 29.

"The sons of _Phut_ settled in _Mauritania_, where was a country called

_Phutia_, and a river of the like denomination. Mauritaniæ Fluvius usque

ad præsens Tempus _Phut_ dicitur, omnisq; circa eum Regio _Phutensis_.

Hieron. Tradit. Hebroeæ.--Amnem, quem vocant _Fut_." Pliny, L. 5. c. 1.

Some of this family settled above Ægypt, near Æthiopia, and were styled

Troglodytæ. (phoud ex ou troglodotai). Syncellus, p. 47. Many of them

passed inland, and peopled the Mediterranean country."

"In process of time the sons of _Chus_ also, (after their expulsion from

Egypt) made settlements upon the sea coast of _Africa_, and came into

_Mauritania_. Hence we find traces of them also in the names of places,

such as _Churis, Chusares_, upon the coast: and a river _Chusa_, and a

city _Cotta_, together with a promontory, _Cotis_, in _Mauritania_, all

denominated from _Chus_; who at different times, and by different

people, was called _Chus, Cuth, Cosh_, and _Cotis_. The river _Cusa_ is

mentioned by _Pliny_, Lib. 5. c. 1. and by _Ptolomy_."

"Many ages after these settlements, there was another eruption of the

_Cushites_ into these parts, under the name of _Saracens_ and _Moors_,

who over-ran _Africa_, to the very extremity of Mount Atlas. They passed

over and conquered _Spain_ to the north, and they extended themselves

southward, as I said in my treatise, to the rivers _Senegal_ and

_Gambia_, and as low as the _Gold Coast_. I mentioned this, because I do

not think that they proceeded much farther: most of the nations to the

_south_ being, as I imagine, of the race of _Phut_. The very country

upon the river _Gambia_ on one side, is at this day called _Phuta_, of

which _Bluet_, in his history of _Juba Ben Solomon_, gives an account."]

[Footnote 077: When America was first discovered, it was thought by

some, that the scripture account of the creation was false, and that

there were different species of men, because they could never suppose

that people, in so rude a state as the Americans, could have transported

themselves to that continent from any parts of the known world. This

opinion however was refuted by the celebrated Captain Cooke, who shewed

that the traject between the continents of Asia and America, was as

short as some, which people in as rude a state have been actually known

to pass. This affords an excellent caution against an ill-judged and

hasty censure of the divine writings, because every difficulty which may

be started, cannot be instantly cleared up.]

[Footnote 078: The divine writings, which assert that all men were

derived from the _same stock_, shew also, in the same instance of

_Cush_, (Footnote 075), that some of them had changed their original

complexion.]

[Footnote 079: The following are the grand colours discernible in

mankind, between which there are many shades;

White } { Copper

}--Olive--{

Brown } { Black

]

[Footnote 080: See note, (Footnote 075). To this we may add, that the

rest of the descendants of _Ham_, as far as they can be traced, are now

also black, at well as many of the descendants of _Shem_.]

[Footnote 081: Diseases have a great effect upon the _mucosum corpus_,

but particularly the jaundice, which turns it yellow. Hence, being

transmitted through the cuticle, the yellow appearance of the whole

body. But this, even as a matter of ocular demonstration, is not

confined solely to white people; negroes themselves, while affected with

these or other disorders, changing their black colour for that which the

disease has conveyed to the _mucous_ substance.]

[Footnote 082: The cutaneous pores are so excessively small, that one

grain of sand, (according to Dr. Lewenhoeck's calculations) would cover

many hundreds of them.]

[Footnote 083: We do not mean to insinuate that the same people have

their _corpus mucosum_ sensibly vary, as often as they go into another

latitude, but that the fact is true only of different people, who have

been long established in different latitudes.]

[Footnote 084: We beg leave to return our thanks here to a gentleman,

eminent in the medical line, who furnished us with the above-mentioned

facts.]

[Footnote 085: Suppose we were to see two nations, contiguous to each

other, of black and white inhabitants in the same parallel, even this

would be no objection, for many circumstances are to be considered. A

black people may have wandered into a white, and a white people into a

black latitude, and they may not have been settled there a sufficient

length of time for such a change to have been accomplished in their

complexion, as that they should be like the old established inhabitants

of the parallel, into which they have lately come.]

[Footnote 086: Justamond's Abbe Raynal, v. 5. p. 193.]

[Footnote 087: The author of this Essay made it his business to inquire

of the most intelligent of those, whom he could meet with in London, as

to the authenticity of the fact. All those from _America_ assured him

that it was strictly true; those from the West-Indies, that they had

never observed it there; but that they had found a sensible difference

in themselves since they came to England.]

[Footnote 088: This circumstance, which always happens, shews that they

are descended from the same parents as ourselves; for had they been a

distinct species of men, and the blackness entirely ingrafted in their

constitution and frame, there is great reason to presume, that their

children would have been born _black_.]

[Footnote 089: This observation was communicated to us by the gentleman

in the medical line, to whom we returned our thanks for certain

anatomical facts.]

[Footnote 090: Philos. Trans. No. 476. sect. 4.]

[Footnote 091: Treatise upon the Trade from Great Britain to Africa, by

an African merchant.]

[Footnote 092: We mean such only as are _natives_ of the countries which

we mention, and whose ancestors have been settled there for a certain

period of time.]

[Footnote 093: Herodotus. Euterpe. p. 80. Editio Stephani, printed

1570.]

[Footnote 094: This circumstance confirms what we said in a former note,

(Footnote 085), that even if two nations were to be found in the same

parallel, one of whom was black, and the other white, it would form no

objection against the hypothesis of climate, as one of them might have

been new settlers from a distant country.]

[Footnote 095: Suppose, without the knowledge of any historian, they had

made such considerable conquests, as to have settled themselves at the

distance of 1000 miles in any one direction from _Colchis_, still they

must have changed their colour. For had they gone in an Eastern or

Western direction, they must have been of the same colour as the

_Circassians_; if to the north, whiter; if to the south, of a copper.

There are no people within that distance of _Colchis_, who are black.]

[Footnote 096: There are a particular people among those transported

from Africa to the colonies, who immediately on receiving punishment,

destroy themselves. This is a fact which the _receivers_ are unable to

contradict.]

* * * * *

CHAP. IX.

The reader may perhaps think, that the _receivers_ have by this

time expended all their arguments, but their store is not so easily

exhausted. They are well aware that justice, nature, and religion, will

continue, as they have ever uniformly done, to oppose their conduct.

This has driven them to exert their ingenuity, and has occasioned that

multiplicity of arguments to be found in the present question.

These arguments are of a different complexion from the former. They

consist in comparing the state of _slaves_ with that of some of the

classes of _free_ men, and in certain scenes of felicity, which the

former are said to enjoy.

It is affirmed that the punishments which the Africans undergo, are less

severe than the military; that their life is happier than that of the

English peasant; that they have the advantages of manumission; that they

have their little spots of ground, their holy-days, their dances; in

short, that their life is a scene of festivity and mirth, and that they

are much happier in the colonies than in their own country.

These representations, which have been made out with much ingenuity and

art, may have had their weight with the unwary; but they will never pass

with men of consideration and sense, who are accustomed to estimate the

probability of things, before they admit them to be true. Indeed the

bare assertion, that their situation is even comfortable, contains its

own refutation, or at least leads us to suspect that the person, who

asserted it, has omitted some important considerations in the account.

Such we shall shew to have been actually the case, and that the

representations of the _receivers_, when stripped of their glossy

ornaments, are but empty declamation.

It is said, first, of _military punishments_, that they are more

severe than those which the _Africans_ undergo. But this is a bare

assertion without a proof. It is not shewn even by those, who assert it,

how the fact can be made out. We are left therefore to draw the

comparison ourselves, and to fill up those important considerations,

which we have just said that the _receivers_ had omitted.

That military punishments are severe we confess, but we deny that they

are severer than those with which they are compared. Where is the

military man, whose ears have been slit, whose limbs have been

mutilated, or whose eyes have been beaten out? But let us even allow,

that their punishments are equal in the degree of their severity: still

they must lose by comparison. The soldier is never punished but after a

fair and equitable trial, and the decision of a military court; the

unhappy African, at the discretion of his Lord. The one knows what

particular conduct will constitute an offence[097]; the other has no

such information, as he is wholly at the disposal of passion and

caprice, which may impose upon any action, however laudable, the

appellation of a crime. The former has it of course in his power to

avoid a punishment; the latter is never safe. The former is punished for

a real, the latter, often, for an imaginary fault.

Now will any person assert, on comparing the whole of those

circumstances together, which relate to their respective punishments,

that there can be any doubt, which of the two are in the worst

situation, as to their penal systems?

With respect to the declaration, that the life of an _African_ in

the colonies is happier than that of an _English_ peasant, it is

equally false. Indeed we can scarcely withhold our indignation, when we

consider, how shamefully the situation of this latter class of men has

been misrepresented, to elevate the former to a state of fictitious

happiness. If the representations of the _receivers_ be true, it

is evident that those of the most approved writers, who have placed a

considerable share of happiness in the _cottage_, have been

mistaken in their opinion; and that those of the rich, who have been

heard to sigh, and envy the felicity of the _peasant_, have been

treacherous to their own sensations.

But which are we to believe on the occasion? Those, who endeavour to

dress _vice_ in the habit of _virtue_, or those, who derive

their opinion from their own feelings? The latter are surely to be

believed; and we may conclude therefore, that the horrid picture which

is given of the life of the _peasant_, has not so just a foundation

as the _receivers_ would, lead us to suppose. For has he no

pleasure in the thought, that he lives in his _own country_, and

among his relations and friends? That he is actually _free_, and

that his children will be the same? That he can never be _sold_ as

a beast? That he can speak his mind _without the fear of the lash_?

That he cannot even be struck _with impunity_? And that he

partakes, equally with his superiours, of the _protection of the

law_?--Now, there is no one of these advantages which the

_African_ possesses, and no one, which the defenders of slavery

take into their account.

Of the other comparisons that are usually made, we may observe in

general, that, as they consist in comparing the iniquitous practice of

slavery with other iniquitous practices in force among other nations,

they can neither raise it to the appearance of virtue, nor extenuate its

guilt. The things compared are in these instances both of them evils

alike. They call equally for redress[098], and are equally disgraceful

to the governments which suffer them, if not encourage them, to exist.

To attempt therefore to justify one species of iniquity by comparing it

with another, is no justification at all; and is so far from answering

the purpose, for which the comparison is intended, as to give us reason

to suspect, that the _comparer_ has but little notion either of

equity or honour.

We come now to those scenes of felicity, which slaves are said to enjoy.

The first advantage which they are said to experience, is that of

_manumission_. But here the advocates for slavery conceal an

important circumstance. They expatiate indeed on the charms of freedom,

and contend that it must be a blessing in the eyes of those, upon whom

it is conferred. We perfectly agree with them in this particular. But

they do not tell us that these advantages are _confined_; that they

are confined to some _favourite domestick_; that not _one in an

hundred_ enjoy them; and that they are _never_ extended to

those, who are employed in the _cultivation of the field_, as long

as they can work. These are they, who are most to be pitied, who are

destined to _perpetual_ drudgery; and of whom _no one whatever_

has a chance of being freed from his situation, till death

either releases him at once, or age renders him incapable of continuing

his former labour. And here let it be remarked, _to the disgrace of

the receivers_, that he is then made free, not--_as a reward for

his past services_, but, as his labour is then of little or no

value,--_to save the tax_[099].

With the same artifice is mention also made of the little spots, or

_gardens_, as they are called, which slaves are said to possess

from the _liberality_ of _the receivers_. But people must not

be led away by agreeable and pleasant sounds. They must not suppose that

these gardens are made for _flowers_; or that they are places of

_amusement_, in which they can spend their time in botanical

researches and delights. Alas, they do not furnish them with a theme for

such pleasing pursuits and speculations! They must be cultivated in

those hours, which ought to be appropriated to rest[100]; and they must

be cultivated, not for an amusement, but to make up, _if it be

possible_, the great deficiency in their weekly allowance of

provisions. Hence it appears, that the _receivers_ have no merit

whatever in such an appropriation of land to their unfortunate slaves:

for they are either under the necessity of doing this, or of

_losing_ them by the jaws of famine. And it is a notorious fact,

that, with their weekly allowance, and the produce of their spots

together, it is often with the greatest difficulty that they preserve a

wretched existence.

The third advantage which they are said to experience, is that of

_holy-days_, or days of respite from their usual discipline and

fatigue. This is certainly a great indulgence, and ought to be recorded

to the immortal honour of the _receivers_. We wish we could express

their liberality in those handsome terms, in which it deserves to be

represented, or applaud them sufficiently for deviating for once from

the rigours of servile discipline. But we confess, that we are unequal

to the task, and must therefore content ourselves with observing, that

while the horse has _one_ day in _seven_ to refresh his limbs,

the happy _African_[101] has but _one_ in _fifty-two_, as

a relaxation from his labours.

With respect to their _dances_, on which such a particular stress

has been generally laid, we fear that people may have been as shamefully

deceived, as in the former instances. For from the manner in which these

are generally mentioned, we should almost be led to imagine, that they

had certain hours allowed them for the purpose of joining in the dance,

and that they had every comfort and convenience, that people are

generally supposed to enjoy on such convivial occasions. But this is far

from the case. Reason informs us, that it can never be. If they wish for

such innocent recreations, they must enjoy them in the time that is

allotted them for sleep; and so far are these dances from proceeding

from any uncommon degree of happiness, which excites them to convivial

society, that they proceed rather from an uncommon depression of

spirits, which makes them even sacrifice their rest[102], for the sake

of experiencing for a moment a more joyful oblivion of their cares. For

suppose any one of the _receivers_, in the middle of a dance, were

to address his slaves in the following manner: "_Africans!_ I begin

at last to feel for your situation; and my conscience is severely hurt,

whenever I reflect that I have been reducing those to a state of misery

and pain, who have never given me offence. You seem to be fond of these

exercises, but yet you are obliged to take them at such unseasonable

hours, that they impair your health, which is sufficiently broken by the

intolerable share of labour which I have hitherto imposed upon you. I

will therefore make you a proposal. Will you be content to live in the

colonies, and you shall have the half of every week entirely to

yourselves? or will you choose to return to your miserable, wretched

country?"--But what is that which strikes their ears? Which makes them

motionless in an instant? Which interrupts the festive scene?--their

country?--transporting sound!--Behold! they are now flying from the

dance: you may see them running to the shore, and, frantick as it were

with joy, demanding with open arms an instantaneous passage to their

beloved native plains.

Such are the _colonial delights_, by the representation of which

the _receivers_ would persuade us, that the _Africans_ are

taken from their country to a region of conviviality and mirth; and that

like those, who leave their usual places of residence for a summer's

amusement, they are conveyed to the colonies--_to bathe_,--_to

dance_,--_to keep holy-day_,--_to be jovial_.--But there

is something so truly ridiculous in the attempt to impose these scenes

of felicity on the publick, as scenes which fall to the lot of slaves,

that the _receivers_ must have been driven to great extremities, to

hazard them to the eye of censure.

The last point that remains to be considered, is the shameful assertion,

that the _Africans_ are much _happier in the colonies, than in

their own country_. But in what does this superiour happiness

consist? In those real scenes, it must be replied, which have been just

mentioned; for these, by the confession of the receivers, constitute the

happiness they enjoy.--But it has been shewn that these have been

unfairly represented; and, were they realized in the most extensive

latitude, they would not confirm the fact. For if, upon a

recapitulation, it consists in the pleasure of _manumission_, they

surely must have passed their lives in a much more comfortable manner,

who, like the _Africans at home_, have had no occasion for such a

benefit at all. But the _receivers_, we presume, reason upon this

principle, that we never know the value of a blessing but by its loss.

This is generally true: but would any one of them make himself a

_slave_ for years, that he might run the chance of the pleasures of

_manumission_? Or that he might taste the charms of liberty with

_a greater relish_? Nor is the assertion less false in every other

consideration. For if their happiness consists in the few

_holy-days_, which _in the colonies_ they are permitted to

enjoy, what must be their situation _in their own country_, where

the whole year is but one continued holy-day, or cessation from

discipline and fatigue?--If in the possession of _a mean and

contracted spot_, what must be their situation, where a whole region

is their own, producing almost spontaneously the comforts of life, and

requiring for its cultivation none of those hours, which should be

appropriated to _sleep_?--If in the pleasures of the _colonial

dance_, what must it be in _their own country_, where they may

dance for ever; where there is no stated hour to interrupt their

felicity, no intolerable labour immediately to succeed their

recreations, and no overseer to receive them under the discipline of the

lash?--If these therefore are the only circumstances, by which the

assertion can be proved, we may venture to say, without fear of

opposition, that it can never be proved at all.

But these are not the only circumstances. It is said that they are

barbarous at home.--But do you _receivers_ civilize them?--Your

unwillingness to convert them to Christianity, because you suppose you

must use them more kindly when converted, is but a bad argument in

favour of the fact.

It is affirmed again, that their manner of life, and their situation is

such in their own country, that to say they are happy is a jest. "But

who are you, who pretend to judge[103] of another man's happiness? That

state which each man, under the guidance of his maker, forms for

himself, and not one man for another? To know what constitutes mine or

your happiness, is the sole prerogative of him who created us, and cast

us in so various and different moulds. Did your slaves ever complain to

you of their unhappiness, amidst their native woods and desarts? Or,

rather, let me ask, did they ever cease complaining of their condition

under you their lordly masters? Where they see, indeed, the

accommodations of civil life, but see them all pass to others,

themselves unbenefited by them. Be so gracious then, ye petty tyrants

over human freedom, to let your slaves judge for themselves, what it is

which makes their own happiness, and then see whether they do not place

it _in the return to their own country_, rather than in the

contemplation of your grandeur, of which their misery makes so large a

part."

But since you speak with so much confidence on the subject, let us ask

you _receivers_ again, if you have ever been informed by your

unfortunate slaves, that they had no connexions in the country from

which they have forcibly been torn away: or, if you will take upon you

to assert, that they never sigh, when they are alone; or that they never

relate to each other their tales of misery and woe. But you judge of

them, perhaps, in an happy moment, when you are dealing out to them

their provisions for the week; and are but little aware, that, though

the countenance may be cheered with a momentary smile, the heart may be

exquisitely tortured. Were you to shew us, indeed, that there are laws,

subject to no evasion, by which you are obliged to clothe and feed them

in a comfortable manner; were you to shew us that they are

protected[104] at all; or that even _one_ in a _thousand_ of

those masters have suffered death[105], who have been guilty of

_premeditated_ murder to their slaves, you would have a better

claim to our belief: but you can neither produce the instances nor the

laws. The people, of whom you speak, are _slaves_, are your own

_property_, are wholly _at your own disposal_; and this idea

is sufficient to overturn your assertions of their happiness.

But we shall now mention a circumstance, which, in the present case,

will have more weight than all the arguments which have hitherto been

advanced. It is an opinion, which the _Africans_ universally

entertain, that, as soon as death shall release them from the hands of

their oppressors, they shall immediately be wafted back to their native

plains, there to exist again, to enjoy the sight of their beloved

countrymen, and to spend the whole of their new existence in scenes of

tranquillity and delight; and so powerfully does this notion operate

upon them, as to drive them frequently to the horrid extremity of

putting a period to their lives. Now if these suicides are frequent,

(which no person can deny) what are they but a proof, that the situation

of those who destroy themselves must have been insupportably wretched:

and if the thought of returning to their country after death, _when

they have experienced the colonial joys_, constitutes their supreme

felicity, what are they but a proof, that they think there is as much

difference between the two situations, as there is between misery and

delight?

Nor is the assertion of the _receivers_ less liable to a refutation

in the instance of those, who terminate their own existence, than of

those, whom nature releases from their persecutions. They die with a

smile upon their face, and their funerals are attended by a vast

concourse of their countrymen, with every possible demonstration of

joy[106]. But why this unusual mirth, if their departed brother has left

an happy place? Or if he has been taken from the care of an indulgent

master, who consulted his pleasures, and administered to his wants? But

alas, it arises from hence, that _he is gone to his happy country_:

a circumstance, sufficient of itself, to silence a myriad of those

specious arguments, which the imagination has been racked, and will

always be racked to produce, in favour of a system of tyranny and

oppression.

It remains only, that we should now conclude the chapter with a fact,

which will shew that the account, which we have given of the situation

of slaves, is strictly true, and will refute at the same time all the

arguments which have hitherto been, and may yet be brought by the

_receivers_, to prove that their treatment is humane. In one of the

western colonies of the Europeans, [107]six hundred and fifty thousand

slaves were imported within an hundred years; at the expiration of which

time, their whole posterity were found to amount to one hundred and

forty thousand. This fact will ascertain the treatment of itself. For

how shamefully must these unfortunate people have been oppressed? What a

dreadful havock must famine, fatigue, and cruelty, have made among them,

when we consider, that the descendants of _six hundred and fifty

thousand_ people in the prime of life, gradually imported within a

century, are less numerous than those, which only _ten thousand_[108]

would have produced in the same period, under common advantages,

and in a country congenial to their constitutions?

But the _receivers_ have probably great merit on the occasion. Let

us therefore set it down to their humanity. Let us suppose for once,

that this incredible waste of the human species proceeds from a

benevolent design; that, sensible of the miseries of a servile state,

they resolve to wear out, as fast as they possibly can, their

unfortunate slaves, that their miseries may the sooner end, and that a

wretched posterity may be prevented from sharing their parental

condition. Now, whether this is the plan of reasoning which the

_receivers_ adopt, we cannot take upon us to decide; but true it

is, that the effect produced is exactly the same, as if they had

reasoned wholly on this _benevolent_ principle.

* * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 097: The articles of war are frequently read at the head of

every regiment in the service, stating those particular actions which

are to be considered as crimes.]

[Footnote 098: We cannot omit here to mention one of the customs, which

has been often brought as a palliation of slavery, and which prevailed

but a little time ago, and we are doubtful whether it does not prevail

now, in the metropolis of this country, of kidnapping men for the

service of the East-India Company. Every subject, as long as he behaves

well, has a right to the protection of government; and the tacit

permission of such a scene of iniquity, when it becomes known, is as

much a breach of duty in government, as the conduct of those subjects,

who, on other occasions, would be termed, and punished as, rebellious.]

[Footnote 099: The expences of every parish are defrayed by a poll-tax

on negroes, to save which they pretend to liberate those who are past

labour; but they still keep them employed in repairing fences, or in

doing some trifling work on a scanty allowance. For to free a

_field-negroe_, so long as he can work, is a maxim, which,

notwithstanding the numerous boasted manumissions, no master _ever

thinks of adopting_ in the colonies.]

[Footnote 100: They must be cultivated always on a _Sunday_, and

frequently in those hours which should be appropriated to _sleep_,

or the wretched possessors must be inevitably _starved_.]

[Footnote 101: They are allowed in general three holy-days at Christmas,

but in Jamaica they have two also at Easter, and two at Whitsuntide: so

that on the largest scale, they have only seven days in a year, or one

day in fifty-two. But this is on a supposition, that the receivers do

not break in upon the afternoons, which they are frequently too apt to

do. If it should be said that Sunday is an holy-day, it is not true; it

is so far an holy-day, that they do not work for their masters; but such

an holy-day, that if they do not employ it in the cultivation of their

little spots, they must _starved_.]

[Footnote 102: These dances are usually in the middle of the night; and

so desirous are these unfortunate people of obtaining but a joyful hour,

that they not only often give up their sleep, but add to the labours of

the day, by going several miles to obtain it.]

[Footnote 103: Bishop of Glocester's sermon, preached before the society

for the propagation of the gospel, at the anniversary meeting, on the

21st of February, 1766.]

[Footnote 104: There is a law, (but let the reader remark, that it

prevails but in _one_ of the colonies), against mutilation. It took

its rise from the frequency of the inhuman practice. But though a master

cannot there chop off the limb of a slave with an axe, he may yet work,

starve, and beat him to death with impunity.]

[Footnote 105: _Two_ instances are recorded by the

_receivers_, out of about _fifty-thousand_, where a white man

has suffered death for the murder of a negroe; but the receivers do not

tell us, that these suffered more because they were the pests of

society, than because the _murder of slaves was a crime_.]

[Footnote 106: A negroe-funeral is considered as a curious sight, and is

attended with singing, dancing, musick, and every circumstance that can

shew the attendants to be happy on the occasion.]

[Footnote 107: In 96 years, ending in 1774, 800,000 slaves had been

imported into the French part of St. Domingo, of which there remained

only 290,000 in 1774. Of this last number only 140,000 were creoles, or

natives of the island, i. e. of 650,000 slaves, the whole posterity were

140,000. _Considerations sur la Colonie de St. Dominique_,(See

errata--should be read as "_St. Domingue_") published by authority

in 1777.]

[Footnote 108: Ten thousand people under fair advantages, and in a soil

congenial to their constitutions, and where the means of subsistence are

easy, should produce in a century 160,000. This is the proportion in

which the Americans increased; and the Africans in their own country

increase in the same, if not in a greater proportion. Now as the climate

of the colonies is as favourable to their health as that of their own

country, the causes of the prodigious decrease in the one, and increase

in the other, will be more conspicuous.]

* * * * *

CHAP. X.

We have now taken a survey of the treatment which the unfortunate

_Africans_ undergo, when they are put into the hands of the

_receivers_. This treatment, by the four first chapters of the

present part of this Essay, appears to be wholly insupportable, and to

be such as no human being can apply to another, without the imputation

of such crimes, as should make him tremble. But as many arguments are

usually advanced by those who have any interest in the practice, by

which they would either exculpate the treatment, or diminish its

severity, we allotted the remaining chapters for their discussion. In

these we considered the probability of such a treatment against the

motives of interest; the credit that was to be given to those

disinterested writers on the subject, who have recorded particular

instances of barbarity; the inferiority of the _Africans_ to the

human species; the comparisons that are generally made with respect to

their situation; the positive scenes of felicity which they are said to

enjoy, and every other argument, in short, that we have found to have

ever been advanced in the defence of slavery. These have been all

considered, and we may venture to pronounce, that, instead of answering

the purpose for which they were intended, they serve only to bring such

circumstances to light, as clearly shew, that if ingenuity were racked

to invent a situation, that would be the most distressing and

insupportable to the human race; it could never invent one, that would

suit the description better, than the--_colonial slavery_.

If this then be the case, and if slaves, notwithstanding all the

arguments to the contrary, are exquisitely miserable, we ask you

_receivers, by what right_ you reduce them to so wretched a

situation?

You reply, that you _buy them_; that your _money_ constitutes

your _right_, and that, like all other things which you purchase,

they are wholly at your own disposal.

Upon this principle alone it was, that we professed to view your

treatment, or examine your right, when we said, that "the question[109]

resolved itself into two separate parts for discussion; into the

_African_ commerce, as explained in the history of slavery, and the

subsequent slavery in the colonies, _as founded on the equity of the

commerce_." Now, since it appears that this commerce, upon the

fullest investigation, is contrary to "_the principles[110] of law and

government, the dictates of reason, the common maxims of equity, the

laws of nature, the admonitions of conscience, and, in short, the whole

doctrine of natural religion_," it is evident that the _right_,

which is founded upon it, must be the same; and that if those

things only are lawful in the sight of God, which are either

virtuous in themselves, or proceed from virtuous principles, you _have

no right over them at all_.

You yourselves also confess this. For when we ask you, whether any human

being has a right to sell you, you immediately answer, No; as if nature

revolted at the thought, and as if it was so contradictory to your own

feelings, as not to require consideration. But who are you, that have

this exclusive charter of trading in the liberties of mankind? When did

nature, or rather the Author of nature, make so partial a distinction

between you and them? When did He say, that you should have the

privilege of selling others, and that others should not have the

privilege of selling you?

Now since you confess, that no person whatever has a right to dispose of

you in this manner, you must confess also, that those things are

unlawful to be done to you, which are usually done in consequence of the

sale. Let us suppose then, that in consequence of the _commerce_

you were forced into a ship; that you were conveyed to another country;

that you were sold there; that you were confined to incessant labour;

that you were pinched by continual hunger and thirst; and subject to be

whipped, cut, and mangled at discretion, and all this at the hands of

those, whom you had never offended; would you not think that you had a

right to resist their treatment? Would you not resist it with a safe

conscience? And would you not be surprized, if your resistance should be

termed rebellion?--By the former premises you must answer, yes.--Such

then is the case with the wretched _Africans_. They have a right to

resist your proceedings. They can resist them, and yet they cannot

justly be considered as rebellious. For though we suppose them to have

been guilty of crimes to one another; though we suppose them to have

been the most abandoned and execrable of men, yet are they perfectly

innocent with respect to you _receivers_. You have no right to

touch even the hair of their heads without their own consent. It is not

your money, that can invest you with a right. Human liberty can neither

be bought nor sold. Every lash that you give them is unjust. It is a

lash against nature and religion, and will surely stand recorded against

you, since they are all, with respect to your _impious_ selves, in

a state of nature; in a state of original dissociation; perfectly free.

* * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 109: See Part II Chapter I second paragraph.]

[Footnote 110: See Part II Chapter IX last paragraph.]

* * * * *

CHAP. XI.

Having now considered both the _commerce_ and _slavery_, it

remains only to collect such arguments as are scattered in different

parts of the work, and to make such additional remarks, as present

themselves on the subject.

And first, let us ask you, who have studied the law of nature, and you,

who are learned in the law of the land, if all property must not be

inferiour in its nature to its possessor, or, in other words, (for it is

a case, which every person must bring home to his own breast) if you

suppose that any human being can have _a property in yourselves_?

Let us ask you appraisers, who scientifically know the value of things,

if any human creature is equivalent only to any of the trinkets that you

wear, or at most, to any of the horses that you ride: or in other words,

if you have ever considered the most costly things that you have valued,

as _equivalent to yourselves?_ Let us ask you rationalists, if man,

as a reasonable being, is not _accountable_ for his actions, and

let us put the same question to you, who have studied the divine

writings? Let us ask you parents, if ever you thought that you possessed

an _authority_ as such, or if ever you expected a _duty_ from

your sons; and let us ask you sons, if ever you felt an impulse in your

own breasts to _obey_ your parents. Now, if you should all answer

as we could wish, if you should all answer consistently with reason,

nature, and the revealed voice of God, what a dreadful argument will

present itself against the commerce and slavery of the human species,

when we reflect, that no man whatever can be bought or reduced to the

situation of a slave, _but he must instantly become a brute, he must

instantly be reduced to the value of those things, which were made for

his own use and convenience; he must instantly cease to be accountable

for his actions, and his authority as a parent, and his duty as a son,

must be instantly no more_.

Neither does it escape our notice, when we are speaking of the fatal

wound which every social duty must receive, how considerably

Christianity suffers by the conduct of you _receivers_. For by

prosecuting this impious commerce, you keep the _Africans_ in a

state of perpetual ferocity and barbarism; and by prosecuting it in such

a manner, as must represent your religion, as a system of robbery and

oppression, you not only oppose the propagation of the gospel, as far as

you are able yourselves, but throw the most certain impediments in the

way of others, who might attempt the glorious and important task.

Such also is the effect, which the subsequent slavery in the colonies

must produce. For by your inhuman treatment of the unfortunate

_Africans_ there, you create the same insuperable impediments to a

conversion. For how must they detest the very name of _Christians_,

when you _Christians_ are deformed by so many and dreadful vices?

How must they detest that system of religion, which appears to resist

the natural rights of men, and to give a sanction to brutality and

murder?

But, as we are now mentioning Christianity, we must pause for a little

time, to make a few remarks on the arguments which are usually deduced

from thence by the _receivers_, in defence of their system of

oppression. For the reader may readily suppose, that, if they did not

hesitate to bring the _Old_ Testament in support of their

barbarities, they would hardly let the _New_ escape them.

_St. Paul_, having converted _Onesimus_ to the Christian

faith, who was a fugitive slave of _Philemon_, sent him back to his

master. This circumstance has furnished the _receivers_ with a

plea, that Christianity encourages slavery. But they have not only

strained the passages which they produce in support of their assertions,

but are ignorant of historical facts. The benevolent apostle, in the

letter which he wrote to _Philemon_, the master of _Onesimus_,

addresses him to the following effect: "I send him back to you, but not

in his former capacity[111], _not now as a servant, but above a

servant, a brother beloved_. In this manner I beseech you to receive

him, for though I could _enjoin_ you to do it, yet I had rather it

should be a matter of your _own will_, than of _necessity_."

It appears that the same _Onesimus_, when he was sent back, was no

longer _a slave_, that he was a minister of the gospel, that he was

joined with _Tychicus_ in an ecclesiastical commission to the

church of the _Colossians_, and was afterwards bishop of

_Ephesus_. If language therefore has any meaning, and if history

has recorded a fact which may be believed, there is no case more

opposite to the doctrine of the _receivers_, than this which they

produce in its support.

It is said again, that Christianity, among the many important precepts

which it contains, does not furnish us with one for the abolition of

slavery. But the reason is obvious. Slavery at the time of the

introduction of the gospel was universally prevalent, and if

Christianity had abruptly declared, that the millions of slaves should

have been made free, who were then in the world, it would have been

universally rejected, as containing doctrines that were dangerous, if

not destructive, to society. In order therefore that it might be

universally received, it never meddled, by any positive precept, with

the civil institutions of the times; but though it does not expressly

say, that "you shall neither buy, nor sell, nor possess a slave," it is

evident that, in its general tenour, it sufficiently militates against

the custom.

The first doctrine which it inculcates, is that of _brotherly

love_. It commands good will towards men. It enjoins us to love our

neighbours as ourselves, and to do unto all men, as we would that they

should do unto us. And how can any man fulfil this scheme of universal

benevolence, who reduces an unfortunate person _against his will_,

to the _most insupportable_ of all human conditions; who considers

him as his _private property_, and treats him, not as a brother,

nor as one of the same parentage with himself, but as an _animal of

the brute creation?_

But the most important doctrine is that, by which we are assured that

mankind are to exist in a future state, and to give an account of those

actions, which they have severally done in the flesh. This strikes at

the very root of slavery. For how can any man be justly called to an

account for his actions, whose actions are not _at his own

disposal?_ This is the case with the _proper_[112] slave. His

liberty is absolutely bought and _appropriated_; and if the

purchase is _just and equitable_, he is _under the necessity_

of perpetrating any crime, which the purchaser may order him to commit,

or, in other words, of ceasing to be _accountable for his actions_.

These doctrines therefore are sufficient to shew, that slavery is

incompatible, with the Christian system. The _Europeans_ considered

them as such, when, at the close of the twelfth century, they resisted,

their hereditary prejudices, and occasioned its abolition. Hence one,

among many other proofs, that Christianity was the production of

infinite wisdom; that though it did not take such express cognizance of

the wicked national institutions of the times, as should hinder its

reception, it should yet contain such doctrines, as, when it should be

fully established, would be sufficient for the abolition of them all.

Thus then is the argument of you _receivers_ ineffectual, and your

conduct impious. For, by the prosecution of this wicked slavery and

commerce, you not only oppose the propagation of that gospel which was

ordered to be preached unto every creature, and bring it into contempt,

but you oppose its tenets also: first, because you violate that law of

_universal benevolence_, which was to take away those hateful

distinctions of _Jew_ and _Gentile_, _Greek_ and _Barbarian,

bond_ and _free_, which prevailed when the gospel was introduced;

and secondly, because, as every man is to give an account of

his actions hereafter, it is necessary that he should be _free_.

Another argument yet remains, which, though nature will absolutely turn

pale at the recital, cannot possibly be omitted. In those wars, which

are made for the sake of procuring slaves, it is evident that the

contest must be generally obstinate, and that great numbers must be

slain on both sides, before the event can be determined. This we may

reasonably apprehend to be the case: and we have shewn[113], that there

have not been wanting instances, where the conquerors have been so

incensed at the resistance they have found, that their spirit of

vengeance has entirely got the better of their avarice, and they have

murdered, in cool blood, every individual, without discrimination,

either of age or sex. From these and other circumstances, we thought we

had sufficient reason to conclude, that, where _ten_ were supposed

to be taken, an _hundred_, including the victors and vanquished,

might be supposed to perish. Now, as the annual exportation from

_Africa_ consists of an hundred thousand men, and as the two

orders, of those who are privately kidnapped by individuals, and of

those, who are publickly seized by virtue of the authority of their

prince, compose together, at least, nine-tenths of the _African_

slaves, it follows, that about ten thousand consist of convicts and

prisoners of war. The last order is the most numerous. Let us suppose

then that only six thousand of this order are annually sent into

servitude, and it will immediately appear that no less than

_sixty-thousand_ people annually perish in those wars, which are

made only for the purpose of procuring slaves. But that this number,

which we believe to be by no means exaggerated, may be free from all

objection, we will include those in the estimate, who die as they are

travelling to the ships. Many of these unfortunate people have a journey

of one thousand miles to perform on foot, and are driven like sheep

through inhospitable woods and deserts, where they frequently die in

great numbers, from fatigue and want. Now if to those, who thus perish

on the _African_ continent, by war and travelling, we subjoin

those[114], who afterwards perish on the voyage, and in the seasoning

together, it will appear that, in every yearly attempt to supply the

colonies, an _hundred thousand_ must perish, even before _one_

useful individual can be obtained.

Gracious God! how wicked, how beyond all example impious, must be that

servitude, which cannot be carried on without the continual murder of so

many and innocent persons! What punishment is not to be expected for

such monstrous and unparalleled barbarities! For if the blood of one

man, unjustly shed, cries with so loud a voice for the divine vengeance,

how shall the cries and groans of an _hundred thousand_ men,

_annually murdered_, ascend the celestial mansions, and bring down

that punishment, which such enormities deserve! But do we mention

punishment? Do we allude to that punishment, which shall be inflicted on

men as individuals, in a future life? Do we allude to that awful day,

which shall surely come, when the master shall behold his murdered

negroe face to face? When a train of mutilated slaves shall be brought

against him? When he shall stand confounded and abashed? Or, do we

allude to that punishment, which may be inflicted on them here, as

members of a wicked community? For as a body politick, if its members

are ever so numerous, may be considered as an whole, acting of itself,

and by itself, in all affairs in which it is concerned, so it is

accountable, as such, for its conduct; and as these kinds of polities

have only their existence here, so it is only in this world, that, as

such, they can be punished.

"Now, whether we consider the crime, with respect to the individuals

immediately concerned in this most barbarous and cruel traffick, or

whether we consider it as patronized[115] and encouraged by the laws of

the land, it presents to our view an equal degree of enormity. A crime,

founded on a dreadful pre-eminence in wickedness,--a crime, which being

both of individuals and the nation, must sometime draw down upon us the

heaviest judgment of Almighty God, who made of one blood all the sons of

men, and who gave to all equally a natural right to liberty; and who,

ruling all the kingdoms of the earth with equal providential justice,

cannot suffer such deliberate, such monstrous iniquity, to pass long

unpunished[116]."

But alas! he seems already to have interfered on the occasion! The

violent[117] and supernatural agitations of all the elements, which, for

a series of years, have prevailed in those European settlements, where

the unfortunate _Africans_ are retained in a state of slavery, and

which have brought unspeakable calamities on the inhabitants, and

publick losses on the states to which they severally belong, are so many

awful visitations of God for this inhuman violation of his laws. And it

is not perhaps unworthy of remark, that as the subjects of Great-Britain

have two thirds of this impious commerce in their own hands, so they

have suffered[118] in the same proportion, or more severely than the

rest.

How far these misfortunes may appear to be acts of providence, and to

create an alarm to those who have been accustomed to refer every effect

to its apparent cause; who have been habituated to stop there, and to

overlook the finger of God; because it is slightly covered under the

veil of secondary laws, we will not pretend to determine? but this we

will assert with confidence, that the _Europeans_ have richly

deserved them all; that the fear of sympathy, which can hardly be

restrained on other melancholy occasions, seems to forget to flow at the

relation of these; and that we can never, with any shadow of justice,

with prosperity to the undertakers of those, whose success must be at

the expence of the happiness of millions of their fellow-creatures.

But this is sufficient. For if liberty is only an adventitious right; if

men are by no means superiour to brutes; if every social duty is a

curse; if cruelty is highly to be esteemed; if murder is strictly

honourable, and Christianity is a lye; then it is evident, that the

_African_ slavery may be pursued, without either the remorse of

conscience, or the imputation of a crime. But if the contrary of this is

true, which reason must immediately evince, it is evident that no custom

established among men was ever more impious; since it is contrary to

_reason, justice, nature, the principles of law and government, the

whole doctrine, in short, of natural religion, and the revealed voice of

God_.

* * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 111: Epist. to Philemon.]

[Footnote 112: The _African_ slave is of this description; and we

could wish, in all our arguments on the present subject, to be

understood as having spoken only of _proper slaves_. The slave who

is condemned to the oar, to the fortifications, and other publick works,

is in a different predicament. His liberty is not _appropriated_,

and therefore none of those consequences can be justly drawn, which have

been deduced in the present case.]

[Footnote 113: See the description of an African battle (Footnote 049).]

[Footnote 114: The lowest computation is 40,000, (Footnote 060).]

[Footnote 115: The legislature has squandered away more money in the

prosecution of the slave trade, within twenty years, than in any other

trade whatever, having granted from the year 1750, to the year 1770, the

sum of 300,000 pounds.]

[Footnote 116: Sermon preached before the University of Cambridge, by

the Rev. Peter Peckard.]

[Footnote 117: The first noted earthquake at Jamaica, happened June the

7th 1692, when Port Royal was totally sunk. This was succeeded by one in

the year 1697, and by another in the year 1722, from which time to the

present, these regions of the globe seem to have been severely visited,

but particularly during the last six or seven years. See a general

account of the calamities, occasioned by the late tremendous hurricanes

and earthquakes in the West-Indian islands, by Mr. Fowler.]

[Footnote 118: The many ships of war belonging to the British navy,

which were lost with all their crews in these dreadful hurricanes, will

sufficiently prove the fact.]

* * * * *

FINIS.

* * * * *