OWNERSHIP IN MAN.--THE OLD TESTAMENT SLAVERY.
"Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do
ye even so to them; FOR THIS IS THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS."
HOLY WRIT.
The rain still poured down in the morning, making it agreeable to us
that we had the prospect of an uninterrupted forenoon for our
conversation.
So when we found ourselves together again in the course of the forenoon,
by the fire, we opened the discussion.
Mr. North inquired what I understood by the term "owning a
fellow-creature."
"I understand by it," I replied, "a right to use, and to dispose of, the
services of another, wholly at my will. That will must be subject to the
whole law of God, which includes the golden rule. I do not mean by it
that a man owns the body of a man in such a sense that he can maim it at
will, or in any way abuse it. Ownership in men is power to use their
services and to dispose of them, at will."
"Now," said he, "who gives you a right to go to Africa or to a slave
auction and to say to a human being, 'I propose to own you.' How would
you like to have a black man come to you in a solitary place and say,
'My dear Sir, I propose to own you. Henceforth your services are
subject to my will.'?"
"As to Africa," said I, "and making slaves of those who are now free, we
cannot differ. As to the other part of your question, I will carry the
illustration a little further, and in doing so, will answer you in part.
How would you like to have some Michael O'Connor come to you and say,
'Mr. North, I propose to hire you and pay you wages as my body-servant,
or my ostler.' Why should you not consent? If you do not, why should you
hire Mike himself to serve you in either of those capacities? What has
become of the golden rule, if you hire a man to do work for you which
you would not be hired to do?
"You are feasting with a company of friends; and your domestics, below,
hear your cheerful talk, and feel the wide difference between your state
and theirs. Why do you not go down and say, 'Dear fellow-creatures, go
up and take our places at table, and let us be servants'? Does the
golden rule require that? Inequalities in human conditions are a wise
and benevolent provision for human happiness, so long as men are
dependent on one another, as they are and ever must be. Some are so
constituted by an all-wise God that they are happier to be in
subordinate situations. Mind is lord; and they, seeing and feeling the
superiority of others, gladly attach themselves to them as helpers, to
be thought for and protected, and to enjoy their approbation. There is
nothing cruel in this, unless it be cruel not to have made all men
equal. There are important influences growing out of these relationships
of superiors and inferiors,--gentleness, kindness, benevolence, in all
its forms, on the one hand, and on the other, respect, deference, love,
strong attachments and identification of interests.
"As to the remaining part of your question, let me ask, What nation or
tribes are capable of such bondage as the Africans at home inflict and
bear? We never had a right to go and steal them, nor to encourage their
captors in their pillage and violent seizure of the defenceless
creatures; nor do I think that all the blessings which multitudes of
them have received, for both worlds, in consequence of their
transportation from Africa, lessens the guilt of slave-traders; nor are
these benefits any justification of the trade, nor do they afford ground
for its continuance. Nothing can justify it. Such is the voice of the
human conscience everywhere except where covetousness or controversy
prevail.
"But finding these colored people here, the question upon which you and
I differ, is, What is our duty with regard to them?
"You say, Set them all free. I reply, The relation of ownership on our
part toward them is best for all concerned. You say, It is wrong in
itself. To say this, I think, is to be more righteous than God."
"Then you maintain," said he, "that the Most High, in the Bible,
countenances all the atrocities of American slavery."
"What a strange way," said I, "of arguing, do we very generally find
among anti-slavery men, when their feelings are enlisted, as they are so
apt to be. They take unwarrantable, extreme inferences from what we say,
and oppose these as logical answers to a statement or argument. 'Auction
block' and 'Bunker Hill,' are sufficient answers with them to most of
our reasoning on this subject. But let us look at this point in a
dispassionate manner.
"But," said I, "before I begin I wish to be distinctly understood as
holding this doctrine; namely, The Bible does not justify us in reducing
men to bondage at our will. God might appoint that certain tribes should
be slaves to others; but before we proceed to reduce men to slavery, our
warrant for it must be clear.
"If, however, slavery is found by a certain generation among them, and
it is not right and just nor expedient to abolish it, may we not safely
ask, How did the Most High legislate concerning slavery among the people
to whom he gave a code of laws from his own lips?
"Learning this, we must then consider whether circumstances in our day
warrant, or require, different rules and regulations.
"But our inquiry into the divine legislation respecting slavery, will
disclose some things which draw largely upon one's implicit faith in the
divine goodness; and if a man is disposed to be a sceptic and his
anti-slavery feelings are strong, here is a stone on which, if that
anti-slavery man falls, he shall be broken, but if it falls on him, it
shall grind him to powder.
"You will acknowledge this, if you will allow me to speak further on
this subject.
"Did you ever notice," said I, "with what words Christ concludes his
enunciation of the golden rule? They are a remarkable answer to our
modern infidels, who impugn the Old Testament as far behind the New in
its moral standard. After declaring that the rule by which we should
treat others is self-love, the Saviour says,--'for this is the Law and
the Prophets.' So there was nothing in the Law and Prophets inconsistent
with the golden rule. The golden rule therefore marks the history of
divine legislation from the beginning; and if God appointed slavery, he
ordained nothing in connection with it which was inconsistent with
equal love to one's self and to a neighbor.
"This deserves to be considered by those who, finding slavery in the Old
Testament appointed by God, begin, as it were, to exculpate their Maker
by saying that the Hebrews were a rude, semi-barbarous people, and that
divine legislation was wisely accommodated to their moral capacity. Now
it is singular, if this be so, that the Mosaic code should be the basis,
as it is, of all good legislation everywhere. The effort to make the
Hebrew people and their code appear inferior, in order to excuse
slavery, is one illustration of the direful effect which anti-slavery
principles have had in lowering the respect of many for the Bible, and
loosening its hold upon their consciences. Now it is to me a perfect
relief on this subject of slavery in the Old Testament, to know that God
appointed nothing in the relation of his people to men of any class or
condition which his people in a change of circumstances, might not be
willing should be administered to them. If slavery was ordained of God
to the Hebrews, it must, therefore, have been benevolent. If we start
with the doctrine that 'Slavery is the sum of all villanies,' no wonder
that we find it necessary to use extenuating words and a sort of
apologetic, protecting manner of treating the divine oracles. After all
it is evidently hard work, with many anti-slavery men to maintain that
reverence for the Old Testament and that confidence in God which they
feel are required of them. So they lay all the responsibility of
imperfection in the divine conduct, to the 'semi-barbarous Hebrews!'--a
people by the way, whose first leader combined in himself a greater
variety, and a higher order, of talent, than any other man in history.
As military commander, poet, historian, judge, legislator, who is to be
named in comparison with the man Moses?
"We must come to the conclusion," said I, "that the relation of
ownership is not only not sinful, but that it is in itself benevolent,
that it had a benevolent object; for its origin was certainly
benevolent."
"What was its origin?" said Mrs. North; "I always had a desire to know
how slavery first came into existence."
"Blackstone tells us," I replied, "that its origin was in the right of a
captor to commute the death of his captives with bondage. The laws of
war give the conqueror a right to destroy his enemies; if he sees fit to
spare their lives in consideration of their serving him, this is also
his right. Thus, we suppose, slavery gained its existence.
"True, its very nature partakes of our fallen condition; it is not a
paradisiacal institution; it is not good in itself; it is an
accompaniment of the loss which we have incurred by sin. In that light
it is proper to speak of the Most High as adapting his legislation to
the depraved condition of man; but that is no more true of slavery than
of redemption; everything in the treatment of us by the Almighty is an
exponent of our departure from our first estate."
"Now," said Mrs. North, "all this is a relief to me; for I have always
been sorely tried by remarks seemingly impugning the divine wisdom and
goodness, whenever slavery in the Bible has been under discussion."
"Please give us an outline," said Mr. North, "of the Hebrew legislation
on this subject." He handed me a Bible.
"I will try and not be tedious," said I, "and will repeat to you in few
words the principal points of the Hebrew Code, with regard to
involuntary servitude.
* * * * *
"Slavery is the first thing named in the law given at Sinai, after the
moral law and a few simple directions as to altars. This is noticeable.
In the twenty-first chapter of Exodus, and in the twenty-fifth chapter
of Leviticus, we find the Hebrew slave-code. The following is a summary
of it:--
"1. Hebrews themselves might be bought and sold by Hebrews; but for six
years only, at farthest. If the jubilee year occurred at any time during
these six years, it cut short the term of service.
"2. Hebrew paupers were an exception to this rule. They could be
retained till the year of jubilee next ensuing.
"3. Hebrew servants, married in servitude, if they went out free in the
seventh, or in the jubilee year, must go out alone, leaving their wives
which their masters had given them, and their children by these wives,
(if any,) behind them, as their masters' possession. If, however, they
chose to remain with their wives and children, the ear of the servant
was bored with an awl to the door-post, and his servitude became
perpetual.
"4. Hebrew servants might also, from love to their masters, in like
manner and by the same ceremony, become servants forever.
"5. Strangers and sojourners among the Hebrews, 'waxing rich,' were
allowed to buy Hebrews who were 'waxen poor,' and who were at liberty to
sell themselves to these sojourners or to the family of these strangers.
The jubilee year, however, terminated this servitude. The price of sale
was graduated according to the number of years previous to the jubilee
year. The kindred of the servant had the right of redeeming him, the
price being regulated in the same way.
"6. In all these cases in which Hebrews were bought and sold, there were
special injunctions that they should not be treated 'with rigor,' the
reason assigned by the Most High being substantially the same in all
cases, namely, 'For unto me the children of Israel are servants; they
are my servants whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt: I am the
Lord your God.'
"7. Liberal provision was to be made for the Hebrew servant at the
termination of his servitude. During his term of service, he was to be
regarded and treated 'as an hired servant and a sojourner.'
"8. Bondmen and bondmaids, as property, without limitation of time, and
transmissible as inheritance to children, might be bought of surrounding
nations. The children of sojourners also could be thus acquired. To
these the seventh year's and the fiftieth year's release did not apply.
"Now, Mr. North," said I, "let me proceed to try your faith somewhat. I
will see whether your confidence in divine revelation is sound, for
nothing at the present day has overthrown the faith of many like the
manifest teachings of the Bible with regard to slavery. You have felt
that the Hebrew code is better than ours, so far as it relates to slaves
who were Hebrews. As to the slaves from the heathen, we infer that they
met 'with rigor,' or at least were liable to it; for God continually
enjoins it upon the Hebrews that they shall not use rigor with their
brethren.
"Now let me mention some things which will try your faith in revelation,
if you are an abolitionist.
"The Hebrews were allowed to sell their servants to other people.
"Thus they traded in flesh and blood. This was prohibited in the case of
a Hebrew maid-servant, whom a man had bought and had made her his
concubine. If she did not please him, it was said that--'to sell her
unto a strange nation he shall have no power.' The inference is that
they sold their Gentile slaves, if they pleased, 'to a strange nation.'
Again. When a father or mother became poor, their creditor could take
their children for servants. Thus you read: 'Now there cried a certain
woman of the wives of the sons of the prophets unto Elisha saying, Thy
servant my husband is dead, and thou knowest that thy servant did fear
the Lord; and the creditor is come to take unto him my two sons to be
bondmen.' This was according to the law of Moses, in the twenty-fifth of
Leviticus; 'bondmen,' however, meaning here a servant for a term of
years. See also the New Testament parable of the unforgiving servant.
"This was hard, it will seem to you and to all of us, that if one became
poor in Israel, his children could be attached. Thus the idea of
involuntary servitude, where no crime was, prevailed in the Theocracy.
"But we come now to something which draws harder upon our faith.
"We find the Most High prescribing, Exodus xxi. 20, 21, that a master
who kills his servant under chastisement shall be punished (but not put
to death); and if the servant survives a day or two, the master shall
not even be 'punished' for the death of his slave!
"The reason which the Most High gives is this: '_For he is his money_'!
"A human being, 'money'! An immortal soul, 'money'! God's image,
'money'! And this the reasoning, these the very words of my Maker! Is it
not astonishing, if your principles are correct, that there has been no
controversy for ages against this? and that the Bible, with such
passages in it should have retained its hold on the human mind? 'He is
his money'! It would have been no different had it read: 'He is his
cotton.' You see that the Most High recognized 'ownership,' 'property in
man.' Why is it said, 'He is his money'? Poole (Synopsis) says,--'that
is, his possession bought with money; and therefore 1. Had a power to
chastise him according to his merit, which might be very great. 2. Is
sufficiently punished with his own loss. 3. May be presumed not to have
done this purposely or maliciously.'
"Either and all of which explanations, or any other which can be given,
only bring more clearly to view the idea of 'money' as a reason why the
master is not to be punished, for causing the death of a slave by
whipping, if the slave happens to continue a day or two, no matter under
what mutilations and sufferings.
"Furthermore. We find the Most High decreeing perpetual bondage in
certain cases, and more than all, as we have seen, _the forcible
separation of husband and wife_ among slaves. Let me turn to Exodus xxi.
and read:--
"'1. Now these are the judgments which thou shalt set before them.
"'2. If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in
the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
"'3. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he
were married, then his wife shall go out with him.
"'4. If his master have given him a wife and she have borne him
sons or daughters, _the wife and her children shall be her
master's_, and he shall go out by himself.'
"I have not finished my reading," said I; "but what do you say to that,
Mr. North?"
"Read on," said he.
"'5. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my
wife, and my children, I will not go out free:
"'6. Then his master shall bring him unto the judges, he shall also
bring him to the door, or unto the door-post, and his master shall
bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall serve him forever.'
"God decreed, therefore, that the marriage of a slave in bondage, in
those days, was dissoluble, as no other marriage was. Divorces among the
Hebrews, allowed for the hardness of their hearts, were not parallel to
the forcible separation of a slave from his wife under the hard
necessity of choice between perpetual bondage with a wife, or freedom
without her. The merciful God who kindly enacted, 'No man shall take the
nether nor the upper millstone to pledge: for he taketh a man's life to
pledge,' and that a garment pawned should be restored before sundown,
that wages should not be withheld over night, yes, the God who
legislated about bird's-nests ordained the dissolution of the marriage
tie between slaves in certain cases, unless the slave husband was
willing for his wife's sake, to be a slave forever!
"What do you say to this, Mr. North?" I asked again.
Said Mrs. North, "I begin to see the origin and cause of infidelity
among the abolitionists."
"Tell me," said Mr. North, "how you view it."
"On stating this, once," said I, "in a public meeting, I raised a
clamor. Three or four men sprung to their feet, and one of them, who
first caught the chairman's eye, cried out, his face turning red, his
eyes starting from their sockets, his fist clenched, 'I demand of the
gentleman whether he means to approve of all the abominations of
American slavery! Is he in favor of separating husbands and wives,
parents and children? Let us know it, Sir, if it be so. No wonder that
strong anti-slavery men turn infidels when they hear Christian men
defending American slavery from the Bible. No wonder that they say, "The
times demand, and we must have, an anti-slavery constitution, an
anti-slavery Bible, and an anti-slavery God." Mr. Moderator, will the
gentleman answer my question,--Do you mean to approve all the atrocities
of American slavery, on the ground that the Bible countenances them?'
"I was never more calm in my life. I replied, 'Mr. Chairman, taking for
my warrant an inspired piece of advice as to the best way of answering a
man according to his folly, it would be just, should I reply to the
gentleman's question, Yes, I do. But the gentleman, I perceive, is too
much excited to hear me.'
"He had flung himself round in his seat, put his elbow on the back of
it, and his hand through his hair; he then flung himself round in the
opposite direction, and put his arm and hand as before, and he blew his
nose with a sound like a trombone.
"I then said, 'Mr. Chairman, if all that the gentleman meant to ask was,
Do you find any countenance under any circumstances, for the relation of
master and slave in the divine legation of Moses,--and this was all
which, as a fair man, not carried away by a gust of passion, he should
have asked me,--my answer was correct and proper. If he wished to know
my views of what is right and proper as to the marriage relation of our
slaves, he should have put the question in a different shape. But first,
Sir,' said I, 'if he dislikes the twenty-first chapter of Exodus, his
controversy must be with his God, not with me. Sinai was, let me remind
him, more of a place than Bunker Hill. I am not a friend of "oppression"
any more than the gentleman; but I trust that had I lived in Israel, I
should never have thought of being more humane than my Maker.'
"I then proceeded to say that (as before remarked to you) we are not
warranted by the Bible to make men slaves when we please; nor, if
slavery exists, are we commanded to adopt the rules and regulations of
Hebrew slavery.
"But we do learn from the Bible that property in man is not in itself
sinful,--not even to say of a man, 'He is my money.'
"Were it intrinsically wrong, God would not have legislated about it in
such ways; for granting, if you please, the untenable distinction about
his 'not appointing' slavery, but 'finding it in existence' and
legislating for it, what necessity could there have been for making such
a law as that relating to the boring of the ear, rather than giving the
slave his wife and children and suffering them all to go free?
"No, Mr. North," said I, continuing our conversation, "I cannot oppose
the relation of master and slave as in itself sinful; for then I become
more righteous than God. But I must inquire whether it is right, in each
given case, to reduce men to bondage: shall that be, for example, the
mode in which prisoners of war shall be disposed of? or a subjugated
people? or criminals? or, in certain cases, debtors? In doing so, there
is no intrinsic sin; the act itself, under the circumstances, may be
exceedingly sinful; but the relation of ownership is not necessarily a
sin. This, I hold, is all that can be deduced from the Bible in favor of
slavery: The relation is not in itself sinful."
"But," said Mr. North, "we sinned in stealing these people from Africa;
all sin should be immediately forsaken; therefore, set the slaves free
at once."
I replied, "Let us apply that principle. You and I, and a large company
of passengers, are in a British ship, approaching our coast. We find
out, all at once, that the crew and half of the passengers stole the
ship. We gain the ascendency; we can do as we please. Now, as all sin
must be repented of at once, it is the duty of the passengers and crew
to put the ship about, and deliver it to the owners in Glasgow! Perhaps
we should not think it best to put in force the '_ruat coelum_'
doctrine, especially if we had had some '_ruat coelum_' storms, and it
was late in the season. But then we should actually be enjoying the
stolen property--the ship and its comforts--for several days, with the
belief that benevolence and justice to all concerned required us to
reach the end of the voyage before we took measures to perform that
justice, which, before, would have been practical folly.
"Now, please, do not require this illustration to go on all fours. All
that I mean is this: A right thing may be wrong, if done unseasonably,
or in disregard of circumstances which have supervened.
"But to go a little further, and beyond mere expediency: Can you see no
difference between buying slaves, and making men slaves? While it would
be wicked for you to reduce people to slavery, is that the same as
becoming owners to those who are already in slavery? In one case, you
could not apply the golden rule; in the other, the golden rule would
absolutely compel you, in many instances, to buy slaves. Go to almost
any place where slaves are sold, and they will come to you, if they like
your looks, and, by all the arts of persuasion, entreat you to become
their master. Having succeeded, step behind the scenes, if you can, and
hear them exulting that they 'fetched more' than this or that man. Is
there no difference between this and reducing free people to slavery?"
"Say yes, husband," said Mrs. North, "or I must say it for you."
"So that, let me add," said I, "in opposing slavery, I am necessarily
confined to the evils and abuses committed in the relationship of
master. But, even in doing this, why should I be meddlesome? We have a
most offensive air and manner in our behavior towards Southerners, in
connection with their duties as masters. It is perfectly disgusting. I
may oppose slavery, on the grounds of political economy or for national
reasons. But if I mix up with it wrathful opposition to the sin, so
called, or the unrighteousness of holding property in man, it has no
countenance in the Bible. If I speak of it publicly, as a system fraught
with evil, I must discriminate; or they whom I would influence, knowing
that I am mistaken, will regard me as an infatuated enemy, who will
effect more injury than I can repair. As to Mr. Jefferson's testimony,
there are as good and conscientious men at the South in our day as
Thomas Jefferson. Mr. Calhoun was as worthy a witness in all respects."
"Now tell us," said Mrs. North, "your sober convictions, apart from this
Northern controversy, about that twenty-first chapter of Exodus, where
God directs that slaves, in certain cases, shall be slaves forever; and,
moreover, in certain cases, that slave husbands may have their wives and
children withheld from them, and the husbands leave them forever. How do
you reconcile this with the justice and goodness of God?"
I said to her, "To make the case fully appear, before we converse upon
it, hear this passage, Leviticus XXV. 44-46:--'Both thy bondmen, and thy
bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round
about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.' So, in the next
verses, 'The children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of
them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they
begat in your land; and they shall be your possession: And ye shall take
them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for
a possession; they shall be your bondmen forever; but over your
brethren, the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another
with rigor.'
"Here, and in all the divine legislation on this subject, a distinction
is made between Hebrews who became slaves, and slaves who were
foreigners, or of foreign extraction, though resident in Israel. Slaves
of Hebrew extraction might go free after six years, and upon the death
of the owner; and in every jubilee year they must all return to freedom,
and be free from every disability by reason of bondage, except where the
ear was bored.
"Not so with the slaves of foreign extraction; nor even with the Hebrew
whose ear was bored, provided his wife was given him in slavery, and he
had elected to live with her rather than be free. Not even upon the
death of the owner could such slaves be manumitted, as was the case
ordinarily with regard to Hebrew slaves; but property in these Gentile
slaves, and in Hebrew slaves reduced to the same condition, God ordained
should be an 'inheritance,' passing down forever from father to child.
"No jubilee trumpet was to cheer their hearts. Think what the jubilee
morning must have been to those slaves in hopeless bondage, if bondage
were necessarily such as many fancy. Our abolitionists represent the
bells and guns of our Fourth of July to be a hideous mockery in the ears
of the slaves; and multitudes of our good people ludicrously fancy them
as most miserable on that day, by the contrast of their enslaved
condition with our boasted Independence. Let us borrow this fancy, and
apply it to the Hebrew slave.
"The jubilee trumpets, and all the joyous scenes of the fiftieth year in
Israel, caused multitudes of slaves in Israel, we will suppose, to
reflect, This Jehovah, God of Israel, has doomed us to hopeless bondage.
We are guilty of having been born so many degrees south or north, east
or west, of these Hebrews. We, by God's providence, are Gentiles. Our
chiefs sold us, and these Hebrews bought us. We were betrayed; we were
driven out of our homes; unjust wars were made upon us, to make us
captives, that we might be sold. And 'the Lord's people' bought us, by
his special edict (Lev. xxv. 44). Our brother-servants, unfortunate
Hebrews, get released in the jubilee year, except these poor creatures
who were so unfortunate as to be married in slavery, and, not being
willing to be divorced, had their ears fastened, with the ignominious
'awl,' to their master's door-post. God could have ordained that they,
with their wives and children, and we, with ours, should have release in
the fiftieth year. But, no! our bondage is forever, and so is theirs;
and our children and their children are to be servants forever. But we
hold it to be a self-evident truth that all men are born free and equal,
and have an inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness. Slavery is the sum of all villanies. Our master's will is our
law; we are subject to his passions; we are chattels; we 'are his
money.' This is the language of your God,--the God whom you worship; and
not only so, but you circumcise us to worship Him!
"Some benevolent Levite, jealous for the character of his Maker,
replies, 'But God did not institute slavery; He found it in existence,
and he only legislates about it, and regulates it.'
"A thousand groans are the prelude to the withering answer which the
slaves make to this apology for oppression.
"'He broke your bonds, it seems,' they cry, 'in Egypt, and in the Red
Sea. Did He "find slavery" on the opposite shore of the Red Sea? Why did
he not merely "legislate for it, and regulate it?" No, He enacted it.
How dare you apologize for your God with such a miserable pretext? He
made the ordinance separating a husband from wife and children, unless
the husband would submit to the indignity of having his ear bored and to
the doom of perpetual bondage, in case his wife was a Gentile. If he
goes away, he must leave his wife and children. Great indulgence have
you in multiplying wives; that is winked at "for the hardness of your
hearts;" but the poor Hebrew must abandon his wife and family if he
chooses freedom! They are his master's "property," "his money," and God
gave the servant these children, knowing that they would be the
"property" of another, and that he would have no unencumbered right to
them; and down through all ages they and their descendants must be
servants. And now you tell us, "God did not institute" this! He only
"found it!" He "regulated it!" Come, blow up your trumpet, reverend
Levite! Go, worship the God of whom you feel half ashamed. Do not ask us
to worship and love a Being who is bound by the laws of fate so that he
cannot do otherwise, if he would, than make one of us a slave forever,
while the man who grinds with me at the same mill, goes with his wife
and children, forever free!'"
"Those remarks have the true Boston tone," said Mrs. North.
"Yes," said I, "there were brave men before Agamemnon, Horace tells us.
There is slavery forever," said I, "or the separation of husband and
wife, father and children, unless the man would be a slave forever. What
'partings' there must have been! What struggles in those who concluded
to take the fatal 'awl' through their ears, before they could make up
their minds to be slaves forever. See the hardship of the case. If the
man 'loves his wife and children,' he may be a slave; that love would
make him spend and be spent for them in freedom, in his humble home,
amid the sweets of liberty; but no; if he loves his wife he must take
the bitter draught of slavery with his love. But if he hates her and his
children, he may be free! What a bounty on conjugal fickleness, on
unnatural treatment of offspring!"
"Was there no Canada?" said Mrs. North, biting off her thread. "O, I
recollect; Hagar went there. I wonder if the angel who remanded her was
removed from office, on his return to heaven."
"Come, wife," said Mr. North, "there is such a thing as being converted
too much. Please, Sir, will you answer the question as to the
consistency of all this with the divine wisdom and goodness?"
"That," said I, "is not the question which you wish to ask."
"I do not understand you," said he; "please to explain."
"You wish to ask," said I, "how I reconcile these things with your
notions of wisdom and benevolence."
"Why," said he, "I have my ideas of divine wisdom and goodness, and I
wish to make these things square with them."
"And that," said I, "is just the rock on which you all split. Your ideas
of the divine goodness must be based on a complete view of the revealed
character and conduct of God. But you and your friends say, 'this and
that ought to be, or ought not to be,' and you try your Maker by that
measure. Now I say, 'he that reproveth God, let him answer it.' Are not
the things which I have quoted, parts of divine revelation, as much as
the flood and the passover?"
"I see that they are," said Mr. North.
"Do you believe that God is a spirit infinite, eternal, unchangeable, in
his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth?"
"I do," said he.
"You believe this notwithstanding the apostasy, the destruction of Sodom
and Gomorrah, the flood, and the extirpation of the Canaanites."
"I do," said he, "so long as I receive the Bible as the Word of God."
"I think," said Mrs. North, "that the loss of the 'Central America' with
her four hundred passengers, tries my faith in God full as much as a
heathen's having his ear bored to spend his days with his wife and
children among God's covenant people."
"Then you do not worship the Goddess of Liberty, Mrs. North," said
I.--"'Art thou called being a servant? Care not for it. But if thou
mayest be made free, use it rather.'"
"That," said she, "seems to express my idea about bondage and freedom.
Of course it is not, theoretically, a blessing to be a slave. It may be,
practically, to some. But what strikes me oftentimes is the utter
inability of an abolitionist to say to a slave, under any circumstances,
'Care not for it.' His doctrine, rather, is, 'Art thou called being a
servant? If thou hast a Sharpe's rifle, or a John Brown's pike, use it
rather.' Or, 'Art thou called being a servant? If thou canst run for
Canada, use it rather.' Paul had not an abolitionist mind, that is very
clear. But," she continued, "do relieve my husband and enlighten me
also, by giving us your views about the Old Testament slavery, which I
presume you can do without seeming to arraign the character of God."
I replied, "This is a sinful race, and we are treated as such. Slavery
is one of God's chastisements. Instead of destroying every wicked nation
by war, pestilence, or famine, he grants some of them a reprieve, and
commutes their punishment from death to bondage. Those whom he allowed
to be slaves to his people Israel were highly favored; they enjoyed a
blessing which came to them disguised by the sable cloud of servitude;
but in their endless happiness many of them will bless God for the
bondage which joined them to the nation of Israel.
"I look upon our slaves as being here by a special design of
Providence, for some great purpose, to be disclosed at the right time.
Unless I take this view of it, I am embarrassed and greatly troubled;
'perplexed, but not in despair.' The great design of Providence in no
wise abates the sin of those who brought the slaves here, nor does it
warrant us in getting more of them. While this is true, I cannot resist
the thought that God has a controversy with this black race which is not
yet finished. I believe that God withholds from them a spirit and temper
suited for freedom till he shall have finished his marvellous designs.
His destiny with the Jew, as a nation, to the present day, is another
illustration of his mysterious providence with regard to a people.
"As to the enactment which made the Hebrew servant a slave for life,
thus dooming even one of the covenant people to perpetual bondage, if he
had married in slavery, I see in it several things most clearly.
"You will have noticed that in every case in which a Hebrew was made a
servant, poverty was the ground of it. 'If thy brother be waxen poor,'
he could sell himself, either to a Hebrew or to a resident alien. He and
his children could also be taken for debt. This seems to us oppressive.
"Let a family among us be reduced, from any cause, to a condition in
which they cannot maintain themselves, and what follows? The children
find employment, some of them in families, in various kinds of domestic
service. Indented apprenticeships in this commonwealth are within the
memory of all who are forty or fifty years of age. We remember the very
frequent advertisements: 'One cent reward. Ran away from the subscriber,
an indented apprentice,' etc. The descriptions of such fugitives, all
for the sake of absolving the master from liability for the absconding
boy, and sometimes the hunt that was made, with dogs to scent his
tracks, when his return was desired, are far within the memory of the
oldest inhabitant.
"In Israel, this descent of a family from a prosperous to a decayed
state, and the consequent servitude, were used by the Most High to
cultivate some of the best feelings of our nature. It touched the finest
sensibilities of the soul. Let me read from the fifteenth of
Deuteronomy:--
"'And if thy brother, an Hebrew man or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto
thee, and serve thee six years, then in the seventh year thou shalt
let him go free from thee.
"'And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let
him go away empty.
"'Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy
floor, and out of thy wine-press: of that wherewith the Lord thy God
hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him. And thou shalt remember
that thou wast a bondman in the land of Egypt, and the Lord thy God
redeemed thee: therefore I command thee this thing to-day.
"'And if it shall be, if he say unto thee, I will not go away from
thee; because he loveth thee and thine house, because he is well
with thee,
"'Then thou shalt take an awl and thrust it through his ear unto the
door, and he shall be thy servant forever. And also with thy
maid-servant thou shalt do likewise.
"'It shall not seem hard unto thee when thou sendest him away free
from thee: for he hath been worth a doubled hired servant to thee,
in serving thee six years; and the Lord thy God shall bless thee in
all that thou doest.'
"Is not this very beautiful and touching, Mrs. North?"
She said nothing, but hid her face in her little babe's neck,
pretending to kiss it. But Mr. North wiped his eyes. "There is not much
barbarism in that," said he.
"The golden rule," said I; "for this is the law and the prophets.
"The people to whom these touching precepts were given by the Most High,
and who were susceptible to these finest appeals, are, as we have said,
sometimes represented as a semi-barbarous people, so gross that God was
obliged to let them hold slaves! Now, could anything be more civilizing,
refining, elevating, than such relationships as this limited servitude
of poor Hebrews created? What scenes there must have been oftentimes,
when the six years were out, and the servant was about to depart, laden
with gifts! And what a scene when, with strong attachment to the family,
the servant declined to be free, and went to the door-post to have his
ear pierced with the awl, to be a servant, and not only so, but to be an
inheritance forever!
"Is this 'the sum of all villanies,' Mr. North?" said I. "Yet it is
'slavery.' 'Auction-blocks,' 'whippings,' 'roastings,' 'separations of
families,' are not 'slavery.' They are its abuses; slavery can exist
when they cease. I pray you, is such slavery as the God of the Hebrews
appointed, in such cases as these, 'forever,' an unmitigated curse?
"Now," said I, "go through our Southern country, and you will find in
every city, town, and village just such relationships between the whites
and the blacks as must have existed where these Hebrew laws had effect.
Think of the little slave-babe, and the Southern lady's letter, which
have given occasion to all our conversation. The Gospel, as it subdues
and softens the human heart, will make the relationship of involuntary
servitude everywhere to be after this pattern. Instead of exciting
hatred and jealousy, and provoking war between the whites and blacks, I
am for bringing all the influences of the Gospel to bear upon the hearts
of the white population, to convert them into such masters as God
enjoined the Hebrews to be, and such as the Apostle to the Gentiles
enjoined upon Gentile slave-holders as their models. And I am filled
with sorrow and astonishment as I see some of the very best and most
beloved men among us at the North withholding missionaries and tracts
from the Southern country, and--as Gustavus's aunt said some of these
do--calling it 'standing up for Jesus!'
"Now," said I, "if such were the injunctions of the Most High as to the
manner in which the Hebrews should treat their Hebrew slaves, it is easy
to see that such a habit with regard to them would serve greatly to
mitigate the sorrows of bondage on the part of Gentile slaves. And thus
the curse of slavery, like sin, and even death, is made, under the
influences of religion, a means of improvement, a source of blessing.
Let but the sun shine on a pile of cloud, and what folds of beauty and
deep banks of snowy whiteness does it set forth, and, at the close of
day, all the exquisite tints which make the artist despair are flung
profusely upon that mass of vapor which but for the sun were a heap of
sable cloud.
"The minister," said I, "who, Hattie tells us, classed 'Abraham the
slave-holder' with the 'murderer,' and the 'liar and swearer,' knew not
what he did. People who laugh and titter at the 'patriarchal
institution,' need to peruse the laws of Moses again, with a spirit akin
to their beautiful tone; and those who say that to hold a fellow-man as
property is 'sin,' are not 'wiser than Daniel,' but they make themselves
wiser than God.
"All who sustain the relationship of owner to a human being," said I,
"do well to read these injunctions of the Most High, as very many of
them do, applying them to themselves. And it is also profitable to read
how that a violation of these very slave-laws was, in after years, one
great cause of the divine wrath upon the Hebrews. You will find, in the
thirty-fourth of Jeremiah, that, not content with having Gentile slaves,
the Hebrews violated the law requiring them to release each his Hebrew
slaves once in seven years.
"'I made a covenant with your fathers,' God says, 'in the day that I
brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, saying, At the end of seven
years let ye go every man his brother an Hebrew which hath been sold
unto thee. But ye turned and polluted my name, and caused every man his
servant to return, and brought them unto subjection. Ye have not
hearkened unto me in proclaiming a liberty every one to his
brother;--behold, I proclaim a liberty for you, saith the Lord, to the
sword, to the pestilence, and to the famine.'
"Thus it is evident that the relation of master and servant was
originally ordained and instituted by God as a benevolent arrangement to
all concerned,--not 'winked at,' or 'suffered,' like polygamy, but
ordained,--that it was full of blessings to all who fulfilled the duties
of the relation in the true spirit of the institution; and, moreover, it
is true that there are few curses which will be more intolerable than
they will suffer who make use of their fellow-men, in the image of God,
for the purposes of selfishness and sin; while those who feel their
accountableness in this relation, and discharge it in the spirit of the
Bible, will find their hearts refined and ennobled, and the relationship
will be, to all concerned, a source of blessings whose influences will
bring peace to their souls when the grave of the slave and that of his
owner are looking up into the same heavens from the common earth."