"Would any one, in reading this paragraph from an evening paper,

conjecture that these '_eight_ rubbers and riders,' that together with

a horse, are merely mentioned as a 'loss' to their owner, were human

beings--immortal as the writer who thus brutalizes them, and perhaps

cherishing life as much? In this view, perhaps, the 'eight' lost as

much as Colonel Oliver."

The following is from the "Charleston (S.C.) Patriot," Oct. 18.

"_Loss of Property_!--Since I have been here, (Rice Hope, N. Santee,)

I have seen much misery, and much of human suffering. The loss of

PROPERTY has been immense, not only on South Santee, but also on this

river. Mr. Shoolbred has lost, (according to the statement of the

physician,) forty-six negroes--the majority lost being the _primest

hands_ he had--bricklayers, carpenters, blacksmiths and Coopers. Mr.

Wm. Mazyck has lost 35 negroes. Col. Thomas Pinkney, in the

neighborhood of 40, and many other planters, 10 to 20 on each

plantation. Mrs. Elias Harry, adjoining the plantation of Mr. Lucas,

has lost up to date, 32 negroes--the _best part of her primest_

negroes on her plantation."

From the "Natchez (Miss.) Daily Free Trader," Feb. 12, 1838.

"_Found_.--A NEGRO'S HEAD WAS PICKED UP ON THE RAIL-ROAD YESTERDAY,

WHICH THE OWNER CAN HAVE BY CALLING AT THIS OFFICE AND PAYING FOR THE

ADVERTISEMENT."

The way in which slaveholding 'public opinion' protects a poor female

lunatic is illustrated in the following advertisement in the

"Fayetteville (N.C.) Observer," June 27, 1838:

"Taken and committed to jail, a negro girl named Nancy, who is

supposed to belong to Spencer P. Wright, of the State of Georgia. She

is about 30 years of age, and is a LUNATIC. The owner is requested to

come forward, prove property, pay charges, and take her away, or SHE

WILL BE SOLD TO PAY HER JAIL FEES.

FRED'K HOME, Jailor."

A late PROSPECTUS Of the South Carolina Medical College, located in

Charleston, contains the following passage:--

"Some advantages of a _peculiar_ character are connected with this

Institution, which it may be proper to point out. No place in the

United States offers as great opportunities for the acquisition of

anatomical knowledge, SUBJECTS BEING OBTAINED FROM AMONG THE COLORED

POPULATION IN SUFFICIENT NUMBER FOR EVERY PURPOSE, AND PROPER

DISSECTIONS CARRIED ON WITHOUT OFFENDING ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE

COMMUNITY!!"

_Without offending any individuals in the community_! More than half

the population of Charleston, we believe, is 'colored;' _their_ graves

may be ravaged, their dead may be dug up, dragged into the dissecting

room, exposed to the gaze, heartless gibes, and experimenting knives,

of a crowd of inexperienced operators, who are given to understand in

the prospectus, that, if they do not acquire manual dexterity in

dissection, it will be wholly their own fault, in neglecting to

improve the unrivalled advantages afforded by the institution--since

each can have as many human bodies as he pleases to experiment

upon--and as to the fathers, mothers, husbands, wives, brothers, and

sisters, of those whom they cut to pieces from day to day, why, they

are not 'individuals in the community,' but 'property,' and however

_their_ feelings may be tortured, the 'public opinion' of slaveholders

is entirely too 'chivalrous' to degrade itself by caring for them!

The following which has been for some time a standing advertisement of

the South Carolina Medical College, in the Charleston papers, is

another index of the same 'public opinion' toward slaves. We give an

extract:--

"_Surgery of the Medical College of South Carolina, Queen st_.--The

Faculty inform their professional brethren, and the public that they

have established a _Surgery_, at the Old College, Queen street, FOR

THE TREATMENT OF NEGROES, which will continue in operation, during the

session of the College, say from first November, to the fifteenth of

March ensuing.

"The _object_ of the Faculty, in opening this Surgery, is to collect

as _many interesting cases_, as possible, for the _benefit_ and

_instruction_ of their pupils--at the same time, they indulge the

hope, that it may not only prove an _accommodation_, but also a matter

of economy to the public. They would respectfully call the attention

of planters, living in the vicinity of the city, to this subject;

particularly such as may have servants laboring under Surgical

diseases. Such _persons of color_ as may not be able to pay for

Medical advice, will be attended to gratis, at stated hours, as often

as may be necessary.

"The Faculty take this opportunity of soliciting the co-operation of

such of their professional brethren, as are favorable to their

objects."

"The first thing that strikes the reader of the advertisement is, that

this _Surgery_ is established exclusively 'for the treatment of

_negroes_; and, if he knows little of the hearts of slaveholders

towards their slaves, he charitably supposes, that they 'feel the dint

of pity,' for the poor sufferers and have founded this institution as

a special charity for their relief. But the delusion vanishes as he

reads on; the professors take special care that no such derogatory

inference shall be drawn from their advertisement. They give us the

three reasons which have induced them to open this 'Surgery for the

treatment of negroes.' The first and main one is, 'to collect as many

_interesting cases_ as possible for the benefit and instruction of

their _pupils_--another is, 'the hope that it may prove an

_accommodation_,'--and the third, that it may be 'a matter of economy

to the _public_' Another reason, doubtless, and controlling one,

though the professors are silent about it, is that a large collection

of 'interesting surgical cases,' always on hand, would prove a

powerful attraction to students, and greatly increase the popularity

of the institution. In brief, then, the motives of its founders, the

professors, were these, the accommodation of their _students_--the

accommodation of the _public_ (which means, _the whites_)--and the

accommodation of slaveholders who have on their hands disabled slaves,

that would make 'interesting cases,' for surgical operation in the

presence of the pupils--to these reasons we may add the accommodation

of the Medical Institution and the accommodation of _themselves_! Not

a syllable about the _accommodation_ of the hopeless sufferers,

writhing with the agony of those gun shot wounds, fractured sculls,

broken limbs and ulcerated backs which constitute the 'interesting

cases' for the professors to 'show off' before their pupils, and, as

practice makes perfect, for the students themselves to try their hands

at by way of experiment.

Why, we ask, was this surgery established 'for the treatment of

_negroes'_ alone? Why were these 'interesting cases' selected from

that class exclusively? No man who knows the feeling of slave holders

towards slaves will be at a loss for the reason. 'Public opinion'

would tolerate surgical experiments, operations, processes, performed

upon them, which it would execrate if performed upon their master or

other whites. As the great object in collecting the disabled negroes

is to have 'interesting cases' for the students, the professors who

perform the operations will of course endeavor to make them as

'interesting' as possible. The _instruction of the student_ is the

immediate object, and if the professors can accomplish it best by

_protracting_ the operation, pausing to explain the different

processes, &c. the subject is only a negro, and what is his protracted

agony, that it should restrain the professor from making the case as

'interesting' as possible to the students by so using his knife as

will give them the best knowledge of the parts, and the process,

however it may protract or augment the pain of the subject. The _end_

to be accomplished is the _instruction_ of the student, operations

upon the negroes are the _means_ to the end; _that_ tells the whole

story--and he who knows the hearts of slaveholders and has common

sense, however short the allowance, can find the way to his

conclusions without a lantern.

By an advertisement of the same Medical Institution, dated November

12, 1838, and published in the Charleston papers, it appears that an

'infirmary has been opened in connection with the college.' The

professors manifest a great desire that the masters of servants should

send in their disabled slaves, and as an inducement to the furnishing

of such _interesting cases_ say, all medical and surgical aid will be

offered _without making them liable to any professional charges_.

Disinterested bounty, pity, sympathy, philanthropy. However difficult

or numerous the surgical cases of slaves thus put into their hands by

the masters, they charge not a cent for their _professional services_.

Their yearnings over human distress are so intense, that they beg the

privilege of performing all operations, and furnishing all the medical

attention needed, _gratis_, feeling that the relief of misery is its

own reward!!! But we have put down our exclamation points too

soon--upon reading the whole of the advertisement we find the

professors conclude it with the following paragraph:--

"The SOLE OBJECT Of the faculty in the establishment of such an

institution being to promote the interest of Medical Education within

their native State and City."

In the "Charleston (South Carolina) Mercury" of October 12, 1838, we

find an advertisement of half a column, by a Dr. T. Stillman, setting

forth the merits of another 'Medical Infirmary,' under his own special

supervision, at No. 110 Church street, Charleston. The doctor, after

inveighing loudly against 'men totally ignorant of medical science,'

who flood the country with quack nostrums backed up by 'fabricated

proofs of miraculous cures,' proceeds to enumerate the diseases to

which his 'Infirmary' is open, and to which his practice will be

mainly confined. Appreciating the importance of 'interesting cases,'

as a stock in trade, on which to commence his experiments, he copies

the example of the medical professors, and advertises for them. But,

either from a keener sense of justice, or more generosity, or greater

confidence in his skill, or for some other reason, he proposes to _buy

up_ an assortment of _damaged_ negroes, given over, as incurable, by

others, and to make such his 'interesting cases,' instead of

experimenting on those who are the 'property' of others.

Dr. Stillman closes his advertisement with the following notice:--

"To PLANTERS AND OTHERS.--Wanted _fifty negroes_. Any person having

sick negroes, considered incurable by their respective physicians, and

wishing to dispose of them, Dr. S. will pay cash for negroes affected

with scrofula or king's evil, confirmed hypocondriasm, apoplexy,

diseases of the liver, kidneys, spleen, stomach and intestines,

bladder and its appendages, diarrhea, dysentery, &c. The highest cash

price will be paid on application as above."

The absolute barbarism of a 'public opinion' which not only tolerates,

but _produces_ such advertisements as this, was outdone by nothing in

the dark ages. If the reader has a heart of flesh, he can feel it

without help, and if he has not, comment will not create it. The total

indifference of slaveholders to such a cold blooded proposition, their

utter unconsciousness of the paralysis of heart, and death of

sympathy, and every feeling of common humanity for the slave, which it

reveals, is enough, of itself to show that the tendency of the spirit

of slaveholding is, to kill in the soul whatever it touches. It has no

eyes to see, nor ears to hear, nor mind to understand, nor heart to

feel for its victims as _human beings_. To show that the above

indication of the savage state is not an index of individual feeling,

but of 'public opinion,' it is sufficient to say, that it appears to

be a standing advertisement in the Charleston Mercury, the leading

political paper of South Carolina, the organ of the Honorables John C.

Calhoun, Robert Barnwell Rhett, Hugh S. Legare, and others regarded as

the elite of her statesmen and literati. Besides, candidates for

popular favor, like the doctor who advertises for the fifty

'incurables,' take special care to conciliate, rather than outrage,

'public opinion.' Is the doctor so ignorant of 'public opinion' in his

own city, that he has unwittingly committed violence upon it in his

advertisement? We trow not. The same 'public opinion' which gave birth

to the advertisement of doctor Stillman, and to those of the

professors in both the medical institutions, founded the Charleston

'Work House'--a soft name for a Moloch temple dedicated to torture,

and reeking with blood, in the midst of the city; to which masters and

mistresses send their slaves of both sexes to be stripped, tied up,

and cut with the lash till the blood and mangled flesh flow to their

feet, or to be beaten and bruised with the terrible paddle, or forced

to climb the tread-mill till nature sinks, or to experience other

nameless torments.

The "Vicksburg (Miss.) Register," Dec. 27, 1838, contains the

following item of information: "ARDOR IN BETTING.--Two gentlemen, at a

tavern, having summoned the waiter, the poor fellow had scarcely

entered, when he fell down in a fit of apoplexy. 'He's dead!'

exclaimed one. 'He'll come to!' replied the other. 'Dead, for five

hundred!' 'Done!' retorted the second. The noise of the fall, and the

confusion which followed, brought up the landlord, who called out to

fetch a doctor. 'No! no! we must have no interference--there's a bet

depending!' 'But, sir, I shall lose a valuable servant!' 'Never mind!

you can put him down in the bill!'"

About the time the Vicksburg paper containing the above came to hand,

we received a letter from N.P. ROGERS, Esq. of Concord, N.H. the

editor of the 'Herald of Freedom,' from which the following is an

extract:

"Some thirty years ago, I think it was, Col. Thatcher, of Maine, a

lawyer, was in Virginia, on business, and was there invited to dine at

a public house, with a company of the gentry of the south. _The place_

I forget--the fact was told me by George Kimball, Esq. now of Alton,

Illinois who had the story from Col. Thatcher himself. Among the

servants waiting was a young negro man, whose beautiful person,

obliging and assiduous temper, and his activity and grace in serving,

made him a favorite with the company. The dinner lasted into the

evening, and the wine passed freely about the table. At length, one of

the gentlemen, who was pretty highly excited with wine, became

unfortunately incensed, either at some trip of the young slave, in

waiting, or at some other cause happening when the slave was within

his reach. He seized the long-necked wine bottle, and struck the young

man suddenly in the temple, and felled him dead upon the floor. The

fall arrested, for a moment, the festivities of the table. 'Devilish

unlucky,' exclaimed one. 'The gentleman is very unfortunate,' cried

another. 'Really a loss,' said a third, &c, &c. The body was dragged

from the dining hall, and the feast went on; and at the close, one of

the gentlemen, and the very one, I believe, whose hand had done the

homicide, shouted, in bacchanalian bravery, and _southern generosity_,

amid the broken glasses and fragments of chairs, 'LANDLORD! PUT THE

NIGGER INTO THE BILL!' This was that murdered young man's _requiem and

funeral service_."

Mr. GEORGE A. AVERY, a merchant in Rochester, New York, and an elder

in the Fourth Presbyterian Church in that city, who resided four years

in Virginia, gives the following testimony:

"I knew a young man who had been out hunting, and returning with some

of his friends, seeing a negro man in the road, at a little distance,

deliberately drew up his rifle, and shot him dead. This was done

without the slightest provocation, or a word passing. This young man

passed through the _form_ of a trial, and, although it was not even

_pretended_ by his counsel that he was not guilty of the act,

deliberately and wantonly perpetrated, _he was acquitted_. It was

urged by his counsel, that he was a _young_ man, (about 20 years of

age,) had no _malicious_ intention, his mother was a widow, &c, &c"

Mr. BENJAMIN CLENDENON, of Colerain, Lancaster county, Pennsylvania, a

member of the Society of Friends, gives the following testimony:

"Three years ago the coming month, I took a journey of about

seventy-five miles from home, through the eastern shore of Maryland,

and a small part of Delaware. Calling one day, near noon, at

Georgetown Cross-Roads, I found myself surrounded in the tavern by

slaveholders. Among other subjects of conversation, their human cattle

came in for a share. One of the company, a middle-aged man, then

living with a second wife, acknowledged, that after the death of his

first wife, he lived in a state of concubinage with a female slave;

but when the time drew near for the taking of a second wife, he found

it expedient to remove the slave from the premises. The same person

gave an account of a female slave he formerly held, who had a

propensity for some one pursuit, I think the attendance of religious

meetings. On a certain occasion, she presented her petition to him,

asking for this indulgence; he refused--she importuned--and he, with

sovereign indignation, seized a chair, and with a blow upon the head,

knocked her senseless upon the floor. The same person, for some act of

disobedience, on the part, I think, of the same slave, when employed

in stacking straw, felled her to the earth with the handle of a pitch

fork. All these transactions were related with the _utmost composure_,

in a bar-room within thirty miles of the Pennsylvania line."

The two following advertisements are illustrations of the regard paid

to the marriage relations by slaveholding judges, governors, senators

in Congress, and mayors of cities.

From the "Montgomery, (Ala.) Advertiser," Sept. 29, 1837.

"$20 REWARD.--Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro man named Moses. He

is of common size, about 28 years old. He formerly belonged to Judge

Benson, of Montgomery, and it is said, has a wife in that county. John

Gayle"

The John Gayle who signs this advertisement, is an Ex-Governor of

Alabama.

From the "Charleston Courier," Nov. 28.

"Ranaway from the subscriber, about twelve months since, his negro man

Paulladore. His complexion is dark--about 50 years old. I understand

Gen. R.Y. Hayne has purchased his wife and children from H.L.

Pinckney, Esq. and has them now on his plantation, at Goose Creek,

where, no doubt, the fellow is frequently lurking. Thomas Davis."

It is hardly necessary to say, that the GENERAL R.Y. HAYNE, and H.L.

PINCKNEY, Esq. named in the advertisement, are Ex-Governor Hayne,

formerly U.S. Senator from South Carolina, and Hon. Henry L.

Pinckney, late member of Congress from Charleston District, and now

Intendant (mayor) of that city.

It is no difficult matter to get at the 'public opinion' of a

community, when _ladies_ 'of property and standing' publish, under

their own names, such advertisements as the following.

Mrs. ELIZABETH L. CARTER, of Groveton, Prince William county,

Virginia, thus advertises her negro man Moses:

"Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro man named Moses, aged about 40

years, about six feet high, well made, and possessing a good address,

and HAS LOST A PART ON ONE OF HIS EARS."

Mrs. B. NEWMAN, of the same place, and in the same paper, advertises--

"Penny, the wife of Moses, aged about 30 years, brown complexion, tall

and likely, _no particular marks of person recollected._"

Both of the above advertisements appear in the National Intelligencer,

(Washington city,) June 10, 1837.

In the Mobile Mercantile Advertiser, of Feb. 13, 1838, is an

advertisement Signed SARAH WALSH, of which the following is an

extract:

"Twenty-five dollars reward will be paid to any one who may apprehend

and deliver to me, or confine in any jail, so that, I can get him, my

man Isaac, who ranaway sometime in September last. He is 26 years of

age, 5 feet 10 inches high, has a _scar on his forehead, caused by a

blow_, and one on his back, MADE BY A SHOT FROM A PISTOL."

In the "New Orleans Bee," Dec. 21, 1838, Mrs. BURVANT, whose residence

is at the corner of Chartres and Toulouse streets, advertises a woman

as follows:

"Ranaway, a negro woman named Rachel--_has lost all her toes except

the large one_."

From the "Huntsville (Ala.) Democrat," June 16, 1838:

"TEN DOLLARS REWARD.--Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro woman named

Sally, about 21 years of age, taking along her two children--one three

years, and the other seven months old. These negroes were PURCHASED BY

ME at the sale of George Mason's negroes, on the first Monday in May,

and left _a few days_ thereafter. Any person delivering them to the

jailor in Huntsville, or to me, at my plantation, five miles above

Triana, on the Tennessee river, shall receive the above reward.

CHARITY COOPER"

From the "Mississippian," May 13, 1838:

"TEN DOLLARS REWARD.--Ranaway from the subscriber, a man named Aaron,

yellow complexion, blue eyes, &c. I have no doubt he is lurking about

Jackson and its vicinity, probably harbored by some of the negroes

sold as the property of _my late husband_, Harry Long, deceased. Some

of them are about Richland, in Madison co. I will give the above

reward when brought to me, about six miles north-west of Jackson, or

put IN JAIL, _so that I can get him_. LUCY LONG."

If the reader, after perusing the preceding facts, testimony, and

arguments, still insists that the 'public opinion' of the slave states

protects the slave from outrages, and alleges, as proof of it, that

_cruel_ masters are frowned upon and shunned by the community

generally, and regarded as monsters, we reply by presenting the

following facts and testimony.

"Col. MEANS, of Manchester, Ohio, says, that when he resided in South

Carolina, _his neighbor_, a physician, became enraged with his slave,

and sentenced him to receive two hundred lashes. After having received

one hundred and forty, he fainted. After inflicting the full number of

lashes, the cords with which he was bound were loosed. When he

revived, he staggered to the house, and sat down in the sun. Being

faint and thirsty, he _begged_ for some water to drink. The master

went to the well, and procured some water but instead of giving him to

drink, he threw the whole bucket-full in his face. Nature could not

stand the shock--he sunk to rise no more. For this crime, the

physician was bound over to Court, and tried, and _acquitted_--and THE

NEXT YEAR HE WAS ELECTED TO THE LEGISLATURE!"

Testimony of Hon. JOHN RANDOLPH, of Virginia

"In one of his Congressional speeches, Mr. R. says: Avarice alone can

drive, as it does drive, this _infernal_ traffic, and the wretched

victims of it, like so many post horses, _whipped to death_ in a mail

coach. Ambition has its cover-sluts in the pride, pomp, and

circumstance of glorious war; but where are the trophies of avarice?

The hand cuff, the manacle, the blood-stained cowhide! WHAT MAN IS

WORSE RECEIVED IN SOCIETY FOR BEING A HARD MASTER? WHO DENIES THE HAND

OF A SISTER OR DAUGHTER TO SUCH MONSTERS?"

Mr. GEORGE A. AVERY, of Rochester, New York, who resided four years in

Virginia, testifies as follows:

"I know a local Methodist minister, a man of talents, and popular as a

preacher, who took his negro girl into his barn, in order to whip

her--and _she was brought out a corpse_! His friends seemed to think

this of _so little importance to his ministerial standing_, that

although I lived near him about three years, I do not recollect to

have heard them apologize for the deed, though I recollect having

heard ONE of his neighbors allege this fact as a reason why he did not

wish to hear him preach."

Notwithstanding the mass of testimony which has been presented

establishing the fact that in the 'public opinion' of the South the

slaves find no protection, some may still claim that the 'public

opinion' exhibited by the preceding facts is not that of the _highest

class of society at the South_, and in proof of this assertion, refer

to the fact, that 'Negro Brokers,' Negro Speculators, Negro

Auctioneers, and Negro Breeders, &c., are by that class universally

despised and avoided, as are all who treat their slaves with cruelty.

To this we reply, that, if all claimed by the objector were true, it

could avail him nothing for 'public opinion' is neither made nor

unmade by 'the first class of society.' That class produces in it, at

most, but slight modifications; those who belong to it have generally

a 'public opinion,' within their own circle which has rarely more,

either of morality or mercy than the public opinion of the mass, and

is, at least, equally heartless and more intolerant. As to the

estimation in which 'speculators,' 'soul drivers,' &c. are held, we

remark, that, they are not despised because they _trade in slaves_ but

because they are _working_ men, all such are despised by slaveholders.

White drovers who go with droves of swine and cattle from the free

states to the slave states, and Yankee pedlars, who traverse the

south, and white day-laborers are, in the main, equally despised, or,

if negro-traders excite more contempt than drovers, pedlars, and

day-laborers, it is because, they are, as a class more ignorant and

vulgar, men from low families and boors in their manners. Ridiculous

to suppose, that a people, who have, _by law_, made men articles of

trade equally with swine, should despise men-drovers and traders, more

than hog-drovers and traders. That they are not despised because it is

their business to trade in _human beings_ and bring them to market, is

plain from the fact that when some 'gentleman of property and

standing' and of a 'good family' embarks in a negro speculation, and

employs a dozen 'soul drivers' to traverse the upper country, and

drive to the south coffles of slaves, expending hundreds of thousands

in his wholesale purchases, he does not lose caste. It is known in

Alabama, that Mr. Erwin, son-in-law of the Hon. Henry Clay, and

brother of J.P. Erwin, formerly postmaster, and late mayor of the

city of Nashville, laid the foundation of a princely fortune in the

slave-trade, carried on from the Northern Slave States to the Planting

South; that the Hon. H. Hitchcock, brother-in-law of Mr. E., and since

one of the judges of the Supreme Court of Alabama, was interested with

him in the traffic; and that a late member of the Kentucky Senate

(Col. Wall) not only carried on the same business, a few years ago,

but accompanied his droves in person down the Mississippi. Not as the

_driver_, for that would be vulgar drudgery, beneath a gentleman, but

as a nabob in state, ordering his understrappers.

It is also well known that President Jackson was a 'soul driver,' and

that even so late as the year before the commencement of the last war,

he bought up a coffle of slaves and drove them down to Louisiana for

sale.

Thomas N. Gadsden, Esq. the principal slave auctioneer in Charleston,

S.C. is of one of the first families in the state, and moves in the

very highest class of society there. He is a descendant of the

distinguished General Gadsden of revolutionary memory, the most

prominent southern member in the Continental Congress of 1765, and

afterwards elected lieutenant governor and then governor of the state.

The Rev. Dr. Gadsden, rector of St. Phillip's Church, Charleston, and

the Rev. Phillip Gadsden, both prominent Episcopal clergymen in South

Carolina, and Colonel James Gadsden of the United States army, after

whom a county in Florida was recently named, are all brothers of this

Thomas N. Gadsden, Esq. the largest slave auctioneer in the state,

under whose hammer, men, women and children go off by thousands; its

stroke probably sunders _daily_, husbands and wives, parents and

children, brothers and sisters, perhaps to see each other's faces no

more. Now who supply the auction table of this Thomas N. Gadsden, Esq.

with its loads of human merchandize? These same detested 'soul

drivers' forsooth! They prowl through the country, buy, catch, and

fetter them, and drive their chained coffles up to his stand, where

Thomas N. Gadsden, Esq. knocks them off to the highest bidder, to

Ex-Governor Butler perhaps, or to Ex-Governor Hayne, or to Hon. Robert

Barnwell Rhett, or to his own reverend brother, Dr. Gadsden. Now this

high born, wholesale _soul-seller_ doubtless despises the retail

'soul-drivers' who give him their custom, and so does the wholesale

grocer, the drizzling tapster who sneaks up to his counter for a keg

of whiskey to dole out under a shanty in two cent glasses; and both

for the same reason.

The plea that the 'public opinion' among the highest classes of

society at the south is mild and considerate towards the slaves, that

_they_ do not overwork, underfeed, neglect when old and sick, scantily

clothe, badly lodge, and half shelter their slaves; that _they_ do not

barbarously flog, load with irons, imprison in the stocks, brand and

maim them; hunt them when runaway with dogs and guns, and sunder by

force and forever the nearest kindred--is shown, by almost every page

of this work, to be an assumption, not only utterly groundless, but

directly opposed to masses of irrefragable evidence. If the reader

will be at the pains to review the testimony recorded on the foregoing

pages he will find that a very large proportion of the atrocities

detailed were committed, not by the most ignorant and lowest classes

of society, but by persons 'of property and standing,' by masters and

mistresses belonging to the 'upper classes,' by persons in the learned

professions, by civil, judicial, and military officers, by the

_literati_, by the fashionable elite and persons of more than ordinary

'respectability' and external morality--large numbers of whom are

professors of religion.

It will be recollected that the testimony of Sarah M. Grimké, and

Angelina G. Weld, was confined exclusively to the details of slavery

as exhibited in the _highest classes of society_, mainly in

Charleston, S.C. See their testimony pp. 22-24 and 52-57. The former

has furnished us with the following testimony in addition to that

already given.

"Nathaniel Heyward of Combahee, S.C., one of the wealthiest planters

in the state, stated, in conversation with some other planters who

were complaining of the idle and lazy habits of their slaves, and the

difficulty of ascertaining whether their sickness was real or

pretended, and the loss they suffered from their frequent absence on

this account from their work, said, 'I never lose a day's work: it is

an _established_ rule on my plantations that the tasks of all the sick

negroes _shall be done by those who are well in addition to their

own_. By this means a vigilant supervision is kept up by the slaves

over each other, and they take care that nothing but real sickness

keeps any one out of the field.' I spent several winters in the

neighborhood of Nathaniel Heyward's plantations, and well remember his

character as a severe task master. _I was present when the above

statement was made_."

The cool barbarity of such a regulation is hardly surpassed by the

worst edicts of the Roman Caligula--especially when we consider that

the plantations of this man were in the neighborhood of the Combahee

river, one of the most unhealthy districts in the low country of South

Carolina; further, that large numbers of his slaves worked in the

_rice marshes_, or 'swamps' as they are called in that state--and that

during six months of the year, so fatal to health is the malaria of

the swamps in that region that the planters and their families

invariably abandon their plantations, regarding it as downright

presumption to spend a single day upon them 'between the frosts' of

the early spring and the last of November.

The reader may infer the high standing of Mr. Heyward in South

Carolina, from the fact that he was selected with four other

freeholders to constitute a Court for the trial of the conspirators in

the insurrection plot at Charleston, in 1822. Another of the

individuals chosen to constitute that court was Colonel Henry Deas,

now president of the Board of Trustees of Charleston College, and a

few years since a member of the Senate of South Carolina. From a late

correspondence in the "Greenvile (S.C.) Mountaineer," between Rev.

William M. Wightman, a professor in Randolph, Macon, College, and a

number of the citizens of Lodi, South Carolina, it appears that the

cruelty of this Colonel Deas to his slaves, is proverbial in South

Carolina, so much that Professor Wightman, in the sermon which

occasioned the correspondence, spoke of the Colonel's inhumanity to

his slaves as a matter of perfect notoriety.

Another South Carolina slaveholder, Hon. Whitmarsh B. Seabrook,

recently, we believe, Lieut. Governor of the state, gives the

following testimony to his own inhumanity, and his certificate of the

'public opinion' among South Carolina slaveholders 'of high degree.'

In an essay on the management of slaves, read before the Agricultural

Society of St. Johns, S.C. and published by the Society, Charleston,

1834, Mr. S. remarks:

"I consider _imprisonment in the stocks at night_, with or without

hard labor in the day, as a powerful auxiliary in the cause of _good_

government. To the correctness of this opinion _many_ can bear

testimony. EXPERIENCE has convinced ME that there is no punishment to

which the slave looks with more _horror_."

The advertisements of the Professors in the Medical Colleges of South

Carolina, published with comments--on pp. 169, 170, are additional

illustrations of the 'public opinion' of the _literati_.

That the 'public opinion' of _the highest class of society_ in South

Carolina, regards slaves a mere _cattle_, is shown by the following

advertisement, which we copy from the "Charleston (S.C.) Mercury" of

May 16:

"NEGROES FOR SALE.--A girl about twenty years of age, (raised in

Virginia,) and her two female children, one four and the other two

year old--is remarkably strong and healthy--never having had a day's

sickness, with the exception of the small pox, in her life. The

children are fine and healthy. She is VERY PROLIFIC IN HER GENERATING

QUALITIES, _and affords a rare opportunity to any person who wishes to

raise a family of strong and healthy servants for their own use._

"Any person wishing to purchase will please leave their address at the

Mercury office."

The Charleston Mercury, in which this advertisement appears, _is the

leading political paper in South Carolina_, and is well known to be

the political organ of Messrs. Calhoun, Rhett, Pickens, and others of

the most prominent politicians in the state. Its editor, John Stewart,

Esq., is a lawyer of Charleston, and of a highly respectable family.

He is a brother-in-law of Hon. Robert Barnwell Rhett, the late

Attorney-General, now a Member of Congress, and Hon. James Rhett, a

leading member of the Senate of South Carolina; his wife is a niece of

the late Governor Smith, of North Carolina, and of the late Hon. Peter

Smith, Intendant (Mayor) of the city of Charleston; and a cousin of

the late Hon. Thomas S. Grimké.

The circulation of the 'Mercury' among the wealthy, the literary, and

the fashionable, is probably much larger than that of any other paper

in the state.

These facts in connection with the preceding advertisement, are a

sufficient exposition of the 'public opinion' towards slaves,

prevalent in these classes of society.

The following scrap of 'public opinion' in Florida, is instructive. We

take it from the Florida Herald, June 23, 1838:

Ranaway from my plantation, on Monday night, the 13th instant, a negro

fellow named Ben; eighteen years of age, polite when spoken to, and

speaks very good English for a negro. As I have traced him out in

several places in town, I am certain he is harbored. This notice is

given that I am determined, that whenever he is taken, _to punish him

till he informs me_ who has given him food and protection, and _I

shall apply the law of Judge Lynch to my own satisfaction_, on those

concerned in his concealment.

A. WATSON.

June 16, 1838."

Now, who is this A. Watson, who proclaims through a newspaper, his

determination to _put to the torture_ this youth of eighteen, and to

Lynch to his 'satisfaction' whoever has given a cup of cold water to

the panting fugitive. Is he some low miscreant beneath public

contempt? Nay, verily, he is a 'gentleman of property and standing,'

one of the wealthiest planters and largest slaveholders in Florida. He

resides in the vicinity of St. Augustine, and married the daughter of

the late Thomas C. Morton, Esq. one of the first merchants in New

York.

We may mention in this connection the well known fact, that many

wealthy planters make it a _rule never to employ a physician among

their slaves_. Hon. William Smith, Senator in Congress, from South

Carolina, from 1816 to 1823, and afterwards from 1826 to 1831, is one

of this number. He owns a number of large plantations in the south

western states. One of these, borders upon the village of Huntsville,

Alabama. The people of that village can testify that it is a part of

Judge Smith's _system_ never to employ a physician _even in the most

extreme cases_. If the medical skill of the overseer, or of the slaves

themselves, can contend successfully with the disease, they live, if

not, _they die_. At all events, a physician is _not to be called_.

Judge Smith was appointed a judge of the Supreme Court of the United

States three years since.

The reader will recall a similar fact in the testimony of Rev. W.T.

Allan, son of Rev. Dr. Allan, of Huntsville, (see p. 47,) who says

that Colonel Robert H. Watkins, a wealthy planter, in Alabama, and a

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTOR in 1836, who works on his plantations three

hundred slaves, 'After employing a physician for some time among his

negroes, he ceased to do so, alledging as the reason, that it was

_cheaper to lose a few negroes every year than to pay a physician_.'

It is a fact perfectly notorious, that the late General Wade Hampton,

of South Carolina, who was the largest slaveholder in the United

States, and probably the wealthiest man south of the Potomac, was

_excessively cruel_ in the treatment of his slaves. The anecdote of

him related by a clergyman, on page 29, is perfectly characteristic.

For instances of barbarous inhumanity of various kinds, and manifested

by persons BELONGING TO THE MOST RESPECTABLE CIRCLES OF SOCIETY, the

reader can consult the following references:--Testimony of Rev. John

Graham, p. 25, near the bottom; of Mr. Poe, p. 26, middle; of Rev. J.

O. Choules, p. 39, middle; of Rev. Dr. Channing, p. 41, top; of Mr.

George A. Avery, p. 44, bottom; of Rev. W.T. Allan, p. 47; of Mr. John

M. Nelson, p. 51, bottom; of Dr. J.C. Finley, p. 61, top; of Mr.

Dustin, p. 66, bottom; of Mr. John Clarke, p. 87; of Mr. Nathan Cole,

p. 89, middle; Rev. William Dickey, p. 93; Rev. Francis Hawley, p. 97;

of Mr. Powell, p. 100, middle; of Rev. P. Smith p. 102.

The preceding are but a few of a large number of similar cases

contained in the foregoing testimonies. The slaveholder mentioned by

Mr. Ladd, p. 86, who knocked down a slave and afterwards piled brush

upon his body, and consumed it, held the hand of a female slave in the

fire till it was burned so as to be useless for life, and confessed to

Mr. Ladd, that he had killed _four_ slaves, had been a _member of the

Senate of Georgia_ and a _clergyman_. The slaveholder who whipped a

female slave to death in St. Louis, in 1837, as stated by Mr. Cole,

p. 69, was a _Major in the United States Army_. One of the physicians

who was an abettor of the tragedy on the Brassos, in which a slave was

tortured to death, and another so that he barely lived, (see Rev. Mr.

Smith's testimony, p. 102.) was Dr. Anson Jones, a native of

Connecticut, who was soon after appointed minister plenipotentiary

from Texas to this government, and now resides at Washington city. The

slave mistress at Lexington, Ky., who, as her husband testifies, has

killed six of his slaves, (see testimony of Mr. Clarke, p. 87,) is the

wife of Hon. Fielding S. Turner, late judge of the criminal court of

New Orleans, and one of the wealthiest slaveholders in Kentucky.

Lilburn Lewis, who deliberately chopped in pieces his slave George,

with a broad-axe, (see testimony of Rev. Mr. Dickey, p. 93) was a

wealthy slaveholder, and a nephew of President Jefferson. Rev. Francis

Hawley, who was a general agent of the Baptist State Convention of

North Carolina, confesses (see p. 47,) that while residing in that

state he once went out with his hounds and rifle, to hunt fugitive

slaves. But instead of making further reference to testimony already

before the reader, we will furnish additional instances of the

barbarous cruelty which is tolerated and sanctioned by the 'upper

classes' of society at the south; we begin with clergymen, and other

officers and members of churches.

That the reader may judge of the degree of 'protection' which slaves

receive from 'public opinion,' and among the members and ministers of

professed christian churches, we insert the following illustrations.

Extract from an editorial article in the "Lowell (Mass.) Observer" a

religious paper edited at the time (1833) by the Rev. DANIEL S.

SOUTHMAYD, who recently died in Texas.

"We have been among the slaves at the south. We took pains to make

discoveries in respect to the evils of slavery. We formed our

sentiments on the subject of the cruelties exercised towards the

slaves from having witnessed them. We now affirm that we never saw a

man, who had never been at the south, who thought as much of the

cruelties practiced on the slaves, as we _know_ to be a fact.

"A slave whom I loved for his kindness and the amiableness of his

disposition, and who belonged to the family where I resided, happened

to stay out _fifteen minutes longer_ than he had permission to stay.

It was a mistake--it was _unintentional_. But what was the penalty? He

was sent to the house of correction with the order that he should have

_thirty lashes upon his naked body with a knotted rope!!!_ He was

brought home and laid down in the stoop, in the back of the house, in

_the sun, upon the floor_. And there he lay, with more the appearance

of a rotten carcass than a living man, for four days before he could

do more than move. And who was this inhuman being calling God's

property his own, and ruing it as he would not have dared to use a

beast? You may say he was a tiger--one of the more wicked sort, and

that we must not judge others by him. _He was a professor of that

religion which will pour upon the willing slaveholder the retribution

due to his sin_.

"We wish to mention another fact, which our own eyes saw and our own

ears heard. We were called to evening prayers. The family assembled

around the altar of their accustomed devotions. There was one female

_slave_ present, who belonged to another master, but who had been

hired for the day and tarried to attend family worship. The precious

Bible was opened, and nearly half a chapter had been read, when the

eye of the master, who was reading, observed that the new female

servant, instead of being seated like his own slaves, _flat upon the

floor_, was standing in a stooping posture upon her feet. He told her

to sit down on the floor. She said it was not her custom at home. He

ordered her again to do it. She replied that her master did not

require it. Irritated by this answer, he repeatedly _struck her upon

the head with the very Bible he held in his hand_. And not content

with this, he seized his cane and _caned her down stairs most

unmercifully_. He then returned to resume his profane work, but we

need not say that _all_ the family were not there. Do you ask again,

who was this wicked man? _He was a professor of religion!!_"

Rev. HUNTINGTON LYMAN, late pastor of the Free Church in Buffalo, New

York, says:--

"Walking one day in New Orleans with a professional gentleman, who was

educated in Connecticut, we were met by a black man; the gentleman was

greatly incensed with the black man for passing so _near_ him, and

turning upon him _he pushed him with violence off walk into the

street_. This man was a professor of religion."

(And _we_ add, a member, and if we mistake not an officer of the

Presbyterian Church which was established there by Rev. Joel Parker,

and which was then under his teachings-ED.)

Mr. EZEKIEL BIRDSEYE, a gentleman of known probity, in Cornwall,

Litchfield county, Conn. gives the testimony which follows:--

"A BAPTIST CLERGYMAN in Laurens District, S.C. WHIPPED HIS SLAVE TO

DEATH, whom he _suspected_ of having stolen about sixty dollars. The

slave was in the prime of life and was purchased a few weeks before

for $800 of a slave trader from Virginia or Maryland. The coroner, Wm.

Irby, at whose house I was then boarding, _told me_, that on reviewing

the dead body, he found it _beat to a jelly from head to foot_. The

master's wife discovered the money a day or two after the death of the

slave. She had herself removed it from where it was placed, not

knowing what it was, as it was tied up in a thick envelope. I happened

to be present when the trial of this man took place, at Laurens Court

House. His daughter testified that her father untied the slave, when

he appeared to be failing, and gave him cold water to drink, of which

he took freely. His counsel pleaded that his death _might_ have been

caused by drinking cold water in a state of excitement. The Judge

charged the jury, that it would be their duty to find the defendant

guilty, if they believed the death was caused by the whipping; but if

they were of opinion that drinking cold water caused the death, they

would find him not guilty! The jury found him--NOT GUILTY!"

Dr. JEREMIAH S. WAUGH, a physician in Somerville, Butler county, Ohio,

testifies as follows:--

"In the year 1825, I boarded with the Rev. John Mushat, a Seceder

minister, and principal of an academy in Iredel county, N.C. He had

slaves, and was in the habit of restricting them on the Sabbath. One

of his slaves, however, ventured to disobey his injunctions. The

offence was he went away on Sabbath evening, and did not return till

Monday morning. About the time we were called to breakfast, the Rev.

gentleman was engaged in chastising him for _breaking the Sabbath_. He

determined not to submit--attempted to escape by flight. The master

immediately took down his gun and pursued him--levelled his instrument

of death, and told him, if he did not stop instantly _he would blow

him through_. The poor slave returned to the house and submitted

himself to the lash; and the good master, while YET PALE WITH RAGE,

_sat down to the table, and with a trembling voice_ ASKED GOD'S

BLESSING!"

The following letter was sent by Capt. JACOB DUNHAM, of New York city,

to a slaveholder in Georgetown, D.C. more than twenty years since:

"Georgetown, June 13, 1815.

"Dear sir--Passing your house yesterday, I beheld a scene of cruelty

seldom witnessed--that was the brutal chastisement of your negro girl,

_lashed to a ladder and beaten in an inhuman manner, too bad to

describe_. My blood chills while I contemplate the subject. This has

led me to investigate your character from your neighbors; who inform

me that you have _caused the death_ of one negro man, whom you struck

with a sledge for some trivial fault--that you have beaten another

black girl with such severity that the _splinters_ remained in her

back for some weeks after you sold her--and many other acts of

barbarity, too lengthy to enumerate. And to my great surprise, I find

you are a _professor of the Christian religion!_

"You will naturally inquire, why I meddle with your family affairs. My

answer is, the cause of humanity and a sense of my duty requires

it.--these hasty remarks I leave you to reflect on the subject; but

wish you to remember, that there is an all-seeing eye who knows all

our faults and will reward us according to our deeds.

I remain, sir, yours, &c

JACOB DUNHAM.

Master of the brig Cyrus, of N.Y."

Rev. SYLVESTER COWLES, pastor of the Presbyterian church in Fredonia,

N.Y. says:--

"A young man, a member of the church in Conewango, went to Alabama

last year, to reside as a clerk in an uncle's store. When he had been

there about nine months, he wrote his father that he must return home.

To see members of the same church sit at the communion table of our

Lord one day, and the next to see one seize any weapon and knock the

other down, _as he had seen_, he _could not_ live there. His good

father forthwith gave him permission to return home."

The following is a specimen of the shameless hardihood with which a

professed minister of the Gospel, and editor of a religious paper,

assumes the right to hold God's image as a chattel. It is from the

Southern Christian Herald:--

"It is stated in the Georgetown Union, that a negro, supposed to have

died of cholera, when that disease prevailed in Charleston, was

carried to the public burying ground to be interred; but before

interment signs of life appeared, and, by the use of proper means, he

was restored to health. And now the man who first perceived the signs

of life in the slave, and that led to his preservation, claims the

property as his own, and is about bringing suit for its recovery. As

well might a man who rescued his neighbor's slave, or his _horse_,

from drowning, or who extinguished the flames that would otherwise

soon have burnt down his neighbor's house, claim the _property_ as his

own."

Rev. GEORGE BOURNE, of New York city, late Editor of the "Protestant

Vindicator," who was a preacher seven years in Virginia, gives the

following testimony.[39]

"Benjamin Lewis, who was an elder in the Presbyterian church, engaged

a carpenter to repair and enlarge his house. After some time had

elapsed, Kyle, the builder, was awakened very early in the morning by

a most piteous moaning and shrieking. He arose, and following the

sound, discovered a colored woman nearly naked, tied to a fence, while

Lewis was lacerating her. Kyle instantly commanded the slave driver to

desist. Lewis maintained his jurisdiction over his slaves, and

threatened Kyle that he would punish him for his interference.

Finally Kyle obtained the release of the victim.

"A second and a third scene of the same kind occurred, and on the

third occasion the altercation almost produced a battle between the

elder and the carpenter.

"Kyle immediately arranged his affairs, packed up his tools and

prepared to depart. 'Where are you going?' demanded Lewis. 'I am

going home;' said Kyle. 'Then I will pay you nothing for what you

have done,' retorted the slave driver, 'unless you complete your

contract.' The carpenter went away with this edifying declaration, 'I

will not stay here a day longer; for I expect the fire of God will

come down and burn you up altogether, and I do not choose to go to

hell with you.' Through hush-money and promises not to whip the women

any more, I believe Kyle returned and completed his engagement.

"James Kyle of Harrisonburg, Virginia, frequently narrated that

circumstance, and his son, the carpenter, confirmed it with all the

minute particulars combined with his temporary residence on the

Shenandoah river.

"John M'Cue of Augusta county, Virginia, a _Presbyterian preacher_,

frequently on the Lord's day morning, tied up his slaves and whipped

them; and left them bound, while he went to the meeting house and

preached--and after his return home repeated his scourging. That

fact, with others more heinous, was known to all persons in his

congregation and around the vicinity; and so far from being censured

for it, he and his brethren justified it as essential to preserve

their 'domestic institutions.'

"Mrs. Pence, of Rockingham county, Virginia, used to boast,--'I am the

best hand to whip a _wench_ in the whole county.' She used to pinion

the girls to a post in the yard on the Lord's day morning, scourge

them, put on the '_negro plaster_,' salt, pepper, and vinegar, leave

them tied, and walk away to church as demure as a nun, and after

service repeat her flaying, if she felt the whim. I once expostulated

with her upon her cruelly. 'Mrs. Pence, how can you whip your girls

so publicly and disturb your neighbors so on the Lord's day morning.'

Her answer was memorable. 'If I were to whip them on any other day I

should lose a day's work; but by whipping them on Sunday, their backs

get well enough by Monday morning.' That woman, if alive, is

doubtless a member of the church now, as then.

"Rev. Dr. Staughton, formerly of Philadelphia, often stated, that when

he lived at Georgetown, S.C. he could tell the doings of one of the

slaveholders of the Baptist church there by his prayers at the prayer

meeting. 'If,' said he, 'that man was upon good terms with his

slaves, his words were cold and heartless as frost; if he had been

whipping a man, he would pray with life; but if he had left a woman

whom he had been flogging, tied to a post in his cellar, with a

determination to go back and torture her again, O! how he would pray!'

The Rev. Cyrus P. Grosvenor of Massachusetts can confirm the above

statement by Dr. Staughton.

"William Wilson, a Presbyterian preacher of Augusta county, Virginia,

had a young colored girl who was constitutionally unhealthy. As no

means to amend her were availing, he sold her to a member of his

congregation, and in the usual style of human flesh dealers, warranted

her 'sound,' &c. The fraud was instantly discovered; but he would not

refund the amount. A suit was commenced, and was long continued, and

finally the plaintiff recovered the money out of which he had been

swindled by slave-trading with his own preacher. No Presbytery

censured him, although Judge Brown, the chancellor, severely condemned

the imposition.

"In the year 1811, Johab Graham, a preacher, lived with Alexander

Nelson a Presbyterian elder, near Stanton, Virginia, and he informed

me that a man had appeared before Nelson, who was a magistrate, and

swore falsely against his slave,--that the elder ordered him

thirty-nine lashes. All that wickedness was done as an excuse for his

dissipated owner to obtain money. A negro trader had offered him a

considerable sum for the 'boy,' and under the pretence of saving him

from the punishment of the law, he was trafficked away from his woman

and children to another state. The magistrate was aware of the

perjury, and the whole abomination, but all the truth uttered by every

colored person in the southern states would not be of any avail

against the notorious false swearing of the greatest white villain who

ever cursed the world. 'How,' said Johab Graham, can I preach

to-morrow?' I replied, 'Very well; go and thunder the doctrine of

retribution in their ears, Obadiah 15, till by the divine blessing you

kill or cure them. My friends, John M. Nelson of Hillsborough, Ohio,

Samuel Linn, and Robert Herron, and others of the same vicinity, could

'make both the ears of every one who heareth them tingle' with the

accounts which they can give of slave-driving by professors of

religion in the Shenandoah Valley, Virginia.

"In 1815, near Frederick, in Maryland, a most barbarous planter was

killed in a fit of desperation, by four of his slaves _in

self-defence_. It was declared by those slaves while in prison that,

besides his atrocities among their female associates, he had

deliberately butchered a number of his slaves. The four men were

murdered by law, to appease the popular clamor. I saw them executed on

the twenty-eighth day of Jan'y, 1816. The facts I received from the

Rev. Patrick Davidson of Frederick, who constantly visited them during

their imprisonment--and who became an abolitionist in consequence of

the disclosures which he heard from those men in the jail. The name of

the planter is not distinctly recollected, but it can be known by a

inspection of the record of the trial in the clerk's office,

Frederick.

"A minister of Virginia, still living, and whose name must not be

mentioned for fear of Nero Preston and his confederate-hanging

myrmidons, informed me of this fact in 1815, in his own house. 'A

member of my church, said he, lately whipped a colored youth to death.

What shall I do?' I answered, 'I hope you do not mean to continue him

in your church.' That minister replied, 'How can we help it'

We dare not call him to an account. We have no legal testimony.'

Their communion season was then approaching. I addressed his

wife,--'Mrs. ---- do you mean to sit at the Lord's table with that

murderer?'--,'Not I,' she answered: 'I would as soon commune with the

devil himself.' The slave killer was equally unnoticed by the civil

and ecclesiastical authority.

"John Baxter, a Presbyterian elder, the brother of that slaveholding

doctor in divinity, George A. Baxter, held as a slave the wife of a

Baptist colored preacher, familiarly called 'Uncle Jack.' In a late

period of pregnancy he scourged her so that the lives of herself and

her unborn child were considered in jeopardy. Uncle Jack was advised

to obtain the liberation of his wife. Baxter finally agreed, I think,

to sell the woman and her children, three of them, I believe for six

hundred dollars, and an additional hundred if the unborn child

survived a certain period after its birth. Uncle Jack was to pay one

hundred dollars per annum for his wife and children for seven years,

and Baxter held a sort of mortgage upon them for the payment. Uncle

Jack showed me his back in furrows like a ploughed field. His master

used to whip up the flesh, then beat it downwards, and then apply the

'negro plaster,' salt, pepper, mustard, and vinegar, until all Jack's

back was almost as hard and unimpressible as the bones. There is

slaveholding religion! A Presbyterian elder receiving from a Baptist

preacher seven hundred dollars for his wife and children. James Kyle

and uncle Jack used to tell that story with great Christian

sensibility; and uncle Jack would weep tears of anguish over his

wife's piteous tale, and tears of ecstasy at the same moment that he

was free, and that soon, by the grace of God, his wife and children,

as he said, 'would be all free together.'"

Rev. JAMES NOURSE, a Presbyterian clergyman of Mifflia co. Penn.,

whose father is, we believe, a slaveholder in Washington City, says,--

"The Rev. Mr. M----, now of the Huntingdon Presbytery, after an absence

of many months, was about visiting his old friends on what is commonly

called the 'Eastern Shore.' Late in the afternoon, on his journey, he

called at the house of Rev. A.C. of P----town, Md. With this brother

he had been long acquainted. Just at that juncture Mr. C. was about

proceeding to whip a colored female, who was his slave. She was firmly

tied to a post in FRONT of his dwelling-house. The arrival of a

clerical visitor at such a time, occasioned a temporary delay in the

execution of Mr. C's purpose. But the delay was only temporary; for

not even the presence of such a guest could destroy the bloody design.

The guest interceded with all the mildness yet earnestness of a

brother and new visitor. But all in vain, 'the woman had been saucy

and must be punished.' The cowhide was accordingly produced, and the

_Rev. Mr. C_., a large and very stout man, applied it 'manfully' on

'woman's' bare and 'shrinking flesh.' I say bare, because you know

that the slave women generally have but three or four inches of the

arm near the shoulder covered, and the neck is left entirely exposed.

As the cowhide moved back and forward, striking right and left, on the

head, neck and arms, at every few strokes the sympathizing guest would

exclaim, 'O, brother C. desist' But brother C. pursued his brutal

work, till, after inflicting about sixty lashes, the woman was found

to be suffused with blood on the hinder part of her neck, and under

her frock between the shoulders. Yet this Rev. gentleman is well

esteemed in the church--was, three or four years since, moderator of

the synod of Philadelphia, and yet walks abroad, feeling himself

unrebuked by law or gospel. Ah, sir does not this narration give

fearful force to the query--_What has the church to do with slavery_?'

Comment on the facts is unnecessary, yet allow me to conclude by

saying, that it is my opinion such occurrences _are not rare in the

south_.

J.N."

REV. CHARLES STEWART RENSHAW, of Quincy, Illinois, in a recent letter,

speaking of his residence, for a period, in Kentucky, says--

"In a conversation with Mr. Robert Willis, he told me that his negro

girl had run away from him some time previous. He was convinced that

she was lurking round, and he watched for her. He soon found the place

of her concealment, drew her from it, got a rope, and tied her hands

across each other, then threw the rope over a beam in the kitchen, and

hoisted her up by the wrists; 'and,' said he, 'I whipped her there

till I made the lint fly, I tell you.' I asked him the meaning of

making 'the lint fly,' and he replied, '_till the blood flew_.' I spoke

of the iniquity and cruelty of slavery, and of its immediate

abandonment. He confessed it an evil, but said, 'I am a

_colonizationist_--I believe in that scheme.' Mr. Willis is a teacher

of sacred music, and a member of the Presbyterian Church in Lexington,

Kentucky."

Mr. R. speaking of the PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER and church where he

resided, says:

"The minister and all the church members held slaves. Some were

treated kindly, others harshly. _There was not a shade of difference_

between their slaves and those of their _infidel_ neighbors, either in

their physical, intellectual, or moral state: in some cases they would

_suffer_ in the comparison.

"In the kitchen of the minister of the church, a slave man was living

in open adultery with a slave woman, who was a member of the church,

with an 'assured hope' of heaven--whilst the man's wife was on the

minister's farm in Fayette county. The minister had to bring a cook

down from his farm to the place in which he was preaching. The choice

was between the wife of the man and this church member. He _left the

wife_, and brought the church member to the adulterer's bed.

"A METHODIST PREACHER last fall took a load of produce down the river.

Amongst other _things_ he took down five slaves. He sold them at New

Orleans--he came up to Natchez--bought seven there--and took them down

and sold them also. Last March he came up to preach the Gospel again.

A number of persons on board the steamboat (the Tuscarora.) who had

seen him in the slave-shambles in Natchez and New Orleans, and now,

for the first time, found him to be a preacher, had much sport at the

expense of 'the fine old preacher who dealt in slaves.'

A non-professor of religion, in Campbell county, Ky. sold a female and

two children to a Methodist professor, with the proviso that they

should not leave that region of country. The slave-driver came, and

offered $5 more for the woman than he had given, and he sold her. She

is now in the lower country, and _her orphan babes are in Kentucky_.

"I was much shocked once, to see a Presbyterian elder's wife call a

little slave to her to kiss her feet. At first the boy hesitated--but

the command being repeated in tones not to be misunderstood, be

approached timidly, knelt, and kissed her foot."

Rev. W.T. ALLAN, of Chatham, Illinois, gives the following in a letter

dated Feb. 4, 1839:

"Mr. Peter Vanarsdale, an elder of the Presbyterian church in

Carrollton, formerly from Kentucky, told me, the other day, that a

Mrs. Burford, in the neighborhood of Harrodsburg, Kentucky, had

_separated a woman and her children_ from their husband and father,

taking them into another state. Mrs. B. was a member of the

_Presbyterian Church_. The bereaved husband and father was also a

professor of religion.

"Mr. V. told me of a slave woman who had lost her son, separated from

her by public sale. In the anguish of her soul, she gave vent to her

indignation freely, and perhaps harshly. Sometime after, she wished to

become a member of the church. Before they received her, she had to

make humble confession for speaking as she had done. _Some of the

elders that received her, and required the confession, were engaged is

selling the son from his mother_."

The following communication from the Rev. WILLIAM BARDWELL, of

Sandwich, Massachusetts, has just been published in Zion's Watchman,

New York city:

_Mr. Editor_:--The following fact was given me last evening, from the

pen of a shipmaster, who has traded in several of the principal ports

in the south. He is a man of unblemished character, a member of the

M.E. Church in this place, and familiarly known in this town. The

facts were communicated to me last fall in a letter to his wife, with

a request that she would cause them to be published. I give verbatim,

as they were written from the letter by brother Perry's own hand while

I was in his house.

"A Methodist preacher, Wm. Whitby by name, who married in Bucksville,

S.C., and by marriage came into possession of some slaves, in July,

1838, was about moving to another station to preach, and wished, also,

to move his family and slaves to Tennessee, much against the will of

the slaves, one of which, to get clear from him, ran into the woods

after swimming a brook. The parson took after him with his gun, which,

however, got wet and missed fire, when he ran to a neighbor for

another gun, with the intention, as he said, of killing him: he did

not, however, catch or kill him; he chained another for fear of his

running away also. The above particulars were related to me by William

Whitby himself. THOMAS C. PERRY. March 3, 1839."

"I find by examining the minutes of the S.C. Conference, that there is

such a preacher in the Conference, and brother Perry further stated to

me that he was well acquainted with him, and if this statement was

published, and if it could be known where he was since the last

Conference, he wished a paper to be sent him containing the whole

affair. He also stated to me, verbally, that the young man he

attempted to shoot was about nineteen years of age, and had been shut

up in a corn-house, and in the attempt of Mr. Whitby to chain him, he

broke down the door and made his escape as above mentioned, and that

Mr. W. was under the necessity of hiring him out for one year, with

the risk of his employer's getting him. Brother Perry conversed with

one of the slaves, who was so old that he thought it not profitable to

remove so far, and had been sold; _he_ informed him of all the above

circumstances, and said, with tears, that he thought he had been so

faithful as to be entitled to liberty, but instead of making him free,

he had sold him to another master, besides parting one husband and

wife from those ties rendered a thousand times dearer by an infant

child which was torn for ever from the husband.

WILLIAM BARDWELL.

_Sandwich, Mass._, March 4, 1839."

Mr. WILLIAM POE, till recently a slaveholder in Virginia, now an elder

in the Presbyterian Church at Delhi, Ohio, gives the following

testimony:--

"An elder in the Presbyterian Church in Lynchburg had a most faithful

servant, whom he flogged severely and sent him to prison, and had him

confined as a felon a number of days, for being _saucy_. Another elder

of the same church, an auctioneer, habitually sold slaves at his

stand--very frequently _parted families_--would often go into the

country to sell slaves on execution and otherwise; when remonstrated

with, he justified himself, saying, 'it was his business;' the church

also justified him on the same ground.

"A Doctor Duval, of Lynchburg, Va. got offended with a very faithful,

worthy servant, and immediately sold him to a negro trader, to be

taken to New Orleans; Duval still keeping the wife of the man as his

slave. This Duval was a professor of religion."

Mr. SAMUEL HALL, a teacher in Marietta College, Ohio, says, in a

recent letter:--

"A student in Marietta College, from Mississippi, a professor of

religion, and in every way worthy of entire confidence, made to me the

following statement. [If his name were published it would probably

cost him his life.]

"When I was in the family of the Rev. James Martin, of Louisville,

Winston county, Mississippi, in the spring of 1838, Mrs. Martin became

offended at a female slave, because she did not move faster. She

commanded her to do so; the girl quickened her pace; again she was

ordered to move faster, or, Mrs. M. declared, she would break the

broomstick over her head. Again the slave quickened her pace; but not

coming up to the _maximum_ desired by Mrs. M. the latter declared she

would _see_ whether she (the slave) could move or not: and, going into

another apartment, she brought in a raw hide, awaiting the return of

her husband for its application. In this instance I know not what was

the final result, but I have heard the sound of the raw-hide in at

least _two_ other instances, applied by this same reverend gentleman

to the back of his _female_ servant."

Mr. Hall adds--"The name of my informant must be suppressed, as" he

says, "there are those who would cut my throat in a moment, if the

information I give were to be coupled with my name." Suffice it to say

that he is a professor of religion, a native of Virginia, and a

student of Marietta College, whose character will bear the strictest

scrutiny. He says:--

"In 1838, at Charlestown, Va. I conversed with several members of the

church under the care of the Rev. Mr. Brown, of the same place. Taking

occasion to speak of slavery, and of the sin of slaveholding, to one

of them who was a lady, she replied, "I am a slaveholder, and I

_glory_ in it." I had a conversation, a few days after, with the

pastor himself, concerning the state of religion in his church, and

who were the most exemplary members in it. The pastor mentioned

several of those who were of that description; the _first_ of whom,

however, was the identical lady who _gloried_ in being a slaveholder!

That church numbers nearly two hundred members.

"Another lady, who was considered as devoted a Christian as any in the

same church, but who was in poor health, was accustomed to flog some

of her female domestics with a raw-hide till she was exhausted, and

then go and lie down till her strength was recruited, rising again and

resuming the flagellation. This she considered as not at all

derogatory to her Christian character."

Mr. JOEL S. BINGHAM, of Cornwall, Vermont, lately a student in

Middlebury College, and a member of the Congregational Church, spent a

few weeks in Kentucky, in the summer of 1838. He relates the following

occurrence which took place in the neighborhood where he resided, and

was a matter of perfect notoriety in the vicinity.

"Rev. Mr. Lewis, a Baptist minister in the vicinity of Frankfort, Ky.

had a slave that ran away, but was retaken and brought back to his

master, who threatened him with punishment for making an attempt to

escape. Though terrified the slave immediately attempted to run away

again. Mr. L. commanded him to stop, but he did not obey. _Mr. L. then

took a gun, loaded with small shot and fired at the slave, who fell_;

but was not killed, and afterward recovered. Mr. L. did not probably

intend to kill the slave, as it was his legs which were aimed at and

received the contents of the gun. The master asserted that he was

driven to this necessity to maintain his authority. This took place

about the first of July, 1838."

The following is given upon the authority of Rev. ORANGE SCOTT, of

Lowell, Mass. for many years a presiding elder in the Methodist

Episcopal Church.

"Rev. Joseph Hough, a Baptist minister, formerly of Springfield, Mass.

now of Plainfield, N.H. while traveling in the south, a few years ago,

put up one night with a Methodist family, and spent the Sabbath with

them. While there, one of the female slaves did something which

displeased her mistress. She took a chisel and mallet, and very

deliberately cut off one of her toes!"

SLAVE BREEDING AN INDEX OF PUBLIC 'OPINION' AMONG THE 'HIGHEST CLASS

OF SOCIETY' IN VIRGINIA AND OTHER NORTHERN SLAVE STATES.

But we shall be told, that 'slave-breeders' are regarded with

contempt, and the business of slave breeding is looked upon as

despicable; and the hot disclaimer of Mr. Stevenson, our Minister

Plenipotentiary at the Court of St. James, in reply to Mr. O'Connell,

who had intimated that he might be a 'slave breeder,' will doubtless

be quoted.[40] In reply, we need not say what every body knows, that

if Mr. Stevenson is not a 'slave breeder,' he is a solitary exception

among the large slaveholders of Virginia. What! Virginia slaveholders

not 'slave-breeders?' the pretence is ridiculous and contemptible; it

is meanness, hypocrisy, and falsehood, as is abundantly proved by the

testimony which follows:--

Mr. GHOLSON, of Virginia, in his speech in the Legislature of that

state, Jan. 18, 1832, (see Richmond Whig,) says:--

"It has always (perhaps erroneously) been considered by steady and

old-fashioned people, that the owner of land had a reasonable right to

its annual profits; the owner of orchards, to their annual fruits; the

owner of _brood mares_, to their product; and the owner of _female

slaves, to their increase_. We have not the fine-spun intelligence,

nor legal acumen, to discover the technical distinctions drawn by

gentlemen. The legal maxim of '_Partus sequitur ventrem_' is coeval

with the existence of the rights of property itself, and is founded in

wisdom and justice. It is on the justice and inviolability of this

maxim that the master foregoes the service of the female slave; has

her nursed and attended during the period of her gestation, and raises

the helpless and infant offspring. The value of the property justifies

the expense; and I do not hesitate to say, that in its _increase

consists much of our wealth_."

Hon. THOMAS MANN RANDOLPH, of Virginia. formerly Governor of that

state, in his speech before the legislature in 1832, while speaking of

the number of slaves annually sold from Virginia to the more southern

slave states, said:--

"The exportation has _averaged_ EIGHT THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED for the

last twenty years. Forty years ago, the whites exceeded the colored

25,000, the colored now exceed the whites 81,000; and these results

too during an exportation of near 260,000 slaves since the year 1790,

now perhaps the fruitful progenitors of half a million in other

states. It is a practice and an increasing practice, in parts of

Virginia, to rear slaves for market. How can an honorable mind, a

patriot and a lover of his country, bear to see this ancient dominion

converted into one grand menagerie, where men are to be reared for

market, like oxen for the shambles."

Professor DEW, now President of the University of William and Mary,

Virginia, in his Review of the Debate in the Virginia Legislature,

1831-2, says, p 49.

"From all the information we can obtain, we have no hesitation in

saying that upwards of six thousand [slaves] are yearly exported [from

Virginia] to other states.' Again, p. 61: 'The 6000 slaves which

Virginia annually sends off to the south, are a source of wealth to

Virginia'--Again, p. 120: 'A full equivalent being thus left in the

place of the slave, this emigration becomes an advantage to the state,

and does not check the black population as much as, at first view, we

might imagine--because it furnishes every inducement to the master to

attend to the negroes, to ENCOURAGE BREEDING, and to cause the

_greatest number possible to be raised._ &c."

_"Virginia is, in fact, a negro-raising state for other states."_

Extract from the speech of MR. FAULKNER, in the Va. House of

Delegates, 1832. [See Richmond Whig.]

"But he [Mr. Gholson,] has labored to show that the Abolition of

Slavery, were it practicable, would be _impolitic_, because as the

drift of this portion of his argument runs, your slaves constitute the

entire wealth of the state, all the _productive capacity_ Virginia

possesses. And, sir, as things are, _I believe he is correct_. He

says, and in this he is sustained by the gentleman from Halifax, Mr.

Bruce, that the slaves constitute the entire available wealth at

present, of Eastern Virginia. Is it true that for 200 years the only

increase in the wealth and resources of Virginia, has been a remnant

of the natural _increase_ of this miserable race?--Can it be, that on

this _increase_, she places her solo dependence? I had always

understood that indolence and extravagance were the necessary

concomitants of slavery; but, until I heard these declarations, I had

not fully conceived the horrible extent of this evil. These gentlemen

state the fact, which the history and _present aspect of the

Commowealth but too well sustain_. The gentlemen's facts and argument

in support of his plea of impolicy, to me, seem rather unhappy. To me,

such a state of things would itself be conclusive at least, that

something, even as a measure of policy, should be done. What, sir,

have you lived for two hundred years, without personal effort or

productive industry, in extravagance and indolence, sustained alone

_by the return from sales of the increase of slaves_, and retaining

merely such a number as your now impoverished lands can sustain, AS

STOCK, _depending, too, upon a most uncertain market_? When that

market is closed, as in the nature of things it must be, what then

will become of this gentleman's hundred millions worth of slaves, AND

THE ANNUAL PRODUCT?"

In the debates in the Virginia Convention, in 1829, Judge Upsher

said--"The value of slaves as an article of property [and it is in

that view only that they are legitimate subjects of taxation] _depends

much on the state of the market abroad_. In this view, it is the value

of land _abroad_, and not of land here, which furnishes the ratio. It

is well known to us all, that nothing is more fluctuating than the

value of slaves. A late law of Louisiana reduced their value 25 per

cent, in two hours after its passage was known. IF IT SHOULD BE OUR

LOT, AS I TRUST IT WILL BE, TO ACQUIRE THE COUNTRY OF TEXAS, THEIR

PRICE WILL RISE AGAIN."--p. 77.

Mr. Goode, Of Virginia, in his speech before the Virginia Legislature,

in Jan. 1832, [See Richmond Whig, of that date,] said:--

"The superior usefulness of the slaves in the south, will constitute

an _effectual demand_, which will remove them from our limits. We

shall send them from our state, because _it will be our interest to do

so_. Our planters are already becoming farmers. Many who grew tobacco

as their only staple, have already introduced, and commingled the

wheat crop. They are already semi-farmers; and in the natural course

of events, they must become more and more so.--As the greater quantity

of rich western lands are appropriated to the production of the staple

of our planters, that staple will become less profitable.--We shall

gradually divert our lands from its production, until we shall become

actual farmers.--Then will the necessity for slave labor diminish;

then will the effectual demand diminish, and then will the quantity of

slaves diminish, until they shall be adapted to the effectual demand.

"But gentlemen are alarmed _lest the markets of other states be closed

against the introduction of our slaves_. Sir, the demand for slave

labor MUST INCREASE through the South and West. It has been heretofore

limited by the want of capital; but when emigrants shall be relieved

from their embarrassments, contracted by the purchase of their lands,

the annual profits of their estates, will constitute an accumulating

capital, which they will _seek to invest in labor_. That the demand

for labor must increase in proportion to the increase of capital, is

one of the demonstrations of political economists; and I confess, that

for the removal of slavery from Virginia, I look to the efficacy of

that principle; together with the circumstance that our southern

brethren are constrained to continue planters, by their position, soil

and climate."

The following is from Niles' Weekly Register, published at Baltimore,

Md. vol. 35, p. 4.

_"Dealing in slaves has become a large business_; establishments are

made in several places in Maryland and Virginia, at which they are

sold like cattle; these places of deposit are strongly built, and well

supplied with thumb-screws and gags, and ornamented with cow-skins and

other whips oftentimes bloody."

R.S. FINLEY, Esq., late General Agent of the American Colonization

Society, at a meeting in New York, 27th Feb. 1833, said:

"In Virginia and other grain-growing slave states, the blacks do not

support themselves, and the only profit their masters derive from them

is, repulsive as the idea may justly seem, in breeding them, like

other live stock for the more southern states."

Rev. Dr. GRAHAM, of Fayetteville, N.C. at a Colonization Meeting,

held in that place in the fall of 1837 said:

"He had resided for 15 years in one of the largest slaveholding

counties in the state, had long and anxiously considered the subject,

and still it was dark. There were nearly 7000 slaves offered in New

Orleans market last winter. From Virginia alone 6000 were annually

sent to the south; and from Virginia and N.C. there had gone, in the

same direction, in the last twenty years, 300,000 slaves. While not

4000 had gone to Africa. What it portended, he could not predict, but

he felt deeply, that _we must awake in these states and consider the

subject_."

Hon. PHILIP DODDRIDGE, of Virginia, in his speech in the Virginia

Convention, in 1829, [Debates p. 89.] said:--

"The acquisition of Texas will greatly _enhance the value of the

property_, in question, [Virginia slaves.]"

Hon C.F. MERCER, in a speech before the same Convention, in 1829,

says:

"The tables of the natural growth of the slave population demonstrate,

when compared with the increase of its numbers in the commonwealth for

twenty years past, that an annual revenue of not less than a million

and a half of dollars is derived from the exportation of a part of

this population." (Debates, p. 199.)

Hon. HENRY CLAY, of Ky., in his speech before the Colonization

Society, in 1829, says:

"It is believed that nowhere in the farming portion of the United

States, would slave labor be generally employed, if the proprietor

were not tempted to RAISE SLAVES BY THE HIGH PRICE OF THE SOUTHERN

MARKET WHICH KEEPS IT UP IN HIS OWN."

The New Orleans Courier, Feb. 15, 1839, speaking of the prohibition of

the African Slave-trade, while the internal slave-trade is plied,

says:

"The United States law may, and probably does, put MILLIONS _into the

pockets of the people living between the Roanoke, and Mason and

Dixon's line_; still we think it would require some casuistry to show

that _the present slave-trade from that quarter_ is a whit better than

the one from Africa. One thing is certain--that its results are more

menacing to the tranquillity of the people in this quarter, as there

can be no comparison between the ability and inclination to do

mischief, possessed by the Virginia negro, and that of the rude and

ignorant African."

That the New Orleans Editor does not exaggerate in saying that the

internal slave-trade puts 'millions' into the pockets of the

slaveholders in Maryland and Virginia, is very clear from the

following statement, made by the editor of the Virginia Times, an

influential political paper, published at Wheeling, Virginia. Of the

exact date of the paper we are not quite certain, it was, however,

sometime in 1836, probably near the middle of the year--the file will

show. The editor says:--

"We have heard intelligent men estimate the number of slaves exported

from Virginia within the last twelve months, at 120,000--each slave

averaging at least $600, making an aggregate at $72,000,000. Of the

number of slaves exported, not more than _one-third_ have been sold,

(the others having been carried by their owners, who have removed,)

_which would leave in the state the_ SUM OF $24,000,000 ARISING FROM

THE SALE OF SLAVES."

According to this estimate about FORTY THOUSAND SLAVES WERE SOLD OUT

OF THE STATE OF VIRGINIA IN A SINGLE YEAR, and the 'slave-breeders'

who hold them, put into their pockets TWENTY-FOUR MILLION OF DOLLARS,

the price of the 'souls of men.'

The New York Journal of Commerce of Oct. 12, 1835, contained a letter

from a Virginian, whom the editor calls 'a very good and sensible

man,' asserting that TWENTY THOUSAND SLAVES had been driven to the

south from Virginia _during that year_, nearly one-fourth of which was

then remaining.

The Maryville (Tenn.) Intelligencer, some time in the early part of

1836, (we have not the date,) says, in an article reviewing a

communication of Rev. J.W. Douglass, of Fayetteville, North Carolina:

"Sixty thousand slaves passed through a little western town for the

southern market, during the year 1835."

The Natchez (Miss.) Courier, says "that the states of Louisiana,

Mississippi, Alabama, and Arkansas, imported TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY

THOUSAND SLAVES from the more northern slave states in the year 1836."

The Baltimore American gives the following from a Mississippi paper,

of 1837:

"The report made by the committee of the citizens Of Mobile, appointed

at their meeting held on the 1st instant, on the subject of the

existing pecuniary pressure, states, among other things: that so large

has been the return of slave labor, that purchases by Alabama of that

species of property from other states since 1833, have amounted to

about TEN MILLION DOLLARS ANNUALLY."

FURTHER the _inhumanity_ of a slaveholding 'public opinion' toward

slaves, follows legitimately from the downright ruffianism of the

slaveholding _spirit_ in the 'highest class of society,' When roused,

it tramples upon all the proprieties and courtesies, and even common

decencies of life, and is held in check by none of those

considerations of time, and place, and relations of station,

character, law, and national honor, which are usually sufficient, even

in the absence of conscientious principles, to restrain other men from

outrages. Our National Legislature is a fit illustration of this.

Slaveholders have converted the Congress of the United States into a

very bear garden. Within the last three years some of the most

prominent slaveholding members of the House, and among them the late

speaker, have struck and kicked, and throttled, and seized each other

by the hair, and with their fists pummelled each other's faces, on the

floor of Congress. We need not publish an account of what every body

knows, that during the session of the last Congress, Mr. Wise of

Virginia and Mr. Bynum of North Carolina, after having called each

other "liars, villains" and "damned rascals" sprung from their seats

"both sufficiently armed for any desperate purpose," cursing each

other as they rushed together, and would doubtless have butchered each

other on the floor of Congress, if both had not been seized and held

by their friends.

The New York Gazette relates the following which occurred at the close

of the session of 1838.

"The House could not adjourn without another brutal and bloody row. It

occurred on Sunday morning immediately at the moment of adjournment,

between Messrs. Campbell and Maury, both of Tennessee. He took offence

at some remarks made to him by his colleague, Mr. Campbell, and the

fight followed."

The Huntsville (Ala.) Democrat of June 16, 1838, gives the particulars

which follow:

"Mr. Maury is said to be badly hurt. He was near losing his life by

being knocked through the window; but his adversary, it is said, saved

him by clutching the hair of his head with his left hand, while he

struck him with his right."

The same number of the Huntsville Democrat, contains the particulars

of a fist-fight on the floor of the House of Representatives, between

Mr. Bell, the late Speaker, and his colleague Mr. Turney of Tennessee.

The following is an extract:

"Mr. Turney concluded his remarks in reply to Mr. Bell, in the course

of which he commented upon that gentleman's course at different

periods of his political career with great severity.

"He did not think his colleague [Mr. Turney,] was actuated by private

malice, but was the willing voluntary instrument of others, the tool

of tools.

Mr. Turney. It is false! it is false!

Mr. Stanley called Mr. TURNEY to order.

At the same moment both gentlemen were perceived in personal conflict,

and blows with the fist were aimed by each at the other. Several

members interfered, and suppressed the personal violence; others

called order, order, and some called for the interference of the

Speaker.

The Speaker hastily took the chair, and insisted upon order; but both

gentlemen continued struggling, and endeavoring, notwithstanding the

constraint of their friends, to strike each other."

The correspondent of the New York Gazette gives the following, which

took place about the time of the preceding affrays:

"The House was much agitated last night, by the passage between Mr.

Biddle, of Pittsburgh, and Mr. Downing, of Florida. Mr. D. exclaimed

"do you impute falsehood to me!" at the same time catching up some

missile and making a demonstration to advance upon Mr. Biddle. Mr.

Biddle repeated his accusation, and meanwhile, Mr. Downing was

arrested by many members."

The last three fights all occurred, if we mistake not, in the short

space of one month. The fisticuffs between Messrs. Bynum and Wise

occurred at the previous session of Congress. At the same session

Messrs. Peyton of Tenn. and Wise of Virginia, went armed with pistols

and dirks to the meeting of a committee of Congress, and threatened to

shoot a witness while giving his testimony.

We begin with the first on the list. Who are Messrs. Wise and Bynum?

Both slaveholders. Who are Messrs. Campbell and Maury? Both

slaveholders. Who are Messrs. Bell and Turney? Both slaveholders. Who

is Mr. Downing, who seized a weapon and rushed upon Mr. Biddle? A

slaveholder. Who is Mr. Peyton who drew his pistol on a witness before

a committee of Congress? A slaveholder of course. All these bullies

were slaveholders, and they magnified their office, and slaveholding

was justified of her children. We might fill a volume with similar

chronicles of slaveholding brutality. But time would fail us. Suffice

it to say, that since the organization of the government, a majority

of the most distinguished men in the slaveholding states have gloried

in strutting over the stage in the character of murderers. Look at the

men whom the people delight to honor. President Jackson, Senator

Benton, the late Gen. Coffee,--it is but a few years since these

slaveholders shot at, and stabbed, and stamped upon each other in a

tavern broil. General Jackson had previously killed Mr. Dickenson.

Senator Clay of Kentucky has immortalized himself by shooting at a

near relative of Chief Justice Marshall, and being wounded by him; and

not long after by shooting at John Randolph of Virginia. Governor

M'Duffie of South Carolina has signalized himself also, both by

shooting and being shot,--so has Governor Poindexter, and Governor

Rowan, and Judge M'Kinley of the U.S. Supreme Court, late senator in

Congress from Alabama,--but we desist; a full catalogue would fill

pages. We will only add, that a few months since, in the city of

London, Governor Hamilton, of South Carolina, went armed with pistols,

to the lodgings of Daniel O'Connell, 'to stop his wind' in the

bullying slang of his own published boast. During the last session of

Congress Messrs. Dromgoole and Wise[41] of Virginia, W. Cost Johnson

and Jenifer of Maryland, Pickens and Campbell of South Carolina, and

we know not how many more slaveholding members of Congress have been

engaged, either as principals or seconds, in that species of murder

dignified with the name of duelling. But enough; we are heart-sick.

What meaneth all this? Are slaveholders worse than other men? No! but

arbitrary power has wrought in them its mystery of iniquity, and

poisoned their better nature with its infuriating sorcery.

Their savage ferocity toward each other when their passions are up, is

the natural result of their habit of daily plundering and oppressing

the slave.

The North Carolina Standard of August 30, 1837, contains the following

illustration of this ferocity exhibited by two southern lawyers in

settling the preliminaries of a duel.

"The following conditions were proposed by Alexander K. McClung, of

Raymond, in the State of Mississippi, to H.C. Stewart, as the laws to

govern a duel they were to fight near Vicksburg:

"Article 1st. The parties shall meet opposite Vicksburg, in the State

of Louisiana, on Thursday the 29th inst. precisely at 4 o'clock, P.M.

Agreed to.

"2d. The weapons to be used by each shall weigh one pound two and a

half ounces, measuring sixteen inches and a half in length, including

the handle, and one inch and three-eighths in breadth. Agreed to.

"3d. Both knives shall be sharp on one edge, and on the back shall be

sharp only one inch at the point. Agreed to.

"4th. Each party shall stand at the distance of eight feet from the

other, until the word is given. Agreed to.

"5th. The second of each party shall throw up, with a silver dollar, on

the ground, for the word, and two best out of three shall win the

word. Agreed to.

"6th. After the word is given, either party may take what advantage he

can with his knife, but on throwing his knife at the other, shall be

shot down by the second of his opponent. Agreed to.

"7th. Each party shall be stripped entirely naked, except one pair of

linen pantaloons; one pair of socks, and boots or pumps as the party

please. Acceded to.

"8th. The wrist of the left arm of each party shall be tied tight to

his left thigh, and a strong cord shall be fastened around his left

arm at the elbow, and then around his body. Rejected.

"9th. After the word is given, each party shall be allowed to advance

or recede as he pleases, over the space of twenty acres of ground,

until death ensues to one of the parties. Agreed to--the parties to be

placed in the centre of the space.

"10th. The word shall be given by the winner of the same, in the

following manner, viz: "Gentlemen are you ready?" Each party shall

then answer, "I am!" The second giving the word shall then distinctly

command--_strike_. Agreed to.

"If either party shall violate these rules, upon being notified by the

second of either party, he may be liable to be shot down instantly. As

established usage points out the duty of both parties, therefore

notification is considered unnecessary."

The FAVORITE AMUSEMENTS of slaveholders, like the gladiatorial shows

of Rome and the Bull Fights of Spain, reveal a public feeling

insensible to suffering, and a depth of brutality in the highest

degree revolting to every truly noble mind. One of their most common

amusements is cock fighting. Mains of cocks, with twenty, thirty, and

fifty cocks on each side, are fought for hundreds of dollars aside.

The fowls are armed with steel spurs or '_gafts_,' about two inches

long. These 'gafts' are fastened upon the legs by sawing off the

_natural_ 'spur,' leaving only enough of it to answer the purpose of a

_stock_ for the tube of the "gafts," which are so sharp that at a

stroke the fowls thrust them through each other's necks and heads, and

tear each other's bodies till one or both dies, then two others are

brought forward for the amusement of the multitude assembled, and this

barbarous pastime is often kept up for days in succession, hundreds

and thousands gathering from a distance to witness it. The following

advertisements from the Raleigh Register, June 18, 1838, edited by

Messrs. Gales and Son, the father and brother of Mr. Gales, editor of

the National Intelligencer, and late Mayor of Washington City, reveal

the public sentiment of North Carolina.

"CHATHAM AGAINST NASH, or any other county in the State. I am

authorized to take a bet of any amount that may be offered, to FIGHT A

MAIN OF COCKS, at any place that may be agreed upon by the parties--to

be fought the ensuing spring. GIDEON ALSTON. Chatham county, June 7,

1838."

Two weeks after, this challenge was answered as follows:

"TO MR. GIDEON ALSTON, of Chatham county, N.C.

"SIR: In looking over the North Carolina Standard of the 20th inst. I

discover a challenge over your signature, headed 'Chatham against

Nash,' in which you state: that you are 'authorized to take a bet of

any amount that may be offered, to fight a main of cocks, at any place

that may be agreed upon by the parties, to be fought the ensuing

spring' which challenge I ACCEPT: and do propose to meet you at

Rolesville, in Wake county, N.C. on the last Wednesday in May next,

the parties to show thirty-one cocks each--fight four days, and be

governed by the rules as laid down in Turner's Cock Laws--which, if

you think proper to accede to, you will signify through this or any

other medium you may select, and then I will name the sum for which we

shall fight, as that privilege was surrendered by you in your

challenge.

"I am, sir, very respectfully, &c. NICHOLAS W. ARRINGTON, near

Hilliardston, Nash co. North Carolina June 22nd, 1838"

The following advertisement in the Richmond Whig, of July 12, 1837,

exhibits the public sentiment of Virginia.

"MAIN OF COCKS.--A large 'MAIN OF COCKS,' 21 a side, for $25 'the

fight', and $500 'the odd,' will be fought between the County of

Dinwiddie on one part, and the Counties of Hanover and Henrico on the

other.

"The 'regular' fighting will be continued _three days_, and from the

large number of 'game uns' on both sides and in the adjacent country,

will be prolonged no doubt a _fourth_. To prevent confusion and

promote 'sport,' the Pit will be enclosed and furnished with _seats_;

so that those having a curiosity to witness a species of diversion

originating in a better day (for they had no rag money then,) can have

_that_ very _natural_ feeling gratified.

"The Petersburg Constellation is requested to copy."

_Horse-racing_ too, as every body knows, is a favorite amusement of

slaveholders. Every slave state has its race course, and in the older

states almost every county has one on a small scale. There is hardly a

day in the year, the weather permitting, in which crowds do not

assemble at the south to witness this barbarous sport. Horrible

cruelty is absolutely inseparable from it. Hardly a race occurs of any

celebrity in which some one of the coursers is not lamed, 'broken

down,' or in some way seriously injured, often for life, and not

unfrequently they are killed by the rupture of some vital part in the

struggle. When the heats are closely contested, the blood of the

tortured animal drips from the lash and flies at every leap from the

stroke of the rowel. From the breaking of girths and other accidents,

their riders (mostly slaves) are often thrown and maimed or killed.

Yet these amusements are attended by thousands in every part of the

slave states. The wealth and fashion, the gentlemen and _ladies_ of

the 'highest circles' at the south, throng the race course.

That those who can fasten steel spurs upon the legs of dunghill fowls,

and goad the poor birds to worry and tear each other to death--and

those who can crowd by thousands to _witness_ such barbarity--that

those who can throng the race-course and with keen relish witness the

hot pantings of the life-struggle, the lacerations and fitful spasms

of the muscles, swelling through the crimsoned foam, as the tortured

steeds rush in blood-welterings to the goal--that such, should look

upon the sufferings of their slaves with, indifference is certainly

small wonder.

Perhaps we shall be told that there are thronged race-courses at the

North. True, there are a few, and they are thronged chiefly by

_Southerners_, and 'Northern men with _Southern_ principles,' and

supported mainly by the patronage of slaveholders who summer at the

North. Cock-fighting and horse-racing are "_Southern_ institutions."

The idleness, contempt of labor, dissipation, sensuality, brutality,

cruelty, and meanness, engendered by the habit of making men and women

work without pay, and flogging them if they demur at it, constitutes a

congenial soil out of which cock-fighting and horse-racing are the

spontaneous growth.

Again,--The kind treatment of the slaves is often argued from the

liberal education and enlarged views of slaveholders. The facts and

reasonings of the preceding pages have shown, that 'liberal

education,' despotic habits and ungoverned passions work together with

slight friction. And every day's observation shows that the former is

often a stimulant to the latter.

But the notion so common at the north that the majority of the

slaveholders are persons of education, is entirely erroneous. A _very

few_ slaveholders in each of the slave states have been men of _ripe_

education, to whom our national literature is much indebted. A larger

number may be called _well_ educated--these reside mostly in the

cities and large villages, but a majority of the slaveholders are

ignorant men, thousands of them notoriously so, _mere boors_ unable to

write their names or to read the alphabet.

No one of the slave states has probably so much general education as

Virginia. It is the oldest of them--has furnished one half of the

presidents of the United States--has expended more upon her university

than any state in the Union has done during the same time upon its

colleges--sent to Europe nearly twenty years since for her most

learned professors, and in fine, has far surpassed every other slave

state in her efforts to disseminate education among her citizens, and

yet, the Governor of Virginia in his message to the legislature (Jan.

7, 1839) says, that of four thousand six hundred and fourteen adult

males in that state, who applied to the county clerks for marriage

licenses in the year 1837, 'ONE THOUSAND AND FORTY SEVEN _were unable

to write their names_.' The governor adds, 'These statements, it will

be remembered, are confined to one sex: the education of females it is

to be feared, is in a condition of _much greater neglect_.'

The Editor of the Virginia Times, published at Wheeling, in his paper

of Jan. 23, 1839, says,--

"We have every reason to suppose that one-fourth of the people of the

state cannot write their names, and they have not, of course, any

other species of education."

Kentucky is the child of Virginia; her first settlers were some of the

most distinguished citizens of the mother state; in the general

diffusion of intelligence amongst her citizens Kentucky is probably in

advance of all the slave states except Virginia and South Carolina;

and yet Governor Clark, in his last message to the Kentucky

Legislature, (Dec 5, 1838) makes the following declaration: "From the

computation of those most familiar with the subject, it appears that

AT LEAST ONE THIRD OF THE ADULT POPULATION OF THE STATE ARE UNABLE TO

WRITE THEIR NAMES."

The following advertisement in the "Milledgeville (Geo.) Journal,"

Dec. 26, 1837, is another specimen from one of the 'old thirteen.'

"NOTICE.--I, Pleasant Webb, of the State of Georgia, Oglethorpe

county, being an _illiterate man, and not able to write my own name_,

and whereas it hath been represented to me that there is a certain

promissory note or notes out against me that I know nothing of, and

further that some man in this State holds a bill of sale for _a

certain negro woman named Ailsey and her increase, a part of which is

now in my possession_, which I also know nothing of. Now do hereby

certify and declare, that I have no knowledge whatsoever of any such

papers existing in my name as above stated and I hereby require all or

any person or persons whatsoever holding or pretending to hold any

such papers, to produce them to me within thirty days from the date

hereof, shewing their authority for holding the same, or they will be

considered fictitious and fraudulently obtained or raised, by some

person or persons for base purposes after my death.

"Given under my hand this 2nd day of December, 1837. PLEASANT WEBB.

his mark X."

FINALLY, THAT SLAVES MUST HABITUALLY SUFFER GREAT CRUELTIES, FOLLOWS

INEVITABLY FROM THE BRUTAL OUTRAGES WHICH THEIR MASTERS INFLICT ON

EACH OTHER.

Slaveholders, exercising from childhood irresponsible power over human

beings, and in the language of President Jefferson, "giving loose to

the worst of passions" in the treatment of their slaves, become in a

great measure unfitted for self control in their intercourse with each

other. Tempers accustomed to riot with loose reins, spurn restraints,

and passions inflamed by indulgence, take fire on the least friction.

We repeat it, the state of society in the slave states, the duels, and

daily deadly affrays of slaveholders with each other--the fact that

the most deliberate and cold-blooded murders are committed at noon

day, in the presence of thousands, and the perpetrators eulogized by

the community as "honorable men," reveals such a prostration of law,

as gives impunity to crime--a state of society, an omnipresent public

sentiment reckless of human life, taking bloody vengeance on the spot

for every imaginary affront, glorying in such assassinations as the

only true honor and chivalry, successfully defying the civil arm, and

laughing its impotency to scorn.

When such things are done in the green tree, what will be done in the

dry? When slaveholders are in the habit of caning, stabbing, and

shooting _each other_ at every supposed insult, the unspeakable

enormities perpetrated by such men, with such passions, upon their

defenceless slaves, _must_ be beyond computation. To furnish the

reader with an illustration of slaveholding civilization and morality,

as exhibited in the unbridled fury, rage, malignant hate, jealousy,

diabolical revenge, and all those infernal passions that shoot up rank

in the hot-bed of arbitrary power, we will insert here a mass of

testimony, detailing a large number of affrays, lynchings,

assassinations, &c., &c., which have taken place in various parts of

the slave states within a brief period--and to leave no room for cavil

on the subject, these extracts will be made exclusively from

newspapers published in the slave states, and generally in the

immediate vicinity of the tragedies described. They will not be made

second hand from _northern_ papers, but from the original _southern_

papers, which now lie on our table.

Before proceeding to furnish details of certain classes of crimes in

the slave states, we advertise the reader--1st. That _we shall not_

include in the list those crimes which are ordinarily committed in the

free, as well as in the slave states. 2d. We shall not include any of

the crimes perpetrated by whites upon slaves and free colored persons,

who constitute a majority of the population in Mississippi and

Louisiana, a large majority in South Carolina, and, on an average,

two-fifths in the other slave states. 3d. Fist fights, canings,

beatings, biting off noses and ears, gougings, knockings down, &c.,

unless they result in _death_, will not be included in the list, nor

will _ordinary_ murders, unless connected with circumstances that

serve as a special index of public sentiment. 4th. Neither will

_ordinary, formal duels_ be included, except in such cases as just

specified. 5th. The only crimes which, as the general rule, will be

specified, will be deadly affrays with bowie knives, dirks, pistols.

rifles, guns, or other death weapons, and _lynchings_. 6th. The crimes

enumerated will, for the most part, be only those perpetrated

_openly_, without _attempt at concealment_. 7th. We shall not attempt

to give a full list of the affrays, &c., that took place in the

respective states during the period selected, as the only files of

southern papers to which we have access are very imperfect.

The reader will perceive, from these preliminaries, that only a

_small_ proportion of the crimes actually perpetrated in the

respective slave states during the period selected, will be entered

upon this list. He will also perceive, that the crimes which will be

presented are of a class rarely perpetrated in the free states; and if

perpetrated there at all, they are, with scarcely an exception,

committed either by slaveholders, temporarily resident in them, or by

persons whose passions have been inflamed by the poison of a southern

contact--whose habits and characters have become perverted by living

among slaveholders, and adopting the code of slaveholding morality.

We now proceed to the details, commencing with the new state of

Arkansas.

ARKANSAS.

At the last session of the legislature of that state, Col. John

Wilson, President of the Bank at Little Rock, the capital of the

state, was elected Speaker of the House of Representatives. He had

been elected to that office for a number of years successively, and

was one of the most influential citizens of the state. While presiding

over the deliberations of the House, he took umbrage at words spoken

in debate by Major Anthony, a conspicuous member, came down from the

Speaker's chair, drew a large bowie knife from his bosom, and attacked

Major A., who defended himself for some time, but was at last stabbed

through the heart, and fell dead on the floor. Wilson deliberately

wiped the blood from his knife, and returned to his seat. The

following statement of the circumstances of the murder, and the trial

of the murderer, is abridged from the account published in the

Arkansas Gazette, a few months since--it is here taken from the

Knoxville (Tennessee) Register, July 4, 1838.

"On the 14th of December last, Maj. Joseph J. Anthony, a member of the

Legislature of Arkansas, was murdered, while performing his duty as a

member of the House of Representatives, by John Wilson, Speaker of

that House.

"The facts were these: A bill came from the Senate, commonly called the

_Wolf Bill_. Among the amendments proposed, was one by Maj. Anthony,

that the signature of the President of the Real Estate Bank should be

attached to the certificate of the wolf scalp. Col. Wilson, the

Speaker, asked Maj. Anthony whether he intended the remark as

personal. Maj. Anthony promptly said, "_No, I do not_." And at that

instant of time, a message was delivered from the Senate, which

suspended the proceedings of the House for a few minutes. Immediately

after the messenger from the Senate had retired, Maj. Anthony rose

from his seat, and said he wished to explain, that he did not intend

to insult the Speaker or the House; when Wilson, interrupting,

peremptorily ordered him to take his seat. Maj. Anthony said, as a

member, he had a right to the floor, to explain himself. Wilson said,

in an angry tone, 'Sit down, or you had better;' and thrust his hand

into his bosom, and drew out a large bowie knife, 10 or 11 inches in

length, and descended from the Speaker's chair to the floor, with the

knife drawn in a menacing manner. Maj. Anthony, seeing the danger he

was placed in, by Wilson's advance on him with a drawn knife, rose

from his chair, set it out of his way, stepped back a pace or two, and

drew his knife. Wilson caught up a chair, and struck Anthony with it.

Anthony, recovering from the blow, caught the chair in his left hand,

and a fight ensued over the chair. Wilson received two wounds, one on

each arm, and Anthony lost his knife, either by throwing it at Wilson,

or it escaped by accident. After Anthony had lost his knife, Wilson

advanced on Anthony, who was then retreating, looking over his

shoulder. Seeing Wilson pursuing him, he threw a chair. Wilson still

pursued, and Anthony raised another chair as high as his breast, with

a view, it is supposed, of keeping Wilson off. Wilson then caught hold

of the chair with his left hand, raised it up, and with his right hand

deliberately thrust the knife, up to the hilt, into Anthony's heart,

and as deliberately drew it out, and wiping off the blood with his

thumb and finger, retired near to the Speaker's chair.

"As the knife was withdrawn from Anthony's heart, he fell a lifeless

corpse on the floor, without uttering a word, or scarcely making a

struggle; so true did the knife, as deliberately directed, pierce his

heart.

"Three days elapsed before the constituted authorities took any notice

of this horrible deed; and not then, until a relation of the murdered

Anthony had demanded a warrant for the apprehension of Wilson. Several

days then elapsed before he was brought before an examining court. He

then, in a carriage and four, came to the place appointed for his

trial. Four or five days were employed in the examination of

witnesses, and never was a clearer case of murder proved than on that

occasion. Notwithstanding, the court (Justice Brown dissenting)

admitted Wilson to bail, and positively refused that the prosecuting

attorney for the state should introduce the law, to show that it was

not a bailable case, or even to hear an argument from him.

"At the time appointed for the session of the Circuit Court, Wilson

appeared agreeably to his recognizance. A motion was made by Wilson's

counsel for _change of venue_, founded on the affidavits of Wilson,

and two other men. The court thereupon removed the case to Saline

county, and ordered the Sheriff to take Wilson into custody, and

deliver him over to the Sheriff of Saline county.

"The Sheriff of Pulaski never confined Wilson one minute, but

permitted him to go where he pleased, without a guard, or any

restraint imposed on him whatever. On his way to Saline, he

entertained him freely at his own house, and the next day delivered

him over to the Sheriff of that county, who conducted the prisoner to

the debtor's room in the jail, and gave him the key, so that he and

every body else had free egress and ingress at all times. Wilson

invited every body to call on him, as he wished to see his friends,

and his room was crowded with visitors, who called to drink grog, and

laugh and talk with him. But this theatre was not sufficiently large

for his purpose. He afterwards visited the dram-shops, where he freely

treated all that would partake with him, and went fishing and hunting

with others at pleasure, and entirely with out restraint. He also ate

at the same table with the Judge, while on trial.

"When the court met at Saline, Wilson was put on his trial. Several

days were occupied in examining the witnesses in the case. After the

examination was closed, while Col. Taylor was engaged in a very able,

lucid, and argumentative speech, on the part of the prosecution, some

man collected a parcel of the rabble, and came within a few yards of

the court-house door, and bawled in a loud voice, 'part them--part

them!' Every body supposed there was an affray, and ran to the doors

and windows to see; behold, there was nothing more than the man, and

the rabble he had collected around him, for the purpose of annoying

Col. Taylor while speaking. A few minutes afterwards, this same person

brought a horse near the court-house door, and commenced crying the

horse, as though he was for sale, and continued for ten or fifteen

minutes to ride before the court-house door, crying the horse, in a

loud and boisterous tone of voice. The Judge sat as a silent listener

to the indignity thus offered the court and counsel by this man,

without interposing his authority.

"To show the depravity of the times, and the people, after the verdict

had been delivered by the jury, and the court informed Wilson that he

was discharged, there was a rush toward him: some seized him by the

hand, some by the arm, and there was great and loud rejoicing and

exultation, directly in the presence of the court: and Wilson told the

Sheriff to take the jury to a grocery, that he might treat them, and

invited every body that chose to go. The house was soon filled to

overflowing. The rejoicing was kept up till near supper time: but to

cap the climax, soon after supper was over, a majority of the jury,

together with many others, went to the rooms that had been occupied

several days by the friend and relation of the murdered Anthony, and

commenced a scene of the most ridiculous dancing, (as it is believed,)

in triumph for Wilson, and as a triumph over the feelings of the

relations of the departed Anthony. The scene did not close here. The

party retired to a dram-shop, and continued their rejoicing until

about half after 10 o'clock. They then collected a parcel of horns,

trumpets, &c., and marched through the streets, blowing them, till

near day, when one of the company rode his horse in the porch

adjoining the room which was occupied by the relations of the

deceased."

This case is given to the reader at length, in order fully to show,

that in a community where the law sanctions the commission of every

species of outrage upon one class of citizens, it fosters passions

which will paralyze its power to protect the other classes. Look at

the facts developed in this case, as exhibiting the state of society

among slaveholders. 1st. That the members of the legislature are _in

the habit_ of wearing bowie knives. Wilson's knife was 10 or 11 inches

long.[42] 2d. The murderer, Wilson, was a man of wealth, president of

the bank at the capital of the state, a high military officer, and

had, for many years, been Speaker of the House of Representatives, as

appears from a previous statement in the Arkansas Gazette. 3d. The

murder was committed in open day, before all the members of the House,

and many spectators, not one of whom seems to have made the least

attempt to intercept Wilson, as he advanced upon Anthony with his

knife drawn, but "made way for him," as is stated in another account.

4th. Though the murder was committed in the state-house, at the

capital of the state, days passed before the civil authorities moved

in the matter; and they did not finally do it, until the relations of

the murdered man demanded a warrant for the apprehension of the

murderer. Even then, several days elapsed before he was brought before

an examining court. When his trial came on, he drove to it in state,

drew up before the door with "his coach and four," alighted, and

strided into court like a lord among his vassals; and there, though a

clearer case of deliberate murder never reeked in the face of the sun,

yet he was admitted to bail, the court absolutely refusing to hear an

argument from the prosecuting attorney, showing that it was not a

bailable case. 5th. The sheriff of Pulaski county, who had Wilson in

custody, "never confined him a moment, but permitted him to go at

large wholly unrestrained." When transferred to Saline co. for trial,

the sheriff of that county gave Wilson the same liberty, and he spent

his time in parties of pleasure, fishing, hunting, and at houses of

entertainment. 6th. Finally, to demonstrate to the world, that justice

among slaveholders is consistent with itself; that authorizing

man-stealing and patronising robbery, it will, of course, be the

patron and associate of murder also, the judge who sat upon the case,

and the murderer who was on trial for his life before him, were

boon-companions together, eating and drinking at the same table

throughout the trial. Then came the conclusion of the farce--the

uproar round the court-house during the trial, drowning the voice of

the prosecutor while pleading, without the least attempt by the court

to put it down--then the charge of the judge to the jury, and their

unanimous verdict of acquittal--then the rush from all quarters around

the murderer with congratulations--the whole crowd in the court room

shouting and cheering--then Wilson leading the way to a tavern,

inviting the sheriff, and jury, and all present to "a treat"--then the

bacchanalian revelry kept up all night, a majority of the jurors

participating--the dancing, the triumphal procession through the

streets with the blowing of horns and trumpets, and the prancing of

horses through the porch of the house occupied by the relations of the

murdered Anthony, adding insult and mockery to their agony.

A few months before this murder on the floor of the legislature,

George Scott, Esq., formerly marshall of the state was shot in an

affray at Van Buren, Crawford co., Arkansas, by a man named Walker;

and Robert Carothers, in an affray in St. Francis co., shot William

Rachel, just as Rachel was shooting at Carothers' father. (_National

Intelligencer, May 8, 1837, and Little Rock Gazette, August 30,

1837._)

While Wilson's trial was in progress, Mr. Gabriel Sibley was stabbed

to the heart at a public dinner, in St. Francis co., Arkansas, by

James W. Grant. (_Arkansas Gazette, May 30, 1838._)

Hardly a week before this, the following occurred:

"On the 16th ult., an encounter took place at Little Rock, Ark.,

between David F. Douglass, a young man of 18 or 19, and Dr. Wm. C.

Howell. A shot was exchanged between them at the distance of 8 or 10

feet with double-barrelled guns. The load of Douglass entered the left

hip of Dr. Howell, and a buckshot from the gun of the latter struck a

negro girl, 13 or 14 years of age, just below the pit of the stomach.

Douglass then fired a second time and hit Howell in the left groin,

penetrating the abdomen and bladder, and causing his death in four

hours. The negro girl, at the last dates, was not dead, but no hopes

were entertained of her recovery. Douglass was committed to await his

trial at the April term of the Circuit Court."--_Louisville Journal_.

The Little Rock Gazette of Oct. 24, says, "We are again called upon

to record the cold blooded murder of a valuable citizen. On the 10th

instant, Col. John Lasater, of Franklin co., was murdered by John W.

Whitson, who deliberately shot him with a shot gun, loaded with a

handful of rifle balls, six of which entered his body. He lived twelve

hours after he was shot.

"Whitson is the son of William Whitson, who was unfortunately killed,

about a year since, in a rencontre with Col. Lasater, (who was fully

exonerated from all blame by a jury,) and, in revenge of his father's

death, committed this bloody deed."

These atrocities were all perpetrated within a few months of the time

of the deliberate assassination, on the floor of the legislature by

the speaker, already described, and are probably but a small portion

of the outrages committed in that state during the same period. The

state of Arkansas contains about forty-five thousand white

inhabitants, which is, if we mistake not, the present population of

Litchfield county, Connecticut. And we venture the assertion, that a

public affray, with deadly weapons, has not taken place in that county

for fifty years, if indeed ever since its settlement a century and a

half ago.

MISSOURI.

Missouri became one of the United States in 1821. Its present white

population is about two hundred and fifty thousand. The following are

a few of the affrays that have occurred there during the years 1837

and '38.

The "Salt River Journal" March 8, 1838, has the following.

"_Fatal Affray_.--An affray took place during last week, in the town

of New London, between Dr. Peake and Dr. Bosley, both of that village,

growing out of some trivial matter at a card party. After some words,

Bosley threw a glass at Peake, which was followed up by other acts of

violence, and in the quarrel Peake stabbed Bosley, several times with

a dirk, in consequence of which, Bosley died the following morning.

The court of inquiry considered Peake justifiable, and discharged him

from arrest."

From the "St. Louis Republican," of September 29, 1837.

"We learn that a fight occurred at Bowling-Green, in this state, a few

days since, between Dr. Michael Reynolds and Henry Lalor. Lalor

procured a gun, and Mr. Dickerson wrested the gun from him; this

produced a fight between Lalor and Dickerson, in which the former

stabbed the latter in the abdomen. Mr. Dickerson died of the wound."

The following was in the same paper about a month previous, August 21,

1837.