By Mr. Martin, of Virginia:--

“And if you come among us, we will do with you as we did with

John Brown,--hang you up as high as Haman. I say that as a

Virginian.”[117]

But enough,--enough; and I now turn from this branch of the great

subject with a single remark. While exhibiting the Character of

Slave-Masters, these numerous instances--and they might be multiplied

indefinitely--attest the weakness of their cause. It requires no

special talent to estimate the insignificance of an argument that can

be supported only by violence. The scholar will not forget the ancient

story of the colloquy between Jupiter and a simple countryman. They

talked with ease and freedom until they differed, when the angry god

at once menaced his honest opponent with a thunderbolt. “Ah! ah!” said

the clown, with perfect composure, “now, Jupiter, I know you are wrong.

You are always wrong, when you appeal to your thunder.” And permit

me to say, that every appeal, whether to the Duel, the revolver, or

the bludgeon, every menace of personal violence and every outrage of

language, besides disclosing a hideous Barbarism, also discloses the

fevered nervousness of a cause already humbled in debate. And then how

impotent! Truth, like the sunbeam, cannot be soiled by outward touch,

while the best testimony to its might is found in the active passions

it provokes. There are occasions when enmity is a panegyric.

* * * * *

(4.) Much as has been said to exhibit the Character of Slave-Masters,

the work would be incomplete, if I failed to point out that

_unconsciousness_ of its fatal influence which completes the evidence

of the Barbarism under which they live. Nor am I at liberty to decline

this topic; but I shall be brief.

That Senators should seriously declare Slavery “ennobling,” at least

to the master, and “the black marble keystone of our national arch,”

would excite wonder, if it were not explained by examples of history.

There are men who, in the spirit of paradox, make themselves partisans

of a bad cause, as Jerome Cardan wrote an Encomium on Nero. But where

there is no disposition to paradox, it is natural that a cherished

practice should blind those under its influence; nor is there any

end to these exaggerations. According to Thucydides, piracy in the

early ages of Greece was alike wide-spread and honorable; and so much

was this the case, that Telemachus and Mentor, on landing at Pylos,

were asked by Nestor if they were “pirates,”[118]--precisely as in

South Carolina the stranger might be asked if he were a Slave-Master.

Kidnapping, too, a kindred indulgence, was openly avowed, and I doubt

not held to be “ennobling.” Next to the unconsciousness of childhood is

the unconsciousness of Barbarism. The real Barbarian is unconscious as

an infant; and the Slave-Master shows much of the same character. No

New-Zealander exults in his tattoo, no savage of the Northwest Coast

exults in his flat head, more than the Slave-Master of these latter

days--always, of course, with honorable exceptions--exults in his

unfortunate condition. The Slave-Master hugs his disgusting practice

as the Carib of the Gulf hugged Cannibalism, and as Brigham Young now

hugs Polygamy. The delusion of the Goitre is repeated. This prodigious

swelling of the neck, nothing less than a loathsome wallet of flesh

pendulous upon the breast, and sometimes so enormous, that the victim,

unable to support the burden, crawls along the ground, is common

to the population on the slopes of the Alps;[119] but, accustomed

to this deformity, the sufferer comes to regard it with pride,--as

Slave-Masters with us, unable to support their burden, and crawling

along the ground, regard Slavery,--and it is said that those who have

no swelling are laughed at and called “goose-necked.”[120]

With knowledge comes distrust and the modest consciousness of

imperfection; but the pride of Barbarism has no such limitation. It

dilates in the thin air of ignorance, and makes boasts. Surely, if

the illustrations which I have presented to-day are not entirely

inapplicable, then must we find in the boasts of Slave-Masters new

occasion to regret that baleful influence under which even love of

country is lost in love of Slavery, and the great motto of Franklin is

reversed, so as to read, _Ubi Servitudo, ibi Patria_.

It is this same influence which renders Slave-Masters insensible

to those characters which are among the true glories of the

Republic,--which makes them forget that Jefferson, who wrote the

Declaration of Independence, and Washington, who commanded our armies,

were Abolitionists,--which renders them indifferent to the inspiring

words of the one and the commanding example of the other. Of these

great men it is the praise, well deserving perpetual mention, and

grudged only by malign influence, that, reared amidst Slavery, they did

not hesitate to condemn it. Jefferson, in repeated utterances, alive

with the fire of genius and truth, has contributed the most important

testimony to Freedom ever pronounced in this hemisphere, in words equal

to the cause; and Washington, often quoted as a Slave-Master, in the

solemn dispositions of his last will and testament, has contributed

an example which is beyond even the words of Jefferson. Do not, Sir,

call him Slave-Master, who entered into the presence of his Maker only

as Emancipator of his slaves. The difference between such men and the

Slave-Masters whom I expose to-day is so precise that it cannot be

mistaken. The first _looked down_ upon Slavery; the second _look up_

to Slavery. The first, recognizing its wrong, were at once liberated

from its insidious influence; while the latter, upholding it as right

and “ennobling,” must naturally draw from it motives of conduct. The

first, conscious of the character of Slavery, were not misled by

it; the second, dwelling in unconsciousness of its true character,

surrender blindly to its barbarous tendencies, and, verifying the words

of the poet,--

“So perfect is their misery,

Not once perceive their foul disfigurement,

But boast themselves more comely than before.”[121]

Mr. President, it is time to close this branch of the argument. The

Barbarism of Slavery has been exposed, first, in the Law of Slavery,

with its five pretensions, founded on the assertion of property in man,

the denial of the conjugal relation, the infraction of the parental

tie, the exclusion from knowledge, and the robbery of the fruits of

another’s labor, all these having the single object of _compelling men

to work without wages_, while its Barbarism was still further attested

by tracing the law in its origin to barbarous Africa; and, secondly,

it has been exposed in a careful examination of economical results,

illustrated by contrast between the Free States and the Slave States,

sustained by official figures. From this exposure I proceeded to

consider the influence on Slave-Masters, whose true character stands

confessed,--first, in the Law of Slavery, which is their work,--next,

in the relations between them and their slaves, maintained by three

inhuman instruments,--then, in their intercourse with each other and

with society: and here we have seen them at home, under the immediate

influence of Slavery, also in the communities of which they are a

part, practising violence, and pushing it everywhere, in street-fight

and duel; especially raging against all who question the pretensions

of Slavery, entering even into the Free States,--but not in lawless

outbreaks only, also in official acts, as of Georgia and of South

Carolina regarding two Massachusetts citizens,--and then, ascending

in audacity, entering the Halls of Congress, where they have turned,

as at home, against all who oppose their assumptions; while the whole

gloomy array of unquestionable facts is closed by the melancholy

unconsciousness which constitutes one of the distinctive features of

this Barbarism.

* * * * *

Such is my answer to the assumption of fact in behalf of Slavery

by Senators on the other side. But before passing to that other

assumption of Constitutional Law, which forms the second branch

of this discussion, I add testimony to the influence of Slavery

on Slave-Masters in other countries, which is too important to be

neglected, and may properly find place here.

Among those who have done most to press forward in Russia that sublime

act of emancipation by which the present Emperor is winning lustre,

not only for his own country, but for our age, is M. Tourgueneff.

Originally a Slave-Master himself, with numerous slaves, and

residing where Slavery prevailed, he saw, with the instincts of a

noble character, the essential Barbarism of this relation, and in

an elaborate work on Russia, which is now before me, exposed it

with rare ability and courage. Thus he speaks of its influence on

Slave-Masters:--

“But if Slavery degrades the slave, it degrades the master

more. This is an old adage, and long observation has proved to

me that this adage is not a paradox. In fact, how can that man

respect his own dignity, his own rights, who has not learned

to respect either the rights or the dignity of his fellow-man?

What control can the moral and religious sentiments have over

a person who sees himself invested with a power so eminently

contrary to morality and religion? The continual exercise

of an unjust claim, even when moderated, ends in corrupting

the character of the man, and perverting his judgment.… The

possession of a slave being the result of injustice, the

relations of the master with the slave cannot be otherwise than

a succession of wrongs. Among good masters (and it is agreed

so to call those who do not abuse their power as much as they

might) these relations are invested with forms less repugnant

than among other masters; but here the difference ends. Who can

remain always pure, when, induced by disposition, excited by

temper, influenced by caprice, he may with impunity oppress,

insult, humiliate his fellow-men? And be it remarked, that

enlightenment, civilization, do not avail here. The enlightened

man, the civilized man, is nevertheless a man; that he may not

oppress, it is necessary that it should be impossible for him

to oppress. All men cannot, like Louis the Fourteenth, throw

the cane out of the window, when they feel an inclination to

strike.”[122]

Another authority, unimpeachable at all points, whose fortune it has

been, from extensive travels, to see Slavery in the most various forms,

and Slave-Masters under the most various conditions,--I refer to the

great African traveller, Dr. Livingstone,--thus touches the character

of Slave-Masters:--

“I can never cease to be most unfeignedly thankful that I was

not born in a land of slaves. No one can understand the effect

of the unutterable meanness of the slave system on the minds

of those who, _but for the strange obliquity which prevents

them from feeling the degradation of not being gentlemen enough

to pay for services rendered_, would be equal in virtue to

ourselves. Fraud becomes as natural to them as ‘paying one’s

way’ is to the rest of mankind.”[123]

And so does the experience of Slavery in other countries confirm the

sad experience among us.

Charles Sumner: his complete works, volume 06 (of 20) · 第 132 / 208 题