Produced by Curtis Weyant and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive/American Libraries.)
Transcriber's note: Original spelling has been maintained and not
standardized. The numerous short bibliographical reference notes that
were originally printed as sidenotes have been set in brackets here and
included directly into the text; the longer text footnotes have been
renumbered for consistency. To indicate text in italic font,
_underscores_ have been used. Words without italics inside longer italic
sentences are indicated by =equal signs=.
A DISSERTATION ON _SLAVERY_: WITH A PROPOSAL FOR THE GRADUAL ABOLITION
OF IT, IN THE _STATE OF VIRGINIA_.
BY ST. GEORGE TUCKER, _PROFESSOR OF LAW IN THE UNIVERSITY OF WILLIAM AND
MARY, AND ONE OF THE JUDGES OF THE GENERAL COURT, IN VIRGINIA_.
_Slavery not only violates the Laws of Nature, and of civil Society, it
also wounds the best Forms of Government: in a Democracy, where all Men
are equal, Slavery is contrary to the Spirit of the Constitution.
MONTESQUIEU._
PHILADELPHIA: PRINTED FOR MATHEW CAREY, No. 118, MARKET-STREET. 1796.
TO THE
_General Assembly of Virginia_,
To whom it belongs to decide upon the expediency and practicability of a
plan for the _gradual abolition_ of _Slavery_ in this commonwealth,
The following pages are most respectfully submitted and inscribed,
BY THE AUTHOR.
_Williamsburg, in Virginia, May 20, 1796._
TO THE READER.
_The following pages form a part of a course of Lectures on Law and
Police, delivered in the University of William and Mary, in this
commonwealth. The Author considering the Abolition of Slavery in this
State, as an object of the first importance, not only to our moral
character and domestic peace, but even to our political salvation; and
being persuaded that the accomplishment of so momentous and desirable an
undertaking will in great measure depend upon the early adoption of some
plan for that purpose, with diffidence submits to the consideration of
his countrymen his ideas on a subject of such consequence. He flatters
himself that the plan he ventures to suggest, is liable to fewer
objections than most others that have been submitted to the
consideration of the public, as it will be attended with a gradual
change of condition in the blacks, and cannot possibly affect the
interest either of =creditors=, or any other description of persons of
the =present generation=: and posterity he makes no doubt will feel
themselves relieved from a perilous and grievous burden by the timely
adoption of a plan, whose operation may be felt by them, before they are
borne down by a weight which threatens destruction to our happiness both
public and private._
====>The following ADDITIONAL NOTES have been received from the Author
since the body of this work was printed off.
_In page 20, after the word =arms=, in line 5, read this note:_
This was the case under the laws of the state; but the Act of 2. Cong.
c. 33. for establishing an uniform militia throughout the United States,
seems to have excluded all but free white men from bearing arms in the
militia.
_To the word =slave=, page 47, line 14, add the following note:_
It may not be improper here to note, that the first congress of the
United States, at their third session, Dec. 1793, passed an act to
prohibit the carrying on the slave trade from the United States to any
foreign place or country; the provisions of which seem well calculated
to restrain the citizens of united America from embarking in so infamous
a traffick.
ON THE STATE OF SLAVERY IN VIRGINIA.
In the preceding Enquiry[1] into the absolute rights of the citizens of
united America, we must not be understood as if those rights were
equally and universally the privilege of all the inhabitants of the
United States, or even of all those, who may challenge this land of
freedom as their native country. Among the blessings which the Almighty
hath showered down on these states, there is a large portion of the
bitterest draught that ever flowed from the cup of affliction. Whilst
America hath been the land of promise to Europeans, and their
descendants, it hath been the vale of death to millions of the wretched
sons of Africa. The genial light of liberty, which hath here shone with
unrivalled lustre on the former, hath yielded no comfort to the latter,
but to them hath proved a pillar of darkness, whilst it hath conducted
the former to the most enviable state of human existence. Whilst we were
offering up vows at the shrine of Liberty, and sacrificing hecatombs
upon her altars; whilst we swore irreconcilable hostility to her
enemies, and hurled defiance in their faces; whilst we adjured the God
of Hosts to witness our resolution to live free, or die, and imprecated
curses on their heads who refused to unite with us in establishing the
empire of freedom; we were imposing upon our fellow men, who differ in
complexion from us, a _slavery_, ten thousand times more cruel than the
utmost extremity of those grievances and oppressions, of which we
complained. Such are the inconsistencies of human nature; such the
blindness of those who pluck not the beam out of their own eyes, whilst
they can espy a moat, in the eyes of their brother; such that partial
system of morality which confines rights and injuries, to particular
complexions; such the effect of that self-love which justifies, or
condemns, not according to principle, but to the agent. Had we turned
our eyes inwardly when we supplicated the Father of Mercies to aid the
injured and oppressed; when we invoked the Author of Righteousness to
attest the purity of our motives, and the justice of our cause;[2] and
implored the God of Battles to aid our exertions in its defence, should
we not have stood more self convicted than the contrite publican! Should
we not have left our gift upon the altar, that we might be first
reconciled to our brethren whom we held in bondage? Should we not have
loosed their chains, and broken their fetters? Or if the difficulties
and dangers of such an experiment prohibited the attempt during the
convulsions of a revolution, is it not our duty to embrace the first
moment of constitutional health and vigour, to effectuate so desirable
an object, and to remove from us a stigma, with which our enemies will
never fail to upbraid us, nor our consciences to reproach us? To form a
just estimate of this obligation, to demonstrate the incompatibility of
a state of slavery with the principles of our government, and of that
revolution upon which it is founded, and to elucidate the practicability
of its total, though gradual, abolition, it will be proper to consider
the nature of slavery, its properties, attendants, and consequences in
general; its rise, progress, and present state not only in this
commonwealth, but in such of our sister states as have either perfected,
or commenced the great work of its extirpation; with the means they have
adopted to effect it, and those which the circumstances and situation of
our country may render it most expedient for us to pursue, for the
attainment of the same noble and important end.[3]
[Footnote 1: The subject of a preceding Lecture, with which the present
was immediately connected, was, An Enquiry into the Rights of Persons,
as Citizens of the United States of America.]
[Footnote 2: The American standard, at the commencement of those
hostilities which terminated in the revolution, had these words upon
it----AN APPEAL TO HEAVEN!]
[Footnote 3: The Author here takes the liberty of making his
acknowledgments to the reverend Jeremiah Belknap, D. D. of Boston, and
to Zephaniah Swift, Esq. representative in congress from Connecticut,
for their obliging communications; he hath occasionally made use of them
in several parts of this Lecture, where he may have omitted referring to
them.]
According to Justinian [Lib. 1. Tit. 2.], the first general division of
persons, in respect to their rights, is into freemen and slaves. It is
equally the glory and the happiness of that country from which the
citizens of the United States derive their origin, that the traces of
slavery, such as at present exists in several of the United States, are
there utterly extinguished. It is not my design to enter into a minute
enquiry whether it ever had existence there, nor to compare the
situation of villeins, during the existence of pure villenage, with that
of modern domestic slaves. The records of those times, at least, such as
have reached this quarter of the globe, are too few to throw a
satisfactory light on the subject. Suffice it that our ancestors
migrating hither brought not with them any prototype of that slavery
which hath been established among us. The first introduction of it into
Virginia was by the arrival of a Dutch ship from the coast of Africa
having _twenty_ Negroes on board, who were sold here in the year 1620
[Stith 182.]. In the year 1638 we find them in Massachusetts.[4] They
were introduced into Connecticut soon after the settlement of that
colony; that is to say, about the same period.[5] Thus early had our
forefathers sown the seeds of an evil, which, like a leprosy, hath
descended upon their posterity with accumulated rancour, visiting the
sins of the fathers upon succeeding generations.--The climate of the
northern states less favourable to the constitution of the natives of
Africa [Dr. Belknap. Zephan. Swift.], than the southern, proved alike
unfavourable to their propagation, and to the increase of their numbers
by importations. As the southern colonies advanced in population, not
only importations increased there, but Nature herself, under a climate
more congenial to the African constitution, assisted in multiplying the
blacks in those parts, no less than in diminishing their numbers in the
more rigorous climates of the north; this influence of climate moreover
contributed extremely to increase or diminish the value of the slave to
the purchasers, in the different colonies. White labourers, whose
constitutions were better adapted to the severe winters of the New
England colonies, were there found to be preferable to the Negroes [Dr.
Belknap. Zephan. Swift.], who, accustomed to the influence of an ardent
sun, became almost torpid in those countries, not less adapted to give
vigour to their laborious exercises, than unfavourable to the
multiplication of their species; in those colonies, where the winters
were not only milder, and of shorter duration, but succeeded by an
intense summer heat, as invigorating to the African, as debilitating to
the European constitution, the Negroes were not barely more capable of
performing labour than the Europeans, or their descendants, but the
multiplication of the species was at least equal; and, where they met
with humane treatment, perhaps greater than among the whites. The
purchaser therefore calculated not upon the value of the labour of his
slave only, but, if a female, he regarded her as "the fruitful mother of
an hundred more:" and many of these unfortunate people have there been
in this state, whose descendants even in the compass of two or three
generations have gone near to realize the calculation.--The great
increase of slavery in the southern, in proportion to the northern
states in the union, is therefore not attributable, _solely_, to the
effect of sentiment, but to natural causes; as well as those
considerations of profit, which have, perhaps, an equal influence over
the conduct of mankind in general, in whatever country, or under
whatever climate their destiny hath placed them. What else but
considerations of this nature could have influenced the merchants of the
freest nation, at that time in the world, to embark in so nefarious a
traffic, as that of the human race, attended, as the African slave trade
has been, with the most atrocious aggravations of cruelty, perfidy, and
intrigues, the objects of which have been the perpetual fomentation of
predatory and intestine wars? What, but similar considerations, could
prevail on the government of the same country, even in these days, to
patronize a commerce so diametrically opposite to the generally received
maxims of that government. It is to the operation of these
considerations in the parent country, not less than to their influence
in the colonies, that the rise, increase, and continuance of slavery in
those British colonies which now constitute united America, are to be
attributed, as I shall endeavour to shew in the course of the present
enquiry. It is now time to enquire into the nature of slavery, in
general, and take a view of its consequences, and attendants in this
commonwealth, in particular.
[Footnote 4: Dr. Belknap's answers to St. G. T.'s queries.]
[Footnote 5: Letter from Zephaniah Swift to St. G. T.]
Slavery, says a well informed writer [Hargrave's case of Negroe
Somerset.] on the subject, has been attended with circumstances so
various in different countries, as to render it difficult to give a
general definition of it. Justinian calls it a constitution of the law
of nations, by which one man is made subject to another, contrary to
nature [Lib. 1. Tit. 3. Sect. 2.]. Grotius describes it to be an
obligation to serve another for life, in consideration of diet, and
other common necessaries [Lib. 2. c. 5. Sect. 27]. Dr. Rutherforth,
rejecting this definition, informs us, that perfect slavery is an
obligation to be directed by another in all one's actions [Lib. 1. c.
20. pa. 474.]. Baron Montesquieu defines it to be the establishment of a
right, which gives one man such a power over another, as renders him
absolute master over his life and fortune [Lib. 15. c. 1.]. These
definitions appear not to embrace the subject fully, since they respect
the condition of the slave, in regard to his _master_, only, and not in
regard to the _state_, as well as the _master_. The author last
mentioned observes, that the constitution of a state may be free, and
the subject not so. The subject free, and not the constitution of the
state [Lib. 12. c. 1.]. Pursuing this idea, instead of attempting a
general definition of slavery; I shall, by considering it under a
threefold aspect, endeavour to give a just idea of its nature.
I. When a nation is, from any external cause, deprived of the right of
being governed by its own laws, only, such a nation may be considered as
in a state of _political slavery_. Such is the state of conquered
countries, and generally, of colonies, and other dependant governments.
Such was the state of united America before the revolution. In this case
the personal rights of the subject may be so far secured by wholesome
laws, as that the individual may be esteemed free, whilst the state is
subject to a higher power: this subjection of one nation, or people, to
the will of another, constitutes the first species of slavery, which, in
order to distinguish it from the other two, I have called political;
inasmuch as it exists only in respect to the governments, and not to the
individuals of the two countries. Of this it is not our business to
speak, at present.
II. Civil liberty being, no other than natural liberty so far restrained
by human laws, and no farther, as is necessary and expedient for the
general advantage of the public [Blackstone's Com. c. 125], whenever
that liberty is, by the laws of the state, further restrained than is
necessary and expedient for the general advantage, a state of _civil
slavery_ commences immediately: this may affect the whole society, and
every description of persons in it, and yet the constitution of the
state be perfectly free. And this happens whenever the laws of a state
respect the form, or energy of the government, more than the happiness
of the citizen; as in Venice, where the most oppressive species of civil
slavery exists, extending to every individual in the state, from the
poorest gondolier to the members of the senate, and the doge himself.
This species of slavery also exists whenever there is an inequality of
rights, or privileges, between the subjects or citizens of the same
state, except such as necessarily result from the exercise of a public
office; for the pre-eminence of one class of men must be founded and
erected upon the depression of another; and the measure of exaltation in
the former, is that of the slavery of the latter. In all governments,
however constituted, or by what description soever denominated, wherever
the distinction of rank prevails, or is admitted by the constitution,
this species of slavery exists. It existed in every nation, and in every
government in Europe before the French revolution. It existed in the
American colonies before they became independent states; and
notwithstanding the maxims of equality which have been adopted in their
several constitutions, it exists in most, if not all, of them, at this
day, in the persons of our free Negroes and mulattoes; whose civil
incapacities are almost as numerous as the civil rights of our free
citizens. A brief enumeration of them, may not be improper before we
proceed to the third head.
Free Negroes and mulattoes are by our constitution excluded from the
right of suffrage,[6] and by consequence, I apprehend, from office too:
they were formerly incapable of serving in the militia, except as
drummers or pioneers, but now I presume they are enrolled in the lists
of those that bear arms, though formerly punishable for presuming to
appear at a muster-field [1723. c. 2.]. During the revolution war many
of them were enlisted as soldiers in the regular army. Even slaves were
not rejected from military service at that period, and such as served
faithfully during the period of their enlistment, were emancipated by an
act passed after the conclusion of the war [Oct. 1783. c. 3.]. An act of
justice to which they were entitled upon every principle. All but
housekeepers, and persons residing upon the frontiers are prohibited
from keeping, or carrying any gun, powder, shot, club, or other weapon
offensive or defensive [1748. c. 31. Edit. 1794.]: Resistance to a white
person, in any case, was, formerly, and now, in any case, except a
wanton assault on the Negroe or mulattoe, is punishable by whipping [Ib.
c. 103.]. No Negroe or mulattoe can be a witness in any prosecution, or
civil suit in which a white person is a party [1794. c. 141.]. Free
Negroes together with slaves were formerly denied the benefit of clergy
in cases where it was allowed to white persons; but they are now upon an
equal footing as to the allowance of clergy, though not as to the
consequence of that allowance, inasmuch as the court may superadd other
corporal punishments to the burning in the hand usually inflicted upon
white persons, in the like cases [1794. c. 103.]. Emancipated Negroes
may be sold to pay the debts of their former master contracted before
their emancipation; and they may be hired out to satisfy their taxes
where no sufficient distress can be had. Their children are to be bound
out apprentices by the overseers of the poor. Free Negroes have all the
advantages in capital cases, which white men are entitled to, except a
trial by a jury of their own complexion: and a slave suing for his
freedom shall have the same privilege. Free Negroes residing, or
employed to labour in any town must be registered; the same thing is
required of such as go at large in any county. The penalty in both cases
is a fine upon the person employing, or harbouring them, and
imprisonment of the Negroe [1794. c. 163.]. The migration of free
Negroes or mulattoes to this state is also prohibited; and those who do
migrate hither may be sent back to the place from whence they came
[1794. c. 164.]. Any person, not being a Negroe, having one-fourth or
more Negroe blood in him is deemed a mulattoe. The law makes no other
distinction between Negroes and mulattoes, whether slaves or freemen.
These incapacities and disabilities are evidently the fruit of the third
species of slavery, of which it remains to speak; or, rather, they are
scions from the same common stock: which is,
III. That condition in which one man is subject to be directed by
another in all his actions; and this constitutes a state of _domestic
slavery_; to which state all the incapacities and disabilities of civil
slavery are incident, with the weight of other numerous calamities
superadded thereto. And here it may be proper to make a short enquiry
into the origin and foundation of domestic slavery in other countries,
previous to its fatal introduction into this.
[Footnote 6: The Constitution of Virginia, art. 7. declares, that the
right of suffrage shall remain as then exercised: the act of 1723, c. 4
(edit. 1733,), sect. 23, declared, that no Negroe, mulattoe, or Indian,
shall have any vote at the election of burgesses, or any other election
whatsoever.--This act, it is presumed, was in force at the adoption of
the constitution.--The act of 1785, c. 55 (edit. of 1794, c. 17,), also
expressly excludes them from the right of suffrage.]
Slaves, says Justinian, are either born such or become so [Inst. lib. 1.
tit. 1.]. They are born slaves when they are children of bond women; and
they become slaves, either by the law of nations, that is, by captivity;
for it is the practice of our generals to sell their captives, being
accustomed to preserve, and not to destroy them: or by the civil law,
which happens when a free person, above the age of twenty, suffers
himself to be sold for the sake of sharing the price given for him. The
author of the Commentaries on the Laws of England thus combats the
reasonableness of all these grounds [1. b. c. 423.]: "The conqueror,"
says he, "according to the civilians, had a right to the life of his
captives; and having spared that, has a right to deal with him as he
pleases. But it is an untrue position, when taken generally, that by the
law of nature or nations, a man may kill his enemy: he has a right to
kill him only in particular cases; in cases of absolute necessity for
self-defence; and it is plain that this absolute necessity did not
subsist, since the victor did not actually kill him, but made him
prisoner. War itself is justifiable only on principles of
self-preservation; and therefore it gives no other right over prisoners
but merely to disable them from doing harm to us, by confining their
persons: much less can it give a right to kill, torture, abuse, plunder,
or even to enslave, an enemy, when the war is over. Since therefore the
right of _making_ slaves by captivity, depends on a supposed right of
slaughter, that foundation failing, the consequence drawn from it must
fail likewise. But, secondly, it is said slavery may begin _jure
civili_; when one man sells himself to another. This, if only meant of
contracts to serve, or work for, another, is very just: but when applied
to strict slavery, in the sense of the laws of old Rome or modern
Barbary, is also impossible. Every sale implies a price, a _quid pro
quo_, an equivalent given to the seller, in lieu of what he transfers to
the buyer; but what equivalent can be given for life and liberty, both
of which, in absolute slavery, are held to be in the master's disposal?
His property, also, the very price he seems to receive, devolves, _ipso
facto_, to his master, the instant he becomes a slave. In this case,
therefore, the buyer gives nothing, and the seller receives nothing: of
what validity then can a sale be, which destroys the very principles
upon which all sales are founded? Lastly we are told, that besides these
two ways by which slaves are acquired, they may also be hereditary;
"_servi nascuntur_"; the children of acquired slaves are, "jure
naturae", by a negative kind of birthright, slaves also.--But _this,
being built on the two former rights, =must= fall_ together with them.
If neither captivity, nor the sale of one's self, can by the law of
nature and reason reduce the parent to slavery, _much less_ can they
reduce the offspring." Thus by the most clear, manly, and convincing
reasoning does this excellent author refute every claim upon which the
practice of slavery is founded, or by which it has been supposed to be
justified, at least, in modern times.[7] But were we even to admit, that
a captive taken in a _just war_, might by his conqueror be reduced to a
state of slavery, this could not justify the claim of Europeans to
reduce the natives of Africa to that state: it is a melancholy, though
well-known fact, that in order to furnish supplies of these unhappy
people for the purposes of the slave trade, the Europeans have
constantly, by the most insidious (I had almost said infernal) arts,
fomented a kind of perpetual warfare among the ignorant and miserable
people of Africa; and instances have not been wanting, where, by the
most shameful breach of faith, they have trepanned end made slaves of
the _sellers_ as well as the _sold_.[8] That such horrid practices have
been sanctioned by a civilized nation; that a nation ardent in the cause
of liberty, and enjoying its blessings in the fullest extent, can
continue to vindicate a right established upon such a foundation; that a
people who have declared, "That _all men =are by nature= equally[Bill of
Rights, art. 1.]-free =and= independent_", and have made this
declaration the first article in the foundation of their government,
should in defiance of so sacred a truth, recognized by themselves in so
solemn a manner, and on so important an occasion, tolerate a practice
incompatible therewith, is such an evidence of the weakness and
inconsistency of human nature, as every man who hath a spark of
patriotic fire in his bosom must wish to see removed from his own
country. If ever there was a cause, if ever an occasion, in which all
hearts should be united, every nerve strained, and every power exerted,
surely the restoration of human nature to its inalienable right is such:
Whatever obstacles, therefore, may hitherto have retarded the attempt,
he that can appreciate the honour and happiness of his country, will
think it time that we should attempt to surmount them.
[Footnote 7: These arguments are, in fact, borrowed from the Spirit of
Laws.]
[Footnote 8: "About the same time (the reign of queen Elizabeth) a
traffic in the human species, called Negroes, was introduced into
England, which is one of the most odious and unnatural branches of trade
the sordid and avaricious mind of mortals ever invented.--It had been
carried on before this period by Genoese traders, who bought a patent
from Charles the fifth, containing an exclusive right of carrying
Negroes from the Portuguese settlements in Africa, to America and the
West Indies; but the English nation had not yet engaged in the
iniquitous traffic.--One William Hawkins, an expert English seaman,
having made several voyages to the coast of Guinea, and from thence to
Brazil and the West Indies, had acquired considerable knowledge of the
countries. At his death he left his journals with his son, John Hawkins,
in which he described the lands of America and the West Indies as
exceedingly rich and fertile, but utterly neglected for want of hands to
improve them. He represented the natives of Europe as unequal to the
task in such a scorching climate; but those of Africa as well adapted to
undergo the labours requisite. Upon which John Hawkins immediately
formed a design of transporting Africans into the western world; and
having drawn a plan for the execution of it, he laid it before some of
his opulent neighbours for encouragement and approbation. To them it
appeared promising and advantageous. A subscription was opened and
speedily filled up, by Sir Lionel Ducket, Sir Thomas Lodge, Sir William
Winter, and others, who plainly perceived the vast profits that would
result from such a trade. Accordingly three ships were fitted out, and
manned by an hundred select sailors, whom Hawkins encouraged to go with
him by promises of good treatment and great pay. In the year 1562 he set
sail for Africa, and in a few weeks arrived at the country called Sierra
Leona, where he began his commerce with the Negroes. While he trafficked
with them, he found the means of giving them a charming description of
the country to which he was bound; the unsuspicious Africans listened to
him with apparent joy and satisfaction, and seemed remarkably fond of
his European trinkets, food, and clothes. He pointed out to them the
barrenness of the country, and their naked and wretched condition, and
promised if any of them were weary of their miserable circumstances, and
would go along with him, he would carry them to a plentiful land, where
they should _live happy_, and _receive_ an abundant _recompence_ for
their labours. He told them the country was inhabited by such men as
himself and his jovial companions, and _assured_ them of _kind usage_
and _great friendship_. In short, the Negroes were overcome by his
flattering promises, and _three hundred_ stout fellows accepted his
offer, and consented to embark along with him. Every thing being settled
on the most amicable terms between them, Hawkins made preparations for
his voyage. But in the night before his departure his Negroes were
attacked by a large body from a different quarter; Hawkins, being
alarmed with the shrieks and cries of dying persons, ordered his men to
the assistance of his slaves, and having surrounded the assailants,
carried a number of them on board as prisoners of war. The next day he
set sail for Hispaniola with his cargo of human creatures; but during
the passage, he treated the prisoners of war in a different manner from
his volunteers. Upon his arrival he disposed of his cargo to great
advantage; and endeavoured to inculcate on the Spaniards who bought the
negroes the same distinction to be observed: but they having _purchased
all at the same rate_, considered them as slaves of the same condition,
and consequently treated all alike."
Hawkins having returned to England, soon after made preparations for a
second voyage. "In his passage he fell in with the Minion man of war,
which accompanied him to the Coast of Africa. After his arrival he began
as formerly to traffic with the Negroes, endeavouring by persuasions and
_prospects_ of _reward_, to induce them to go along with him--but now
they were more reserved and jealous of his designs, and as none of their
neighbours had returned, they were apprehensive he had killed and eat
them. The crew of the man of war observing the Africans backward and
suspicious, began to laugh at his gentle and dilatory methods of
proceeding, and proposed having immediate recourse to force and
compulsion--but Hawkins considered it as cruel and unjust, and tried by
persuasions, promises and threats, to prevail on them to desist from a
purpose so unwarrantable and barbarous. In vain did he urge his
authority and instructions from the Queen: the bold and headstrong
sailors would hear of no restraints. Drunkenness and avarice are deaf to
the voice of humanity. They pursue their violent design, and, after
several unsuccessful attacks, in which _many_ of them lost their
_lives_, the cargo was at length compleated by barbarity and force.
"Hence arose that horrid and inhuman practice of dragging Africans into
slavery, which has since been _so_ pursued, in defiance of every
principle of justice and religion. Had Negroes been brought from the
flames, to which in some countries they were devoted on their falling
prisoners of war, and in others, sacrificed at the funeral obsequies of
the great and powerful among themselves; in short had they by this
traffic been delivered from _torture_ or _death_, European merchants
_might have some excuse_ to plead in its vindication. _But according to
the common mode in which it has been conducted_, we must confess it a
difficult matter to conceive a _single_ argument in its defence. And
though policy has given countenance and sanction to the trade, yet every
candid and impartial man must confess, that it is atrocious and
unjustifiable in every light in which it can be viewed, and turns
merchants into a band of robbers, and trade into atrocious acts of fraud
and violence." Historical Account of South-Carolina and Georgia.
Anonymous. London printed in 1779--page 20, &c.
"The number of Negroe slaves bartered for in one year (viz. 1768), on
the Coast of Africa from Cape Blanco, to Rio Congo, amounted to 104,000
souls, whereof more than half (viz. 53,000) were shipped on account of
British merchants, and 6,300 on the account of British Americans." The
Law of Retribution by Granville Sharpe, Esq. page 147. note.]
But how loudly soever reason, justice, and (may I not add) religion,[9]
condemn the practice of slavery, it is acknowledged to have been very
ancient, and almost universal. The Greeks, the Romans, and the ancient
Germans also practiced it, as well as the more ancient Jews and
Egyptians. By the Germans it was transmitted to the various kingdoms
which arose in Europe out of the ruins of the Roman empire. In England
it subsisted for some ages under the name of _villeinage_.[10] In Asia
it seems to have been general, and in Africa universal, and so remains
to this day: In Europe it hath long since declined; its first declension
there, is said to have been in Spain, as early as the eighth century;
and it is alleged to have been general about the middle of the
fourteenth, and was near expiring in the sixteenth, when the discovery
of the American continent, and the eastern and western coasts of Africa
gave rise to the introduction of a new species of slavery. It took its
origin from the Portuguese, who, in order to supply the Spaniards with
persons able to sustain the fatigue of cultivating their new possessions
in America, particularly the islands, opened a trade between Africa and
America for the sale of Negroes, about the year 1508. The expedient of
having slaves for labour was not long peculiar to the Spaniards, being
afterwards adopted by other European colonies [Hargrave, ib.]: and
though some attempts have been made to stop its progress in most of the
United States, and several of them have the fairest prospects of success
in attempting the extirpation of it, yet is others, it hath taken such
deep root, as to require the most strenuous exertions to eradicate it.
[Footnote 9: See the various tracts on this subject, by Granville
Sharpe, Esq. of London.]
[Footnote 10: The condition of a _villein_ had most of the incidents I
have before described in giving the idea of _slavery_, in general. His
services were uncertain and indeterminate, such as his lord thought fit
to require; or as some of our ancient writers express it, he knew not in
the evening what he was to do in the morning, he was bound to do
whatever he was commanded. He was liable to beating, imprisonment, and
every other chastisement his lord could devise, except killing and
maiming. He was incapable of acquiring property for his own benefit; he
was himself the subject of property; as such saleable and transmissible.
If he was a villein regardant he passed with the land to which he was
annexed, but might be severed at the will of his lord; if he was a
villein in gross, he was an hereditament, or a chattel real, according
to his lord's interest; being descendible to the heir, where the lord
was absolute _owner_, and transmissible to the executor where the lord
had only a term of years in him. Lastly, the slavery extended to the
issue, if the father was a villein, our law deriving the condition of
the child from that of the father, contrary to the Roman law, in which
the rule was, _partus sequitur ventum_. Hargrave's Case of Negroe
Somerset, page 26 and 27.
The same writer refers the origin of vassalage in England, principally
to the wars between the British, Saxon, Danish, and Norman nations,
contending for the sovereignty of that country, in opposition to the
opinion of judge Fitzherbert, who supposes villeinage to have commenced
at the conquest. Ib. 27, 28. And this he proves from Spelman and other
antiquaries. Ib. The writ _de nativo habendo_, by which the lord was
enabled to recover his villein that had absconded from him, creates a
presumption that all the natives of England were at some period reduced
to a state of villeinage, the word _nativus_, which signified a villein,
most clearly designating the person meant thereby to be a _native_: this
etymon is obvious, as well from the import of the word _nativus_, as
from the history of the more remote ages of Britain. Sir Edward Coke's
Etymology, "_quia plerumque nascuntur servi_," is one of those puerile
conceits, which so frequently occur in his works, and are unworthy of so
great a man.
Barrington in his observations upon _magna carta_ c. 4. observes, that
the villeins who held by servile tenures were considered as so many
negroes on a sugar plantation; the words "_liber homo_," in magna carta,
c. 14. with all deference to sir Edward Coke, who says they mean a
_free-holder_, I understand as meaning _a free man_,[Liber homo, &c. the
title of _freeman_ was formerly _confined_ to the _nobility_ and
_gentry_ who were _descended_ of free ancestors.--Burgh's Political
Disquisitions, vol. iii. p. 400, who cites Spelman's Glossary, voc.
Liber homo.] as contradistinguished from a _villein_: for in the very
next sentence the words "et _villanus_ alterius quam noster," occur.
Villeins must certainly have been numerous at that day, to have obtained
a place in the Great Charter. It is no less an evidence that their
condition was in a state of melioration.
In Poland, at this day, the peasants seem to be in an absolute state of
slavery, or at least of villeinage, to the nobility, who are the
land-holders.]
The first introduction of Negroes into Virginia happened, as we have
already mentioned, in the year 1620; from that period to the year 1662
there is no compilation of our laws, in print, now to be met with. In
the revision made in that year, we find an act declaring that no
Englishman, trader, or other, who shall bring in any Indians as servants
and assign them over to any other, shall sell them for _slaves_, nor for
any other time than English of like age should serve by act of assembly
[1662. c. 136.]. The succeeding session all children born in this
country were declared to be bond, or free, according to the condition of
the mother [1662. Sess. d. c. 12.]. In 1667 it was declared, "That the
conferring of baptism doth not alter the condition of the person
baptized, as to his bondage or freedom [1667. c. 2.]." This was done,
"that divers masters freed from this doubt may more carefully endeavour
the propagating of Christianity, by permitting their slaves to be
baptized." It would have been happy for this unfortunate race of men if
the same tender regard for their bodies, had always manifested itself in
our laws, as is shewn for their souls in this act. But this was not the
case; for two years after, we meet with an act, declaring, "That if any
slave resist his master, or others, by his master's orders correcting
him, and by the extremity of the correction should chance to die, such
death should not be accounted felony: but the master or other person
appointed by his master to punish him, be acquit from molestation:
_since it could not be presumed that prepensive malice_, which alone
makes _murder felony_, should induce any man to destroy his own
estate."[11] This cruel and tyrannical act was, at three different
periods [1705. c. 49. 1723. c. 4. 1748. c. 31.] re-enacted, with very
little alteration; and was not finally repealed till the year 1788
[1788. c. 23.]--above a century after it had first disgraced our code.
In 1668 we meet with the first traces of emancipation, in an act which
subjects Negroe women set free to the tax on titheables [1668. c. 7.].
Two years after [1670. c. 5.], an act passed prohibiting _Indians_ or
Negroes, manumitted, or otherwise set free, though baptized, from
purchasing Christian servants [1670. c. 12.]. From this act it is
evident that _Indians_ had _before_ that time been made slaves, as well
as Negroes, though we have no traces of the original act by which they
were reduced to that condition. An act of the same session recites that
disputes had arisen whether Indians taken in war by any other nation,
and by that nation sold to the English, are servants for _life_, or for
a term of years; and declaring that all _servants_, not being
Christians, imported into this country by _shipping_, shall be _slaves_
for their life-time; but that what shall come by land, shall serve, if
boys and girls, until thirty years of age; if men and women twelve
years, and no longer. On a rupture with the Indians in the year 1679 it
was, for the _better encouragement of soldiers_, declared that what
_Indian_ prisoners should be _taken in war_ should be free purchase to
the soldier _taking_ them [1679. c. 1.]. Three years after it was
declared that all _servants_ brought into this country by sea or land,
not being Christians, whether Negroes, Moors, mulattoes or Indians,
except Turks and Moors in amity with Great Britain, and all Indians
which should thereafter be sold by neighbouring Indians, or any others
trafficking with us, as slaves, should be slaves to all intents and
purposes [1682. c. 1.]. This act was re-enacted in the year 1705, and
afterwards in 1753 [1705 c. 49. 1753. c. 2.], nearly in the same terms.
In 1705 an act was made, authorising a free and open trade for all
persons, at all times, and at all places, with all Indians whatsoever
[1705 c. 52.]. On the authority of this act, the general court in April
term 1787 decided that no Indians brought into Virginia since the
passing thereof, nor their descendants, can be slaves in this
commonwealth.[12] In October 1778 the general assembly passed the first
act which occurs in our code for prohibiting the importation of slaves
[1778. c. 1.]; thereby declaring that no slave should thereafter be
brought into this commonwealth by land, or by water; and that every
slave imported contrary thereto, should upon such importation be free:
with an exception as to such as might belong to persons migrating from
the other states, or be claimed by descent, devise, or marriage, or be
at that time the actual property of any citizen of this commonwealth,
residing in any other of the United States, or belonging to travellers
making a transient stay, and carrying their slaves away with them.--In
1705 this act unfortunately underwent some alteration, by declaring that
slaves thereafter brought into this commonwealth, and kept therein one
whole _year together_, or so long at different times as shall _amount to
a year_, shall be free. By this means the difficulty of proving the
right to freedom will be not a little augmented: for the fact of the
first importation, where the right to freedom immediately ensued, might
have been always proved without difficulty; but where a slave is subject
to removal from place to place, and his right to freedom is postponed
for so long a time as a whole year, or perhaps several years, the
provisions in favour of liberty may be too easily evaded. The same act
declares that no persons shall thenceforth be slaves in this
commonwealth, except such as were so on the first day of that session
(Oct. 17th, 1785), and the descendants of the females of them. This act
was re-enacted in the revisal made in 1792 [See acts of 1794, c. 103.].
In 1793 an additional act passed, authorising and requiring any justice
of the peace having notice of the importation of any slaves, directly or
indirectly, from any part of Africa or the West Indies, to cause such
slave to be immediately apprehended and transported out of the
commonwealth [Edit. of 1794. c. 164.]. Such is the rise, progress, and
present foundation of slavery in Virginia, so far as I have been able to
trace it. The present number of slaves in Virginia, is immense, as
appears by the census taken in 1791, amounting to no less than 292,427
souls: nearly two-fifths of the whole population of the
commonwealth.[13] We may console ourselves with the hope that this
proportion will not increase, the further importation of slaves being
prohibited, whilst the free migrations of white people hither is
encouraged. But this hope affords no other relief from the evil of
slavery, than a diminution of those apprehensions which are naturally
excited by the detention of so large a number of oppressed individuals
among us, and the possibility that they may one day be roused to an
attempt to shake off their chains.
[Footnote 11: Among the Israelites, according to the Mosaical law, "If a
man smote his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he died under his
hand, he should surely be punished--notwithstanding if he continue a day
or two, he should not be punished [Exod. c. 21]:" for, saith the text,
he is _his money_. Our legislators appear to have adopted the reason of
the latter clause, without the humanity of the former part of the law.]
[Footnote 12: Hannah and other Indians, against Davis.--Since this
adjudication, I have met with a manuscript act of assembly made in 1691
c. 9 entitled, "An Act for a free Trade with Indians," the enacting
clause of which is in the very words of the act of 1705. c. 52. A
similar title to an act of that session occurs in the edition of 1733.
p. 94. and the chapter is numbered as in the manuscript. If this
manuscript be authentic (which there is some reason to presume, it being
copied in some blank leaves at the end of Purvis's edition, and
apparently written about the time of the passage of the act), it would
seem that no Indians brought into Virginia for more than a century, nor
any of their descendents, can be retained in slavery in this
commonwealth.]
[Footnote 13: Although it be true that the number of slaves in the
_whole_ state bears the proportion of 292,427, to 747,610, the whole
number of souls in the state, that is, nearly as _two_ to _five_; yet
this proportion is by no means _uniform_ throughout the state. In the
forty-four counties lying upon the Bay, and the great rivers of the
state, and comprehended by a line including Brunswick, Cumberland,
Goochland, Hanover, Spottsylvania, Stafford, Prince William and Fairfax,
and the counties eastward thereof, the number of slaves is 196,542, and
the number of free persons, including free Negroes and mulattoes,
198,371 only. So that the blacks in that populous and extensive district
of country are _more numerous_ than the whites. In the second class,
comprehending nineteen counties, and extending from the last mentioned
line to the Blue Ridge, and including the populous counties of Frederick
and Berkeley, beyond the Blue Ridge, there are 82,286 slaves, and
136,251 free persons; the number of free persons in that class not being
two to one, to the slaves. In the third class the proportion is
considerably increased; the eleven counties of which it consists contain
only 11,218 slaves, and 76,281 free persons. This class reaches to the
Allegany ridge of mountains: the fourth and last class, comprehending
fourteen counties westward of the third class, contains only 2,381
slaves, and 42,288 free persons. It is obvious from this statement that
almost all the dangers and inconveniences which may be apprehended from
a state of slavery on the one hand, or an attempt to abolish it, on the
other, will be confined to the people eastward of the blue ridge of
mountains.]