FREE LABOR AND SLAVE LABOR.--POSSIBILITY OF SAFE EMANCIPATION.
Wo unto him that useth his neighbor's service without wages, and
giveth him not for his work.--_Jeremiah_ xxii, 13.
Who can reflect, unmoved, upon the round
Of smooth and solemnized complacences,
By which, on Christian lands, from age to age,
Profession mocks performance. Earth is sick,
And Heaven is weary, of the hollow words,
Which states and kingdoms utter when they talk
Of truth and justice.
WORDSWORTH.
Political economists found their systems on those broad and general
principles, the application of which has been proved by reason and
experience to produce the greatest possible happiness to the greatest
number of people. All writers of this class, I believe without
exception, prefer free labor to slave labor.
Indeed a very brief glance will show that slavery is inconsistent with
_economy_, whether domestic or political.
The slave is bought, sometimes at a very high price; in free labor there
is no such investment of capital. When the slave is ill, a physician
must be paid by the owner; the free laborer defrays his own expenses.
The children of the slave must be supported by his master; the free man
maintains his own. The slave is to be taken care of in his old age,
which his previous habits render peculiarly helpless; the free laborer
is hired when he is wanted, and then returns to his home. The slave
does not care how slowly or carelessly he works; it is the free man's
interest to do his business well and quickly. The slave is indifferent
how many tools he spoils; the free man has a motive to be careful. The
slave's clothing is indeed very cheap, but it is of no consequence to
him how fast it is destroyed--his master _must_ keep him covered, and
that is all he is likely to do; the hired laborer pays more for his
garments, but makes them last three times as long. The free man will be
honest for reputation's sake; but reputation will make the slave none
the richer, nor invest him with any of the privileges of a human
being--while his poverty and sense of wrong both urge him to steal from
his master. A salary must be paid to an overseer to compel the slave to
work; the free man is impelled by the desire of increasing the comforts
of himself and family. Two hired laborers will perform as much work as
three slaves; by some it is supposed to be a more correct estimate that
slaves perform only _half_ as much labor as the same number of free
laborers. Finally, _where_ slaves are employed, manual industry is a
degradation to white people, and indolence becomes the prevailing
characteristic.
Slave-owners have indeed frequently shown great adroitness in defending
this bad system; but, with few exceptions, they base their arguments
upon the necessity of continuing slavery because it is already begun.
Many of them have openly acknowledged that it was highly injurious to
the prosperity of the State.
The Hon. Henry Clay, in his address before the Colonization Society
of Kentucky, has given a view of the causes affecting, and likely to
affect, slavery in this country, which is very remarkable for its
completeness, its distinctness, and its brevity. The following sentences
are quoted from this address: "As a mere laborer, the slave feels that
he toils for his master, and not for himself; that the laws do not
recognise his capacity to acquire and hold property, which depends
altogether upon the pleasure of his proprietor, and that all the fruits
of his exertions are reaped by others. He knows that, whether sick or
well, in times of scarcity or abundance, his master is bound to provide
for him by the all-powerful influence of self-interest. He is generally,
therefore, indifferent to the adverse or prosperous fortunes of his
master, being contented if he can escape his displeasure or
chastisement, by a careless and slovenly performance of his duties.
"This is the state of the relation between master and slave, prescribed
by the law of its nature, and founded in the reason of things. There are
undoubtedly many exceptions, in which the slave dedicates himself to his
master with a zealous and generous devotion, and the master to the slave
with a parental and affectionate attachment. But it is my purpose to
speak of the _general_ state of this unfortunate relation.
"That labor is best, in which the laborer knows that he will derive the
profits of his industry, that his employment depends upon his diligence,
and his reward upon this assiduity. He then has every motive to excite
him to exertion, and to animate him in perseverance. He knows that if he
is treated badly, he can exchange his employer for one who will better
estimate his service; and that whatever he earns is _his_, to be
distributed by himself as he pleases, among his wife and children, and
friends, or enjoyed by himself. In a word, he feels that he is a free
agent, with rights, and privileges, and sensibilities.
"Wherever the option exists to employ, at an equal hire, free or slave
labor, the former will be decidedly preferred, for the reasons already
assigned. It is more capable, more diligent, more faithful, and in every
respect more worthy of confidence.
"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."
Speaking of an attempt more than thirty-five years ago, to adopt gradual
emancipation in Kentucky, Mr. Clay says: "We were overpowered by
numbers, and submitted to the decision of the majority, with the grace
which the minority, in a republic, should ever yield to such a decision.
I have nevertheless never ceased, and never shall cease, to regret a
decision, the effects of which have been, to place us in the rear of our
neighbors, who are exempt from slavery, in the state of agriculture, the
progress of manufactures, the advance of improvement, and the general
prosperity of society."
Mr. Appleton, in his reply to Mr. McDuffie in the winter of 1832,--a
speech distinguished for its good temper and sound practical
sense,--says: "I do not think the gentleman from South Carolina has
overrated the money price of New-England labor at fifty cents; but most
of the labor is performed by the _owners of the soil_. It is great
industry alone, which makes New-England prosperous. The circumstance
that with this cheap slave labor, the South is complaining of suffering,
while the North is content and prosperous with dear free labor, is a
striking fact and deserves a careful and thorough examination. The
experience of all ages and nations proves that high wages are the most
powerful stimulus to exertion, and the best means of attaching the
people to the institutions under which they live. It is apparent that
this political effect upon the character of society cannot have any
action upon slaves. Having no choice or volition, there is nothing for
stimulus to act upon; they are in fact no part of society. So that, in
the language of political economy, they are, like machinery, merely
capital; and the productions of their labor consists wholly of profits
of capital. But it is not perceived how the tariff can lessen the value
of the productions of their labor, in comparison with that of the other
States. New-York and Virginia both produce wheat; New-York with dear
labor is content, and Virginia with cheap labor is dissatisfied.
"What is the _occupation_ of the white population of the planting
States? I am at a loss to know how this population is employed. We hear
of no products of these States, but those produced by slave labor. It
is clear the white population cannot be employed in raising cotton or
tobacco, because in doing so they can earn but twelve and a half cents
per day, since the same quantity of labor performed by a slave is worth
no more. I am told also that the wages of overseers, mechanics, &c. are
higher than the white labor of the North; and it is well known that many
mechanics go from the North to the South, to get employment during the
winter. These facts suggest the inquiry whether this cheap slave labor
does not paralyze the industry of the whites? Whether _idleness_ is not
the greatest of their evils?"
During the famous debate in the Virginia Legislature, in the winter of
1832, Mr. Brodnax made the following remark: "That slavery in Virginia
is an evil, and a transcendent evil, it would be more than idle for any
human being to doubt or deny. It is a mildew which has blighted every
region it has touched, from the creation of the world. Illustrations
from the history of other countries and other times might be instructive
and profitable, had we the time to review them; but we have evidence
tending to the same conviction nearer at hand and accessible to daily
observation, in the short histories of the different States of this
great confederacy, which are impressive in their admonitions and
conclusive in their character."
During the same session, Mr. Faulkner of Virginia said: "Sir, I am
gratified to perceive that no gentleman has yet risen in this hall, the
avowed _advocate_ of slavery. The day has gone by, when such a voice
could be listened to with patience, or even forbearance. I even regret,
sir, that we should find one amongst us, who enters the lists as its
_apologist_, except on the ground of uncontrolable necessity. If there
be one, who concurs with the gentleman from Brunswick (Mr. Gholson)
in the harmless character of this institution, let me request
him to compare the condition of the slaveholding portion of this
Commonwealth--barren, desolate, and seared as it were by the avenging
hand of Heaven,--with the descriptions which we have of this same
country from those who first broke its virgin soil. To what is this
change ascribable? Alone to the withering and blasting effects of
slavery. If this does not satisfy him, let me request him to extend his
travels to the Northern States of this Union,--and beg him to contrast
the happiness and contentment which prevails throughout the country--the
busy and cheerful sounds of industry--the rapid and swelling growth
of their population--their means and institutions of education--their
skill and proficiency in the useful arts--their enterprise and
public spirit--the monuments of their commercial and manufacturing
industry;--and, above all, their devoted attachment to the government
from which they derive their protection, with the division, discontent,
indolence, and poverty of the Southern country. To what, sir, is all
this ascribable? To that vice in the organization of society, by which
one half of its inhabitants are arrayed in interest and feeling against
the other half--to that unfortunate state of society in which freemen
regard labor as disgraceful--and slaves shrink from it as a burden
tyranically imposed upon them--to that condition of things, in which
half a million of your population can feel no sympathy with the society
in the prosperity of which they are forbidden to participate, and no
attachment to a government at whose hands they receive nothing but
injustice.
"If this should not be sufficient, and the curious and incredulous
inquirer should suggest that the contrast which has been adverted to,
and is so manifest, might be traced to a difference of climate, or other
causes distinct from slavery itself, permit me to refer him to the
two States of Kentucky and Ohio. No difference of soil--no diversity
of climate--no diversity in the original settlement of those two
States, can account for the remarkable disproportion in their national
advancement. Separated by a river alone, they seem to have been
purposely and providentially designed to exhibit in their future
histories the difference, which necessarily results from a country
free from, and a country afflicted with, the curse of slavery. The
same may be said of the two States of Missouri and Illinois.
"Slavery, it is admitted, is an evil--it is an institution which presses
heavily against the best interests of the State. It banishes free white
labor--it exterminates the mechanic--the artisan--the manufacturer. It
deprives them of occupation. It deprives them of bread. It converts the
energy of a community into indolence--its power into imbecility--its
efficiency into weakness. Sir, being thus injurious, have we not a right
to demand its extermination! Shall society suffer, that the slaveholder
may continue to gather his _vigintial crop_ of human flesh? What is
his mere pecuniary claim, compared with the great interests of the
common weal? Must the country languish and die, that the slaveholder
may flourish? Shall all interest be subservient to one?--all rights
subordinate to those of the slaveholder? Has not the mechanic--have not
the middle classes their rights?--rights incompatible with the existence
of slavery?"
Sutcliff, in his Travels in North America, says: "A person not
conversant with these things would naturally think that where families
employ a number of slaves, every thing about their houses, gardens, and
plantations, would be kept in the best order. But the reverse of this
is generally the case. I was sometimes tempted to think that the more
slaves there were employed, the more disorder appeared. I am persuaded
that one or two hired servants, in a well-regulated family, would
preserve more neatness, order, and comfort, than treble the number of
slaves.
"There is a very striking contrast between the appearance of the horses
or teams in Pennsylvania, and those in the Southern States, where slaves
are kept. In Pennsylvania we meet with great numbers of wagons, drawn
by four or more fine fat horses, the carriages firm and well made, and
covered with stout good linen, bleached almost white; and it is not
uncommon to see ten or fifteen together, travelling cheerfully along the
road, the driver riding on one of his horses. Many of these come more
than three hundred miles to Philadelphia, from the Ohio, Pittsburg, and
other places; and I have been told by a respectable friend, a native of
Philadelphia, that more than one thousand covered carriages frequently
come to Philadelphia market."
"The appearance of things in the slave States is quite the reverse of
this. We sometimes meet a ragged black boy or girl driving a team,
consisting of a lean cow or a mule, sometimes a lean bull, or an ox and
a mule; and I have seen a mule, a bull, and a cow, each miserable in its
appearance, composing one team, with a half-naked black slave or two,
riding or driving, as occasion suited. The carriage or wagon, if it may
be called such, appeared in as wretched a condition as the team and its
driver. Sometimes a couple of horses, mules, or cows, &c., would be
dragging a hogshead of tobacco, with a pivot, or axle, driven into each
end of the hogshead, and something like a shaft attached, by which it
was drawn, or rolled along the road. I have seen two oxen and two slaves
pretty fully employed in getting along a single hogshead; and some of
these come from a great distance inland."
The inhabitants of free States are often told that they cannot argue
fairly upon the subject of slavery because they know nothing about its
actual operation; and any expression of their opinions and feelings with
regard to the system, is attributed to ignorant enthusiasm, fanatical
benevolence, or a wicked intention to do mischief.
But Mr. Clay, Mr. Brodnax, and Mr. Faulkner, belong to slaveholding
States; and the two former, if I mistake not, are slave-owners. _They_
surely are qualified to judge of the system; and I might fill ten
pages with other quotations from southern writers and speakers, who
acknowledge that slavery is a great evil. There are zealous partisans
indeed, who defend the system strenuously, and some of them very
eloquently. Thus, Mr. Hayne, in his reply to Mr. Webster, denied that
the south suffered in consequence of _slavery_; he maintained that the
slaveholding States were prosperous, and the principal cause of all the
prosperity in the Union. He laughed at the idea of any danger, however
distant, from an overgrown slave population, and supported the position
by the fact that slaves had always been kept in entire subjection in the
British West Indies, where the white population is less than ten per
cent. of the whole. But the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina
did not mention that the _peace_ establishment of the British West
Indies costs England _two million pounds annually_! Yet such is the
fact. This system is so closely entwined with the apparent interests and
convenience of individuals, that it will never want for able defenders,
so long as it exists. But I believe I do not misrepresent the truth,
when I say the prevailing opinion at the South is, that it would have
been much better for those States, and for the country in general, if
slavery had never been introduced.
Miss Martineau, in her most admirable little book on Demerara, says:
"Labor is the product of mind as much as of body; and to secure that
product, we must sway the mind by the natural means--by motives.
Laboring against self-interest is what nobody ought to expect of white
men--much less of slaves. Of course every man, woman and child, would
rather play for nothing than work for nothing.
"It is the mind, which gives sight to the eye, and hearing to the ear,
and strength to the limbs; and the mind cannot be purchased. Where a
man is allowed the possession of himself, the purchaser of his labor is
benefitted by the vigor of his mind through the service of his limbs:
where man is made the possession of another, the possessor loses at once
and for ever all that is most valuable in that for which he has paid the
price of crime. He becomes the owner of that which only differs from an
idiot in being less easily drilled into habits, and more capable of
effectual revenge.
"Cattle are fixed capital, and so are slaves: But slaves differ from
cattle on the one hand, in yielding (from internal opposition) a less
return for their maintenance; and from free laborers on the other hand,
in not being acted upon by the inducements which stimulate production as
an effort of mind as well as of body. In all three cases the labor is
purchased. In free laborers and cattle, all the faculties work together,
and to advantage; in the slave they are opposed; and therefore he is,
so far as the amount of labor is concerned, the least valuable of the
three. The negroes _can_ invent and improve--witness their ingenuity in
their dwellings, and their skill in certain of their sports; but their
masters will never possess their faculties, though they have purchased
their limbs. Our true policy would be to divide the work of the slave
between the ox and the hired laborer; we should get more out of the
sinews of the one and the soul of the other, than the produce of double
the number of slaves."
As a matter of humanity, let it be remembered that men having more
_reason_ than brutes, must be treated with much greater severity, in
order to keep them in a state of abject submission.
It seems unnecessary to say that what is unjust and unmerciful, can
never be expedient; yet men often write, talk, and act, as if they
either forgot this truth, or doubted it. There is genuine wisdom in the
following remark, extracted from the petition of Cambridge University
to the Parliament of England, on the subject of slavery: "A firm belief
in the Providence of a benevolent Creator assures us that no system,
founded on the oppression of one part of mankind, _can_ be beneficial to
another."
But the tolerator of slavery will say, "No doubt the system is an
evil; but we are not to blame for it; we received it from our English
ancestors. It is a lamentable _necessity_;--we cannot do it away if we
would:--insurrections would be the inevitable result of any attempt to
remove it"--and having quieted their consciences by the use of the word
_lamentable_, they think no more upon the subject.
These assertions have been so often, and so dogmatically repeated, that
many truly kind-hearted people have believed there was some truth in
them. I myself, (may God forgive me for it!) have often, in thoughtless
ignorance, made the same remarks.
An impartial and careful examination has led me to the conviction that
slavery causes insurrections, while emancipation prevents them.
The grand argument of the slaveholder is that sudden freedom occasioned
the horrible massacres of St. Domingo.--If a word is said in favor
of abolition, he shakes his head, and points a warning finger to St.
Domingo! But it is a remarkable fact that this same vilified island
furnishes a strong argument _against_ the lamentable necessity of
slavery. In the first place, there was a bloody civil war there before
the act of emancipation was passed; in the second place enfranchisement
produced the most blessed effects: in the third place, no difficulties
whatever arose, until Bonaparte made his atrocious attempt to _restore
slavery_ in the island.
Colonel Malenfant, a slave proprietor, resident in St. Domingo at the
time, thus describes the effect of sudden enfranchisement, in his
Historical and Political Memoir of the Colonies:
"After this public act of emancipation, the negroes remained quiet both
in the South and in the West, and they continued to work upon all the
plantations. There were estates which had neither owners nor managers
resident upon them, yet upon these estates, though abandoned, the
negroes continued their labors where there were any, even inferior
agents, to guide them; and on those estates where no white men were left
to direct them, they betook themselves to the planting of provisions;
but upon all the plantations where the whites resided, the blacks
continued to labor as quietly as before." Colonel Malenfant says, that
when many of his neighbors, proprietors or managers, were in prison, the
negroes of their plantations came to him to beg him to direct them in
their work.
He adds, "If you will take care not to talk to them of the restoration
of slavery, but to talk to them of freedom, you may with this word chain
them down to their labor. How did Toussaint succeed?--How did I succeed
before his time in the plain of the Culde-Sae on the plantation Gouraud,
during more than eight months after liberty had been granted to the
slaves? Let those who knew me at that time, let the blacks themselves,
be asked: they will all reply that not a single negro upon that
plantation, consisting of more than four hundred and fifty laborers,
refused to work: and yet this plantation was thought to be under the
worst discipline and the slaves the most idle of any in the plain. I
inspired the same activity into three other plantations of which I had
the management. If all the negroes had come from Africa within six
months, if they had the love of independence that the Indians have, I
should own that force must be employed; but ninety-nine out of a hundred
of the blacks are aware that without labor they cannot procure the
things that are necessary for them; that there is no other method of
satisfying their wants and their tastes. They know that they must work,
they wish to do so, and they will do so."
Such was the conduct of the negroes for the first nine months after
their liberation, or up to the middle of 1794. In the latter part of
1796, Malenfant says, "the colony was flourishing under Toussaint, the
whites lived happily and in peace upon their estates, and the negroes
continued to work for them." General Lecroix, who published his "Memoirs
for a History of St. Domingo" in 1819, says, that in 1797 the most
wonderful progress had been made in agriculture. "The Colony," says he,
"marched as by enchantment towards its ancient splendor: cultivation
prospered; every day produced perceptible proof of its progress."
General Vincent,[U] who was a general of brigade of artillery in St.
Domingo and a proprietor of estates in the island, was sent by Toussaint
to Paris in 1801 to lay before the Directory the new constitution which
had been agreed upon in St. Domingo. He arrived in France just at the
moment of the peace of Amiens, and found that Bonaparte was preparing
an armament for the purpose of restoring slavery in St. Domingo. He
remonstrated against the expedition; he stated that it was totally
unnecessary and therefore criminal, for every thing was going on well
in St. Domingo. The proprietors were in peaceable possession of their
estates; cultivation was making rapid progress; the blacks were
industrious and beyond example happy. He conjured him, therefore, not
to reverse this beautiful state of things; but his efforts were
ineffectual, and the expedition arrived upon the shores of St. Domingo.
At length, however, the French were driven from the island. Till that
time the planters had retained their property, and then it was, and not
till then, that they lost their all. In 1804, Dessalines was proclaimed
Emperor; in process of time a great part of the black troops were
disbanded, and returned to cultivation again. From that time to this,
there has been no want of subordination or industry among them."
[Footnote U: Clarkson's Thoughts, p. 2.]
The following account of Hayti at a later period is quoted from Mr.
Harvey's sketches of that island, during the latter part of the reign
of Christophé:
"Those who by their exertions and economy were enabled to procure small
spots of land of their own, or to hold the smaller plantations at an
annual rent, were diligently engaged in cultivating coffee, sugar,
and other articles, which they disposed of to the inhabitants of the
adjacent towns and villages. It was an interesting sight to behold this
class of the Haytians, now in possession of their freedom, coming in
groups to the market nearest which they resided, bringing the produce of
their industry for sale; and afterwards returning, carrying back the
necessary articles of living which the disposal of their commodities had
enabled them to purchase; all evidently cheerful and happy. Nor could it
fail to occur to the mind that their present condition furnished the
most satisfactory answer to that objection to the general emancipation
of slaves, founded on their alleged unfitness to value and improve the
benefits of liberty.
"Though of the same race and possessing the same general traits of
character as the negroes of the other West India islands, they are
already distinguished from them by habits of industry and activity, such
as slaves are seldom known to exhibit. As they would not suffer, so they
do not require, the attendance of one acting in the capacity of a driver
with the instrument of punishment in his hand."
"In Guadaloupe, the conduct of the freed negroes was equally
satisfactory. The perfect subordination which was established and the
industry which prevailed there, are proved by the official Reports of
the Governor of Guadaloupe, to the French government. In 1793 liberty
was proclaimed universally to the slaves in that island, and during
their ten years of freedom, their governors bore testimony to their
regular industry and uninterrupted submission to the laws."
"During the first American war, a number of slaves ran away from their
North American masters and joined the British army. When peace came, it
was determined to give them their liberty, and to settle them in Nova
Scotia, upon grants of land, as British subjects and as free men. Their
number, comprehending men, women and children, was two thousand and
upwards. Some of them worked upon little portions of land as their own;
others worked as carpenters; others became fishermen; and others worked
for hire in various ways. In time, having embraced Christianity, they
raised places of worship of their own, and had ministers of their own
from their own body. They led a harmless life, and gained the character
of an industrious and honest people from their white neighbors. A few
years afterwards, the land in Nova Scotia being found too poor to
answer, and the climate too cold for their constitutions, a number of
them to the amount of between thirteen and fourteen hundred, volunteered
to form a new colony which was then first thought of at Sierra Leone, to
which place they were accordingly conveyed. Many hundreds of the negroes
who had formed the West Indian black regiments were removed in 1819 to
Sierra Leone, where they were set at liberty at once, and founded the
villages of Waterloo, Hastings, and others. Several hundred maroons,
(runaway slaves and their descendants,) being exiled from Jamaica, were
removed in 1801 to Sierra Leone, where they were landed with no other
property than the clothes which they wore and the muskets which they
carried in their hands. A body of revolted slaves were banished from
Barbadoes in 1816, and sent also to Sierra Leone. The rest of the
population of this colony consists almost entirely of negroes who have
been recaptured from slave ships, and brought to Sierra Leone in the
lowest state of misery, debility and degradation: naked, diseased,
destitute, wholly ignorant of the English language, in this wretched,
helpless condition, they have been suddenly made free, and put into
possession at once of the rights and privileges of British subjects.
All these instances of sudden emancipation have taken place in a
colony where the disproportion between black and white is more than
a hundred to one. Yet this mixed population of suddenly emancipated
slaves--runaway slaves--criminal slaves--and degraded recaptured
negroes, are in their free condition living in order, tranquillity and
comfort, and many of them in affluence."
"During the last American war, seven hundred and seventy-four slaves
escaped from their masters, and were at the termination of the war
settled in Trinidad as free laborers, where they are earning their own
livelihood with industry and good conduct. The following extract of a
letter, received in 1829 from Trinidad by Mr. Pownall, will show the
usefulness and respectability of these liberated negroes. 'A field negro
brings four hundred dollars, but most of the work is done by free blacks
and people from the main at a much cheaper rate; and as these are
generally employed by foreigners, this accounts for their succeeding
better than our own countrymen, who are principally from the old
islands, and are unaccustomed to any other management than that of
slaves; however, they are coming into it fast. In Trinidad, there are
upwards of fifteen thousand free people of color; _there is not a single
pauper amongst them_; they live independently and comfortably, and
nearly half of the property of the island is said to be in their hands.
It is admitted that they are highly respectable in character, and are
rapidly advancing in knowledge and refinement.' Mr. Mitchell, a sugar
planter who had resided twenty-seven years in Trinidad, and who is the
superintendent of the liberated negroes there, says he knows of no
instance of a manumitted slave not maintaining himself. In a paper
printed by the House of Commons in 1827, (No. 479,) he says of the
liberated blacks under his superintendence, that each of them possessed
an allotment of land which he cultivated, and on which he raised
provisions and other articles for himself and his family; his wife and
children aiding him in the work. A great part, however, of the time of
the men (the women attending to the domestic menage) was freely given
to laboring on the neighboring plantations, on which they worked not in
general by the day, but by the piece. Mr. Mitchell says that their work
is well executed, and that they can earn as much as four shillings a
day. If, then, these men who have land on which they can support
themselves are yet willing to work for hire, how is it possible to doubt
that in case of general emancipation, the freed negroes who would have
no land of their own would gladly work for wages?"
"A few years ago, about one hundred and fifty negro slaves, at different
times, succeeded in making their escape from Kentucky into Canada.
Captain Stuart, who lived in Upper Canada from 1817 to 1822, was
generally acquainted with them, and employed several of them in various
ways. He found them as good and as trustworthy laborers, in every
respect, as any emigrants from the islands, or from the United States,
or as the natives of the country. In 1828, he again visited that
country, and found that their numbers had increased by new refugees to
about three hundred. They had purchased a tract of woodland, a few miles
from Amherstburgh, and were settled on it, had formed a little village,
had a minister of their own number, color, and choice, a good old man
of some talent, with whom Captain Stuart was well acquainted, and
though poor, were living soberly, honestly and industriously, and were
peacefully and usefully getting their own living. In consequence of the
Revolution in Colombia, all the slaves who joined the Colombian armies,
amounting to a considerable number, were declared free. General Bolivar
enfranchised his own slaves to the amount of between seven and eight
hundred, and many proprietors followed his example. At that time
Colombia was overrun by hostile armies, and the masters were often
obliged to abandon their property. The black population (including
Indians) amounted to nine hundred thousand persons. Of these, a large
number was suddenly emancipated, and what has been the effect? Where the
opportunities of insurrection have been so frequent, and so tempting,
what has been the effect? M. Ravenga declares that the effect has been a
_degree of docility on the part of the blacks, and a degree of security
on the part of the whites_, unknown in any preceding period of the
history of Colombia."
"Dr. Walsh[V] states that in Brazil there are six hundred thousand
enfranchised persons, either Africans or of African descent, who were
either slaves themselves or are the descendants of slaves. He says they
are, generally speaking, 'well conducted and industrious persons, who
compose indiscriminately different orders of the community. There are
among them merchants, farmers, doctors, lawyers, priests and officers of
different ranks. Every considerable town in the interior has regiments
composed of them.' The benefits arising from them, he adds, have
disposed the whites to think of making free the whole negro population."
[Footnote V: Walsh's Notes on Brazil, vol. ii. page 365.]
"Mr. Koster, an Englishman living in Brazil, confirms Mr. Walsh's
statement.[W] 'There are black regiments,' he observes, 'composed
entirely and exclusively of black creole soldiers, commanded by black
creole officers from the corporal to the colonel. I have seen the
several guard-houses of the town occupied by these troops. Far from any
apprehension being entertained on this score, it is well known that the
quietude of this country, and the feeling of safety which every one
possesses, although surrounded by slaves, proceed from the contentedness
of the free people.'"
[Footnote W: Amelioration of Slavery, published in No. 16 of the
Pamphleteer.]
"The actual condition of the hundred thousand emancipated blacks and
persons of color in the British West India Colonies, certainly gives no
reason to apprehend that if a general emancipation should take place,
the newly freed slaves would not be able and willing to support
themselves. On this point the Returns from fourteen of the Slave
Colonies, laid before the House of Commons, in 1826, give satisfactory
information: they include a period of five years from January 1, 1821,
to December 31, 1825, and give the following account of the state of
pauperism in each of these colonies.
"_Bahamas._--The only establishment in the colony for the relief of
the poor, appears to be a hospital or poor-house. The number passing
through the hospital annually was, on the average, fifteen free black
and colored persons and thirteen whites. The number of free black and
colored persons is about _double_ that of the whites; so that the
proportion of white to that of colored paupers in the Bahamas, is nearly
two to one.
"_Barbadoes._--The average annual number of persons supported in the
nine parishes, from which returns have been sent, is nine hundred and
ninety-eight, all of whom, with a single exception, are white. The
probable amount of white persons in the island is fourteen thousand five
hundred--of free black and colored persons, four thousand five hundred.
"_Berbice._--The white population appears to amount to about six
hundred, the free black and colored to nine hundred. In 1822, it appears
that there were seventeen white and two colored paupers.
"_Demerara._--The free black and colored population, it is supposed, are
twice the number of the whites. The average number of white pensioners
on the poor fund appears to be fifty-one, that of colored pensioners
twenty-six. In occasional relief, the white paupers receive about three
times as much as the colored.
"_Dominica._--The white population is estimated at about nine hundred;
the free black and colored population was ascertained, in 1825, to
amount to three thousand one hundred and twenty-two. During the five
years ending in November, 1825, thirty of the former class had received
relief from the poor fund, and only ten of the latter, making the
proportion of more than nine white paupers to one colored one in the
same number of persons.
"_Jamaica_ is supposed to contain twenty thousand whites, and double
that number of free black and colored persons. The returns of paupers
from the parishes which have sent returns, exhibit the average number
of white paupers to be two hundred ninety-five, of black and colored
paupers, one hundred and forty-eight; the proportion of white paupers
to those of the other class, according to the whole population, being
as four to one.
"_Nevis._--The white population is estimated at about eight hundred, the
free black and colored at about eighteen hundred. The number of white
paupers receiving relief is stated to be twenty-five; that of the other
class, two; being in the proportion of twenty-eight to one.
"_St. Christophers._--The average number of white paupers appears to be
one hundred and fifteen; that of the other class, fourteen; although
there is no doubt that the population of the latter class greatly
outnumbers that of the former.
"_Tortola._--In 1825 the free black and colored population amounted to
six hundred and seven. The whites are estimated at about three hundred.
The number of white paupers relieved appears to be twenty-nine: of the
other class, four: being in the proportion of fourteen to one.
"In short, in a population of free black and colored persons amounting
to from eighty thousand to ninety thousand, only two hundred and
twenty-nine persons have received any relief whatever as paupers during
the years 1821, to 1825; and these chiefly the concubines and children
of destitute whites; while of about sixty-five thousand whites, in the
same time, sixteen hundred and seventy-five received relief. The
proportion, therefore, of enfranchised persons receiving any kind of
aid as paupers in the West Indies, is about one in three hundred and
seventy: whereas the proportion among the whites of the West Indies is
about one in forty; and in England, generally one in twelve or
thirteen--in some counties, one in eight or nine.
"Can any one read these statements, made by the colonists themselves,
and still think it necessary to keep the negroes in slavery, lest they
should be unable to maintain themselves if free?
"In 1823, the Assembly of Grenada passed a resolution, declaring that
the free colored inhabitants of these colonies, were a respectable, well
behaved class of the community, were possessed of considerable property,
and were entitled to have their claims viewed with favor.
"In 1824, when Jamaica had been disturbed for months by unfounded
alarms relating to the slaves, a committee of the legislative assembly
declared that 'the conduct of the freed people evinced not only zeal and
alacrity, but a warm interest in the welfare of the colony, and every
way identified them with those who are the most zealous promoters of its
internal security.' The assembly confirmed this favorable report a few
months ago, by passing a bill conferring on all free black and colored
persons the same privileges, civil and political, with the white
inhabitants.
"In the orders issued in 1829, by the British Government, in St. Lucia,
placing all freemen of African descent upon the footing of equal rights
with their white neighbors, the loyalty and good conduct of that class
are distinctly acknowledged, and they are declared 'to have shown,
hitherto, readiness and zeal in coming forward for the maintenance of
order.' As similar orders have been issued for Trinidad, Berbice, and
the Cape of Good Hope, it may be presumed that the conduct of the free
blacks and colored persons in those colonies has likewise given
satisfaction to Government.
"In the South African Commercial Advertiser, of the 9th of February,
1831, we are happy to find recorded one more of the numerous proofs
which experience affords of the safety and expediency of immediate
abolition.
"_Three thousand_ prize negroes have received their _freedom_;
_four hundred in one day_; but not the least difficulty or disorder
occurred;--_servants found masters--masters hired servants; all gained
homes, and at night scarcely an idler was to be seen_. In the last
month, one hundred and fifty were liberated under precisely similar
circumstances, and with the same result. These facts are within our own
observation; and to state that sudden and abrupt emancipation would
create disorder and distress to those you mean to serve, is not reason,
but the plea of all men who are adverse to emancipation.
"As far as it can be ascertained from the various documents which have
been cited, and from others, which, from the fear of making this account
too long, are not particularly referred to, it appears that in every
place and time in which emancipation has been tried, _not one drop of
white blood has been shed, or even endangered by it_; that it has
everywhere greatly improved the condition of the blacks, and in most
places has removed them from a state of degradation and suffering to one
of respectability and happiness. Can it, then, be justifiable, on
account of any vague fears of we know not what evils, to reject this
just, salutary and hitherto uninjurious measure; and to cling to a
system which we know, by certain experience, is producing crime, misery
and death, during every day of its existence?"
In Mexico, September 15, 1829, the following decree was issued; "Slavery
is for ever abolished in the republic; and consequently all those
individuals, who, until this day, looked upon themselves as slaves, are
free." The prices of slaves were settled by the magistrates, and they
were required to work with their master, for stipulated wages, until the
debt was paid. If the slave wished to change masters he could do so, if
another person would take upon himself the liability of payment, in
exchange for his labor; and provided the master was secured against
loss, he was obliged to consent to the transaction. Similar transfers
might take place to accommodate the master, but never without the
consent of the servant. The law regulated the allowance of provisions,
clothing, &c., and if the negro wished for more, he might have it
charged, and deducted from his wages; but lest masters should take
advantage of the improvidence of their servants, it was enacted, that
all charges exceeding half the earnings of any slave, or family of
slaves, should be void in law. The duties of servants were defined as
clearly as possible by the laws, and magistrates appointed to enforce
them; but the master was entrusted with no power to punish, in any
manner whatever. It was expressly required that the masters should
furnish every servant with suitable means of religious and intellectual
instruction.
A Vermont gentleman, who had been a slaveholder in Mississippi, and
afterward resident at Matamoras, in Mexico, speaks with enthusiasm of
the beneficial effects of these regulations, and thinks the example
highly important to the United States. He declares that the value of the
plantations was soon increased by the introduction of free labor. "No
one was made poor by it. It gave property to the servant, and increased
the riches of the master."
The republics of Buenos Ayres, Chili, Bolivia, Peru, Colombia, Guatemala
and Monte Video, likewise took steps for the abolition of slavery, soon
after they themselves came into possession of freedom. In some of these
States, means were taken for the instruction of young slaves, who were
all enfranchised by law, on arriving at a certain age; in others,
universal emancipation is to take place after a certain date, fixed
by the laws. The empire of Brazil, and the United States are the only
American nations, that have taken no measures to destroy this most
pestilent system; and I have recently been assured by intelligent
Brazilians, that public opinion in that country is now so strongly
opposed to slavery that something effectual will be done toward
abolition, at the very next meeting of the Cortes. If this _should_ take
place, the United States will stand alone in most hideous pre-eminence.
When Necker wrote his famous book on French finances, he suggested a
universal compact of nations to suppress the slave trade. The exertions
of England alone have since nearly realized his generous plan, though
avarice and cunning do still manage to elude her vigilance and power.
She has obtained from Spain, Portugal, France, Holland, and Denmark, a
mutual right to search all vessels suspected of being engaged in this
wicked traffic.[X] I believe I am correct in saying that ours is now the
_only_ flag, which can protect this iniquity from the just indignation
of England. When a mutual right of search was proposed to us, a strong
effort was made to blind the people with their own prejudices, by urging
the old complaint of the impressment of seamen; and alas, when has an
unsuccessful appeal been made to passion and prejudice? It is evident
that nothing on earth ought to prevent co-operation in a cause like
this. Besides, "It is useless for us to attempt to linger on the
skirts of the age that is departing. The action of existing causes and
principles is steady and progressive. It cannot be retarded, unless we
would 'blow out all the moral lights around us;' and if we refuse to
keep up with it, we shall be towed in the wake, whether we are willing
or not."[Y]
[Footnote X: The British Government actually paid Spain four hundred
thousand pounds, as an indemnity to those engaged in the slave trade,
on condition that the traffic should be abolished by law throughout her
dominions.]
[Footnote Y: Speech of Mr. Brodnax, of Virginia.]
When I think of the colonies established along the coast of Africa--of
Algiers, conquered and civilized--of the increasing wealth and
intelligence of Hayti--of the powerful efforts now being made all over
the world to sway public opinion in favor of universal freedom--of the
certain emancipation of slaves in all British Colonies--and above all,
the evident union of purpose existing between the French and English
cabinets,--I can most plainly see the hand of God working for the
deliverance of the negroes. We may resist the blessed influence if we
will; but we cannot conquer. Every year the plot is thickening around
us, and the nations of the earth, either consciously or unconsciously,
are hastening the crisis. The defenders of the slave system are situated
like the man in the Iron Shroud, the walls of whose prison daily moved
nearer and nearer, by means of powerful machinery, until they crushed
all that remained within them.
But to return to the subject of emancipation. Nearly every one of the
States north of Mason and Dixon's line once held slaves. These slaves
were manumitted without bloodshed, and there was no trouble in making
free colored laborers obey the laws.
I am aware that this desirable change must be attended with much more
difficulty in the Southern States, simply because the evil has been
suffered until it is fearfully overgrown; but it must not be forgotten
that while they are using their ingenuity and strength to sustain it for
the present, the mischief is increasing more and more rapidly. If this
be not a good time to apply a remedy, when will be a better? They must
annihilate slavery, or slavery will annihilate them.
It seems to be forgotten that emancipation from tyranny is not an
emancipation from law; the negro, after he is made free, is restrained
from the commission of crimes by the same laws which restrain other
citizens: if he steals, he will be imprisoned: if he commits murder,
he will be hung.
It will, perhaps, be said that the free people of color in the slave
portions of _this_ country are peculiarly ignorant, idle, and vicious?
It may be so: for our laws and our influence are peculiarly calculated
to make them bad members of society. But we trust the civil power
to keep in order the great mass of ignorant and vicious foreigners
continually pouring into the country; and if the laws are strong enough
for this, may they not be trusted to restrain the free blacks?
In those countries where the slaves codes are mild, where emancipation
is rendered easy, and inducements are offered to industry, insurrections
are not feared, and free people of color form a valuable portion of the
community. If we persist in acting in opposition to the established laws
of nature and reason, how can we expect favorable results? But it is
pronounced _unsafe_ to change our policy. Every progressive improvement
in the world has been resisted by despotism, on the ground that changes
were dangerous. The Emperor of Austria thinks there is need of keeping
his subjects ignorant, that good order may be preserved. But what
he calls good order, is sacrificing the happiness of many to the
advancement of a few; and no doubt knowledge _is_ unfavorable to the
continuation of such a state of things. It is precisely so with the
slaveholder; he insists that the welfare of millions must be subordinate
to his private interest, or else all good order is destroyed.
It is much to be regretted that Washington enfranchised his slaves in
the manner he did; because their poverty and indolence have furnished
an ever ready argument for those who are opposed to emancipation.[Z]
To turn slaves adrift in their old age, unaccustomed to take care of
themselves, without employment, and in a community where all the
prejudices were strongly arrayed against free negroes, was certainly an
unhappy experiment.
[Footnote Z: With all my unbounded reverence for Washington, I have, I
confess, sometimes found it hard to forgive him for not manumitting his
slaves long before his death. A fact which has lately come to my
knowledge, gave me great joy; for it furnishes a reason for what had
appeared to me unpardonable. It appears that Washington possessed a gang
of negroes in right of his wife, with which his own negroes had
intermarried. By the marriage settlement, the former were limited, in
default of issue of the marriage, to the representatives of Mrs.
Washington at her death; so that her negroes could not be enfranchised.
An unwillingness to separate parents and children, husbands and wives,
induced Washington to postpone the manumission of his own slaves. This
motive is briefly, and as it were accidentally, referred to in his
will.]
But if slaves were allowed to redeem themselves progressively, by
purchasing one day of the week after another, as they can in the Spanish
colonies, habits of industry would be gradually formed, and enterprise
would be stimulated, by their successful efforts to acquire a little
property. And if they afterward worked better as free laborers than they
now do as slaves, it would surely benefit their masters as well as
themselves.
That strong-hearted republican, La Fayette, when he returned to
France in 1785, felt strongly urged by a sense of duty, to effect the
emancipation of slaves in the Colony of Cayenne. As most of the property
in the colony belonged to the crown, he was enabled to prosecute his
plans with less difficulty than he could otherwise have done. Thirty
thousand dollars were expended in the purchase of plantations and slaves
for the sole purpose of proving by experiment the safety and good policy
of conferring freedom. Being afraid to trust the agents generally
employed in the colony, he engaged a prudent and amiable man at Paris to
undertake the business. This gentleman, being fully instructed in La
Fayette's plans and wishes, sailed for Cayenne. The first thing he
did when he arrived, was to collect all the cart-whips, and other
instruments of punishment, and have them burnt amid a general assemblage
of the slaves; he then made known to them the laws and rules by which
the estates would be governed. The object of all the regulations was to
encourage industry by making it the means of freedom. This new kind of
stimulus had a most favorable effect on the slaves, and gave promise of
complete success. But the judicious agent died in consequence of the
climate, and the French Revolution threw every thing into a state of
convulsion at home and abroad. The new republic of France bestowed
unconditional emancipation upon the slaves in her colonies; and had she
persevered in her promises with good faith and discretion, the horrors
of St. Domingo might have been spared. The emancipated negroes in
Cayenne came in a body to the agents, and declared that if the
plantations still belonged to General La Fayette they were ready and
willing to resume their labors for the benefit of one who had treated
them like men, and cheered their toil by making it a certain means of
freedom.
I cannot forbear paying a tribute of respect to the venerable Moses
Brown, of Providence, Rhode Island, now living in virtuous and vigorous
old age. He was a slave-owner in early life, and, unless I have been
misinformed, a slave-dealer, likewise. When his attention became roused
to religious subjects, these facts troubled his conscience. He easily
and promptly decided that a Christian could not consistently keep
slaves; but he did not dare to trust his own nature to determine the
best manner of doing justice to those he had wronged. He therefore
appointed a committee, before whom he laid a statement of the expenses
he had incurred for the food and clothing of his slaves, and of the
number of years, during which he had had the exclusive benefit of their
labors. He conceived that he had no right to charge them for their
freedom, because God had given them an inalienable right to that
possession, from the very hour of their birth; but he wished the
committee to decide what wages he ought to pay them for the work they
had done. He cordially accepted the decision of the committee, paid the
negroes their dues, and left them to choose such employments as they
thought best. Many of the grateful slaves preferred to remain with him
as hired laborers. It is hardly necessary to add that Moses Brown is a
Quaker.
It is commonly urged against emancipation that white men cannot possibly
labor under the sultry climate of our most southerly States. This is a
good reason for not sending the slaves out of the country, but it is
no argument against making them free. No doubt we do need their labor;
but we ought to pay for it. Why should their presence be any more
disagreeable as hired laborers, than as slaves? In Boston, we
continually meet colored people in the streets, and employ them in
various ways, without being endangered or even incommoded. There is no
moral impossibility in a perfectly kind and just relation between the
two races.
If white men think otherwise, let _them_ remove from climates which
nature has made too hot for their constitutions. Wealth or pleasure
often induces men to change their abode; an emigration for the sake of
humanity would be an agreeable novelty. Algernon Sidney said, "When I
cannot live in my own country, but by such means as are worse than dying
in it, I think God shows me that I ought to keep myself out of it."
But the slaveholders try to stop all the efforts of benevolence, by
vociferous complaints about infringing upon their _property_; and
justice is so subordinate to self-interest, that the unrighteous claim
is silently allowed, and even openly supported, by those who ought
to blush for themselves, as Christians and as republicans. Let men
_simplify_ their arguments--let them confine themselves to one single
question, "What right can a man have to compel his neighbor to toil
without reward, and leave the same hopeless inheritance to his children,
in order that _he_ may live in luxury and indolence?" Let the doctrines
of _expediency_ return to the Father of Lies, who invented them, and
gave them power to turn every way for evil. The Christian knows no
appeal from the decisions of God, plainly uttered in his conscience.
The laws of Venice allowed _property_ in human beings; and upon this
ground Shylock demanded his pound of flesh, cut nearest to the heart.
Those who advertise mothers to be sold separately from their children,
likewise claim a right to human flesh; and they too cut it nearest to
the _heart_.
The personal liberty of one man can never be the property of another.
All ideas of property are founded upon the mutual agreement of the human
race, and are regulated by such laws as are deemed most conducive to the
general good. In slavery there is no _mutual_ agreement; for in that
case it would not be slavery. The negro has no voice in the matter--no
alternative is presented to him--no bargain is made. The beginning of
his bondage is the triumph of power over weakness; its continuation is
the tyranny of knowledge over ignorance. One man may as well claim an
exclusive right to the air another man breathes, as to the possession
of his limbs and faculties. Personal freedom is the birthright of every
human being. God himself made it the first great law of creation; and
no human enactment can render it null and void. "If," says Price, "you
have a right to make another man a slave, he has a right to make you a
slave;" and Ramsay says, "If we have in the beginning no right to sell
a man, no person has a right to buy him."
Am I reminded that the _laws_ acknowledge these vested rights in human
flesh? I answer the laws themselves were made by individuals, who wished
to justify the wrong and profit by it. We ought never to have recognised
a claim, which cannot exist according to the laws of God; it is our duty
to atone for the error; and the sooner we make a beginning, the better
will it be for us all. Must our arguments be based upon justice and
mercy to the slaveholders _only_? Have the negroes no right to ask
compensation for their years and years of unrewarded toil? It is true
that they have food and clothing, of such kind, and in such quantities,
as their masters think proper. But it is evident that this is not the
worth of their labor; for the proprietors can give from one hundred
to five and six hundred dollars for a slave, beside the expense of
supporting those who are too old or too young to labor. They could not
_afford_ to do this, if the slave did not earn more than he receives
in food and clothing. If the laws allowed the slave to redeem himself
progressively, the owner would receive his money back again; and the
negro's years of uncompensated toil would be more than lawful interest.
The southerners are much in the habit of saying they really wish for
emancipation, if it could be effected in safety; but I search in vain
for any proof that these assertions are sincere. (When I say this I
speak collectively; there are, no doubt, individual exceptions.)
Instead of profiting by the experience of other nations, the
slave-owners, as a body, have resolutely shut their eyes against the
light, because they preferred darkness. Every change in the laws has
riveted the chain closer and closer upon their victims; every attempt to
make the voice of reason and benevolence heard has been overpowered with
threatening and abuse. A cautious vigilance against improvement, a
keen-eyed jealousy of all freedom of opinion, has characterized
their movements. There _can_ be no doubt that the _majority_ wish to
perpetuate slavery. They support it with loud bravado, or insidious
sophistry, or pretended regret; but they never abandon the point. Their
great desire is to keep the public mind turned in another direction.
They are well aware that the ugly edifice is built of rotten timbers,
and stands on slippery sands--if the loud voice of public opinion could
be made to reverberate through its dreary chambers, the unsightly frame
would fall, never to rise again.
Since so many of their own citizens admit that the policy of this system
is unsound, and its effects injurious, it is wonderful that they do
not begin to destroy the "costly iniquity" in good earnest. But
long-continued habit is very powerful; and in the habit of slavery are
concentrated the strongest evils of human nature--vanity, pride, love of
power, licentiousness, and indolence.
There is a minority, particularly in Virginia and Kentucky, who
sincerely wish a change for the better; but they are overpowered, and
have not even ventured to speak, except in the great Virginia debate of
1832. In the course of that debate, the spirit of slavery showed itself
without disguise. The members _talked_ of emancipation; but with one or
two exceptions, they merely wanted to emancipate, or rather to send
away, the _surplus_ population, which they could neither keep nor sell,
and which might prove dangerous. They wished to get rid of the
consequences of the evil, but were determined to keep the evil itself.
Some members from Western Virginia, who spoke in a better spirit, and
founded their arguments on the broad principles of justice, not on
the mere convenience of a certain class, were repelled with angry
excitement. The eastern districts threatened to separate from the
western, if the latter persisted in expressing opinions opposed to the
continuance of slavery. From what I have uniformly heard of the
comparative prosperity of Eastern and Western Virginia, I should think
this was very much like the town's poor threatening to separate from
the town.
The mere circumstance of daring to debate on the subject was loudly
reprimanded; and there was a good deal of indignation expressed that
"reckless editors, and imprudent correspondents, had presumed so far
as to allude to it in the columns of a newspaper." Discussion in the
Legislature was strongly deprecated until a plan had been formed; yet
they must have known that no plan could be formed, in a republican
government, without previous discussion. The proposal contained within
itself that self-perpetuating power, for which the schemes of
slave-owners are so remarkable.
Mr. Gholson sarcastically rebuked the restless spirit of improvement, by
saying "he really had been under the _impression_ that he _owned_ his
slaves. He had lately purchased four women and ten children, in whom he
thought he had obtained a great bargain; for he supposed they were his
own property, _as were his brood mares_." To which Mr. Roane replied,
"I own a considerable number of slaves, and am perfectly sure they are
mine; and I am sorry to add that I have occasionally, though not often,
been compelled to make _them_ feel the _impression_ of that ownership.
I would not touch a hair on the head of the gentleman's slave, any sooner
than I would a hair in the _mane of his horse_."
Mr. Roane likewise remarked, "I think slavery as much a correlative of
liberty as cold is of heat. History, experience, observation and reason,
have taught me that the torch of liberty has ever burned brighter when
surrounded by the dark and filthy, yet _nutritious_ atmosphere of
slavery! I do not believe in the fanfaronade that all men are by nature
equal. But these abstract speculations have nothing to do with the
question, which I am willing to view as one of cold, sheer state policy,
in which the safety, prosperity, and happiness of the _whites alone_
are concerned."
Would Mr. Roane carry out his logic into all its details? Would he
cherish intemperance, that sobriety might shine the brighter? Would he
encourage theft, in order to throw additional lustre upon honesty? Yet
there seems to be precisely the same relation between these things that
there is between slavery and freedom. Such sentiments sound oddly enough
in the mouth of a republican of the nineteenth century!
When Mr. Wirt, before the Supreme Federal Court, said that slavery was
contrary to the laws of nature and of nations, and that the law of South
Carolina concerning seizing colored seamen, was unconstitutional, the
Governor directed several reproofs at him. In 1825, Mr. King laid on
the table of the United States Senate a resolution to appropriate the
proceeds of the public lands to the emancipation of slaves, and the
removal of free negroes, provided the same could be done under and
agreeable to, the laws of the respective States. He said he did not wish
it to be debated, but considered at some future time. Yet kindly and
cautiously as this movement was made, the whole South resented it, and
Governor Troup called to the Legislature and people of Georgia, to
"stand to their arms." In 1827, the people of Baltimore presented a
memorial to Congress, praying that slaves born in the District of
Columbia after a given time, specified by law, might become free on
arriving at a certain age. A famous member from South Carolina called
this an "impertinent interference, and a violation of the principles of
_liberty_," and the petition was not even _committed_. Another southern
gentleman in Congress objected to the Panama mission because Bolivar had
proclaimed liberty to the slaves.
Mr. Hayne, in his reply to Mr. Webster, says: "There is a spirit,
which, like the father of evil, is constantly walking to and fro about
the earth, seeking whom it may devour; it is the spirit of _false
philanthropy_. When this is infused into the bosom of a statesman (if
one so possessed can be called a statesman) it converts him at once into
a visionary enthusiast. Then he indulges in golden dreams of national
greatness and prosperity. He discovers that 'liberty is power,' and not
content with vast schemes of improvement at home, which it would
bankrupt the treasury of the world to execute, he flies to foreign lands
to fulfil 'obligations to the human race, by inculcating the principles
of civil and religious liberty,' &c. This spirit had long been busy with
the slaves of the South; and it is even now displaying itself in vain
efforts to drive the government from its _wise_ policy in relation to
the Indians."
Governor Miller, of South Carolina, speaking of the tariff and "the
remedy," asserted that slave labor was preferable to free, and
challenged the free States to competition on fair terms. Governor
Hamilton, of the same State, in delivering an address on the same
subject, uttered a eulogy upon slavery; concluding as usual that nothing
but the tariff--nothing but the rapacity of Northerners, could have
nullified such great blessings of Providence, as the cheap labor and
fertile soil of Carolina. Mr. Calhoun, in his late speech in the Senate,
alludes in a tone of strong disapprobation, and almost of reprimand,
to the remarkable debate in the Virginia Legislature; the occurrence
of which offence he charges to the opinions and policy of the north.
If these things evince any real desire to do away the evil, I cannot
discover it. There are many who inherit the misfortune of slavery, and
would gladly renounce the miserable birthright if they could; for their
sakes, I wish the majority were guided by a better spirit and a wiser
policy. But this state of things cannot last. The operations of Divine
Providence are hastening the crisis, and move which way we will, it must
come in some form or other; if we take warning in time, it may come as
a blessing. The spirit of philanthropy, which Mr. Hayne calls 'false,'
_is_ walking to and fro in the earth; and it will not pause, or turn
back, till it has fastened the golden band of love and peace around a
sinful world. The sun of knowledge and liberty is already high in the
heavens--it is peeping into every dark nook and corner of the earth--and
the African cannot be always excluded from its beams.
The advocates of slavery remind me of a comparison I once heard
differently applied: Even thus does a dog, unwilling to follow his
master's carriage, bite the wheels, in a vain effort to stop its
progress.