THE NEGRO, NORTH AND SOUTH:
THE STATUS OF THE COLOURED POPULATION
NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN STATES OF AMERICA
COMPARED.
BY ROBERT TRIMBLE.
LONDON : AVHITTAKER & CO.
LIVERPOOL: HENRY YOUNG, SOUTH CASTLE STREET.
MANCHESTER: ABEL HEYWOOD.
1863.
PKICE TWOPENCE.
Nothing is more common than to hear it urged that, in the Northern
States, the negro is worse treated than in the Southern States. How
this impression became prevalent it is difficult to say, though it is easy
enough to fathom the motives which urge certain parties to keep up
the delusion. The plain statements of the following pages may,
perhaps, assist to a clear understanding of the actual facts of the case,
and a knowledge of them may tend to a juster view of the struggle now
raging in America between freedom and slavery. I have not referred
to the social inequality which exists both. North and South; in the
natural order simplqfreedom precedes both political and social equality.
With the first placed upon a firm basis all else that is desirable must
follow in time. Many are impatient for immediate results. They say
because the ultimate outcome of freedom is not yet attained, those who
have actually led the van in that sacred cause are actuated by
improper motives. They urge that personal and political freedom
and social equality should all be simultaneously accorded to the
negro race. In reply I have to point out the fact, that in our own
country no such rapid progress has been made. Men of our own race
and colour, though for thirty-four years standing equal to their fellow-
countrymen in the eye of the law, are yet not treated by individual^
with the consideration which they deserve. Still, day by day, we see in
the public prints "No Irish need apply," "No Catholic need apply,"
"None but English need apply;" and sometimes even, "No Welsh
need apply." I would then say to the fault-finders referred to, that
they had better take the beam out of their own eye before casting
reproach for the mote in their brother's eye.
Liverpool,
May 26th, 1860.
THE NEGRO, NORTH AND SOUTH.
In the world's history there has been, probably, no great national
struggle which has been so systematically misunderstood and
misrepresented in its origin, conduct, and aims as that which
now devastates vast provinces on the other side of the Atlantic.
In Great Britain, there seems to be an indisposition to look
fairly at the facts of the case. The middle classes, perhaps
inflated by unprecedented prosperity, have lent a not unwilling
attention to a portion of the newspaper press, which has availed
itself of an extensive circulation to attempt to create and
establish in the public mind an impression that popular institu¬
tions have failed. It has thus become the fashion to sneer at
those of America, to speak contemptuously, more especially, of
that portion of the Grreat Republic which is true to the principles
of freedom, and to exult over what is called "the failure of
democracy." To some of the friends of freedom this aberration
of feeling has been a source of well-founded regret, if not of
alarm. To stop reform at home, and to despise liberty abroad,
have seemed to these very sad out-growths of prosperity. To do
what in them lies to counteract the evil state of things prevail¬
ing, seems a task which, though beset with difficulties, is worthy
of their strenuous exertions.
One of the charges most strongly urged against the people of
the Northern States is, that they are not in earnest in their anti-
slavery feelings; that they treat the coloured population with
even less consideration than is shewn by the people of the
Southern States. Not onl*y are the slaves, better cared for
than the labourers of other parts of the woi'ld, but the free
a
4
coloured men of the South, are in a better position than their
brethren in the Puritanic North. Could this position be verified
it would, indeed, be a very serious matter ; and although it ought
not to discourage any man from doing his utmost to free the
slaves, still it ought to, and would, operate materially in directing
his sympathies into certain channels. The Southern might not
be so good a cause as honest men could wish to support, yet it
would be better than that of the North,—fuller of hope for the
slave, fuller of hope for the civilization and well-being of the
world. To detail a few facts in relation to this most important
matter may not be out of place at the present time. To quote
the opinions of individual men, though of importance in many
respects, yet here will hardly be necessary. The laws and consti¬
tutions and practices of the several States will, probably, prove
the more satisfactory testimony.
1. Consider in the first place, the laws of each section relative
to Freedom and Slavery.
According to the Constitution of Massachusetts, adopted in
the year 1780, and again, with slight amendments, re-adopted in
the year 1821, " all men are born free/' In accordance with this
fundamental doctrine of the Constitution, the law courts decided
that slavery could not exist in the State; and, therefore, from the
year first named, involuntary servitude, except in punishment of
crime, ceased. In 1792, New Hampshire inserted in its Constitu¬
tion a declaration similar to that made by Massachussetts, and
under its operation all slaves in the State were at once enfran¬
chised. In 1793, Yermont inserted a similar article; and at the
same time specifically decreed the absolute and unconditional
abolition of slavery. In 1780, Rhode Island enacted a law that
all children of slaves, born on or after 1st March of that year,
should be free from birth. In 1784, Connecticut placed the
following provision in its statute book:—"No negro or mulatto
"child that shall, after the first day of March, 1784, be born
" within this State, shall be held in servitude longer than until
"they arrive to the age of twenty-five years," &c.; and in the
year 1818, in its revised Constitution, it asserts—" That all men,
" when they form a social compact, are equal in rights." Until
5
the year 1819 Maine formed a part of Massachusetts; and in
regard to slavery, it followed the course pursued by the parent
State.
Thus, in every New England State slavery was abolished, either
by the provisions of the Constitutions, or by express statute law, a
whole generation before its abolition in the British Colonies.
Nor were the other States of the North apathetic in establishing
freedom within their bounds. On 1st March, 1780, an Emancipa¬
tion Act passed the Pennsylvania Assembly. From the adoption
of the act, all Negroes born within the State were to be free
upon attaining the age of twenty-eight years; and slaves then
within the State were declared free, if not registered by their
owners before 1st November following. The slaves of persons
passing through the State, or merely visiting it, were not affected
by this act. On 3rd March, 1847, however, the clause on this
point was repealed; and it was ordained, that all slaves brought
into the State, by the voluntary act of their masters, should be free.
On 29th March, 1799, the Legislature of New York pronounced
all negro children, born on or after 4th'July following, free;
males, upon attaining the age of twenty-eight, and females
twenty-five years. This act was amended, and its provision for
freedom much extended in its scope, on 31st March, 1817, when
it was enacted that from this date all children of slaves should
be free upon attaining the age of twenty-one years; and also,
that all slaves born before 4th July, 1799, should be free from
4th July, 1827. Thus perished slavery in the Empire State.
On 1st November, 1802, Ohio formed its Constitution. Article 8
declared,—" There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary
" servitude in this State, otherwise than for the punishment of
"crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted," &c.
On 14th February, 1804, New Jersey enacted, that all children
born of slave parents after 4th July, 1804, should be free;
males, upon attaining the age of twenty-five, and females, twenty-
one years. In 1S16, Indiana, by its Constitution, prohibited for
ever, any alteration in that clause which forbade slavery. In
1818, Illinois entered the Union. Slaves were then in the State,
yet slavery was at once prohibited.
6
Thus lias been brought under review every Free State admitted
into the Union previous to the British Emancipation Acts. It has
been shown that in every one of them slavery was abolished long
before the era of emancipation in our Colonies. If honour be
due to the apostles of freedom in any country more than in
another, it is to the fathers of the Free States of America.
Having considered the progress of emancipation in the older
Free States, the principles and practice of the older slave States
may be placed in contrast.
In Mississippi and Kentucky a man cannot free his slaves
unless there remain to him, over and above their value, sufficient
property not merely to pay his debts, but also to pay his widow
one-third of -his estate, including the calm of the Negroes them¬
selves. In North Carolina, bonds for §1,000 must be given in
court that the manumitted slaves shall leave the State within
three months, and never afterwards return. According to the
revised Constitution of 1835, "no free negro, free mulatto, or
" free person of mixed blood, descended from negro ancestors, to
"the fourth generation inclusive (though one ancestor of each
" generation may have been a white person), shall vote for mem-
"bers of the Senate or House of Commons." In Tennessee,
bonds must be given that the manumitted slave shall "forthwith"
leave the State; and the County Court must be convinced that
the reasons for emancipation are satisfactory. In Mississippi,
Alabama, South Carolina, and Georgia, no slave can be manu¬
mitted without a Special Act of the Legislature. In Georgia, if
the owner do not first get a special act, not only is the manumission
void, but the master is fined #500 (formerly the fine was only
$200). If the emancipation be by will or testament, then a fine
of $1,000 is levied upon any one attempting to give effect to it
in any way whatever. In Virginia, under the latest revision of
its Constitution—that of 1851-52— " Slaves hereafter ernanci-
" pated shall forfeit their freedom by remaining in the Common-
" wealth more than twelve months after they become actually
"free, and shall be reduced to Slavery under such regulations
" as may be prescribed by law."
7
Here, then, is a marked contrast. Every Northern State syste¬
matically and afore-thought doing all possible to further the cause
of freedom,—every Southern State as systematically and intention¬
ally throwing every possible obstruction in the path of emancipa¬
tion. Yet, it is boldly stated that the former States are insincere,
and that their triumph in the Civil War would rivet tighter the
chains of Slavery; whilst, on the other hand, to insure the speedy
extinction of this immoral system, it is necessary to strengthen the
hands of those States which, from their foundation until the
present moment, have been endeavouring, to the utmost of their
ability, to strengthen and perpetuate human bondage.
2. The only Southern State which bestows the franchise upon
coloured men is North Carolina. The condition upon which it
is there enjoyed has been already stated. Four generations of
free ancestors must pass before the coloured man can exercise this
right. Even if one ancestor in each of those four generations be
white, there is no relaxation. This is the condition of the matter
in the most liberal of the Southern States.
On the other hand, in every one of the New England States
white and coloured men vote on equal terms and are alike eligible
to every office in the State. In New York the only restriction is
that a coloured man shall possess a freehold of $250 ; that is,
equal to our 40s. freehold. If he have not the property to entitle
him to vote, he shall not pay assessed taxes and is not liable to serve
in the militia. I regret this restriction. The great state of New
York could well do without it. In the other Northern States
the franchise is confined to whites. This circumstance I not only
deeply regret, but most emphatically condemn. It is as mean
in a great State as it is unjust to a class of men who cannot
be altogether exempted from the burdens of taxation. There
is good reason to believe, however, that this restriction will be
speedily swept away. The several States provide for " Citizens
of the United States " enjoying all privileges in common. Now
the Attorney-General, Mr. Bates, gave his opinion in the latter
part of last year, that the Constitution of the United States makes
no allusion to colour or to descent, and that, therefore, colour
or descent can be no bar to citizenship. This opinion is as wise
8
and just as it is constitutional. It remains only for some one to
test its accuracy by an appeal to the judgment of the Courts,
This, for plain and prudential reasons, is likely to be deferred for
some time. The majority of the supreme Court consists still of
those men who gave the Dred Scott decision. They hold office
for life. Since the advent to power of the Republican party, three
men true to the principles of freedom have been appointed ; and
it is hoped that ere long that Southern element which has set at
nought every principle of justice will be, if not eliminated altoge¬
ther, at least rendered comparatively powerless for evil. Then,
if not before, one step more will be taken in the onward path.
In the meantime, let condemnation of others be tempered by a
sense of our own shortcomings. If Great Britain does not deny
the franchise to negroes, at any rate upon distinctions far more
evanescent than that of colour, she denies it to the majority of
her inhabitants.
3. In the Northern States the testimony of men is received
in Courts of Law, whether the witness be white or black. Not
only is this the case in individual States, but by an Act of Con¬
gress passed on the 12th July, 1862, it is declared that in judicial
proceedings in the district of Columbia, there shall be no exclu¬
sion of any witness on account of colour.
In the Southern States, " it is an inflexible and universal rule
" . . . that the testimony of a coloured person, whether bond or
"free, cannot be received against a third person." Wherever the
great bulk of the population is white it may be of comparatively
little moment to deny this privilege to the negro ; but in a coun¬
try in which, in many districts, the whites form but a small part
of the population, what chance of justice to the coloured man can
there be under such a system ?
4. In the North, black and white can equally appeal to the
law, and receive substantial justice in cases of assault.
In Georgia, a slave striking a white person, even in self-defence,
is punished for the second offence (P) with death. In South
Carolina this punishment is affixed to the third offence. In Mary¬
land, even a free negro is punished for this artificial crime by
having his ears cropped. In Kentucky, the free negro receives
9
thirty lashes, upon the crime being proved upon the oath of the
person struck: and let it be remembered, the testimony of the
coloured defendant cannot be received to rebut the charge. In
Virginia, a free negro shall receive not exceeding thirty-nine
stripes, "if-he use provoking language or menacing gestures to a
" white person." In Louisiana there is a law which is, perhaps,
unique. It reads as follows : "Free people of colour ought never
" to insult or strike white people, nor presume to conceive themselves
" equal to the whites; but, on the contrary, they ought to yield to
" them on every occasion, and never speak or answer them but
" with respect, under the penalty of imprisonment, according to
" the nature of the offence." Lest these excellent precepts should
lie a dead letter upon the statute-book, Louisiana has taken some
pains to enforce them by other laws. "White as well as coloured
men are therefore aimed at. According to her revised statutes
of 1852, any white person saying or doing anything calculated
" to diminish that respect which is commanded to free people of
" colour for the whites by law, or to destroy that line of distinc-
" tion which the law has established between the several classes
" of this community," shall be fined not less than §300 nor more
than $1000, and imprisoned not less than six months nor more
than three years. "Whosoever shall write, print, publish, or
" distribute anything having a tendency to produce discontent
" among the free coloured population of the State shall, on con-
" viction thereof before any Court of competent jurisdiction, be
" sentenced to imprisonment at hard labour for life, or suffer
" death, at the discretion of the Court." Even if the language
be used at the Bar, from the Bench, the Stage, or the Pulpit, the
penalty is " not less than three years' nor more than twenty-one
" years' imprisonment with hard labour, or death, at the discre¬
tion of the court." In Alabama there are similar laws, only
an intent is requisite to conviction. Virginia has the following
law- in its code of 1849: " If a free person, by speaking or
"writing maintain that owners have not right of property in
" slaves, he shall be confined in jail not more than one year, and
" fined not exceeding #500. He may be arrested and carried
" before the justice by any white person."
10
It seems hardly necessary to draw attention, by lengthened
comments, to the difference between North and South under
this head. In the one case, a spirit of justice prevails; in the
other, injustice is rampant even to madness.
Perhaps it may be thought that these laws of the older States,
though still in force on the statute book, may be a dead letter.
This is not so, as may be easily learned by any one who will take
the trouble to search into the matter. They are of the very nature
and essence of slavery. Take the example of New Mexico—
though still a territory, under the animus which prevails through¬
out the South, it passed laws in the year 1859 to the following
effect:—In section 20 of its Slave bill, it enacts, "Any slave
" who shall conduct himself disorderly in a public place, or shall
" give insolent language, or signs, to any free white person, may
" be arrested and taken by such person before a justice of the
" peace, who, upon a trial and conviction in a summary manner,
"shall cause his constable to give such slave any number of
"stripes upon his or her hare back, not exceeding thirty-nine."
Section 21 provides for " branding* or stripes" in any case of
misdemeanor wherein a fine would be inflicted on a white free
man. Section 25 is the ultima ratio of slave legislation—"The
"emancipation of slaves within this territory is totally pro-
" hibited." Such were the laws which animated that territory,
the latest plant of the Slave Power.
But New Mexico was not satisfied with legislating for slaves
the descendants of Africans. It legalised white slavery also. In
January, 1859, it passed a law establishing and regulating
peonage. To show the absolute servitude of the peon, some
pains were taken. By the fourth section of the act, Courts were
prohibited from taking cognisance of the correction inflicted by
the master upon his servants; " for/' it says, " they are con-
" sidered domestic servants to their masters, and they should
" correct their neglect and faults; for, as soldiers are punished
"by their chiefs, without the intervention of the civil authority,
* In Florida, nailing the Slave's ear to a post and branding with a hot iron '• in
open court," are amongst the legal punishments. In Maryland " cropping" the
ears is a punishment which may be legally inflicted.
11
"by reason of the salary they enjoy, an equal right should he
"granted those persons who pay their money to he served in the
"protection of their property." Working men of Britain! is
this the state to which you desire to he reduced ? Do you wish
to. give your employers the right to "correct" you, without
appeal to courts of law, because they " pay their money to he
served ?" This is the state to which your white brethren, in New
Mexico, were reduced four short years ago. It is the natural out¬
growth of negro slavery. Depend upon it, if the Slave Oligarchy
be left free to work their will on one part of the labouring popu¬
lation, they will not be slow in showing equal unconcern for the
rights of any other portion. It is the logical sequence that if
slavery be right, no question of colour or of race can long be per¬
mitted to stand in the way of doing what is already advocated in
the South, namely, to turn all labourers into capital!
It will be instructive, though somewhat anticipating the course
of this argument, here to follow the history of these New Mexican
measures. " On the 10th of May, 1860, Mr. Bingham, of Ohio,
"from the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives,
" [of the United States, assembled in "Washington,] reported
"'A bill to disapprove and declare null and void all territorial
"acts or parts of acts, heretofore passed by the Legislative
"Assembly of New Mexico, which establish, protect, or legalise,
" involuntary servitude or slavery, within said territory, except as
"a punishment for crime, upon due conviction.'" On the same
day the bill was passed, all the Republican members but one
voting for it, (and Republican members alone,) to the number of
97. Upon the other side were 79 Democrats of various shades,
8 Americans, 1 Independent, and 1 Republican; total, 89.
Thereupon the bill was sent to the Senate. Of course the fifteen
Slave States voted as a unit in the negative, and the Democrats
from the North voted with them. The bill was therefore defeated,
and slavery remained in New Mexico. Fortunately it has not
had a very long lease. On the 18th of June, 1862, an act passed
the Congress of the United States, and was ratified by the Presi¬
dent, to secure f reedom to all persons within the Territories of the
United States. It says—"From and after the passage of this
12
11 act there sliall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in
" any of the Territories of the United States, now existing, or
"which may at any time hereafter be formed or acquired by
" the United States, otherwise than in punishment of crimes
"whereof the party shall have been duly convicted." With the
independence of the South, slavery will of course be re-established.
JSTew Mexico would naturally go with that section of the
States upon which it borders. Are the freemen of Britain
prepared to aid in this foul proceeding —- the re-establish¬
ment of slavery in a territory from which it has been once
eliminated ? There is a great temptation to make it into a Slave
State, apart from its geographic position. It contained at last
census a population of Indians amounting to more than 55,000.
At the current value of Slaves these would probably be worth
twenty-five to thirty millions of dollars; no small prize to men
who have no scruples upon the subject of slavery.
5. In all the New England States the Constitutions make it
a duty for each township to maintain public worship and suitable
means of religious instruction. All classes of the community are
profited by this provision, as is evidenced by the fact that the six
States comprised in this section contain the most moral and
religious people in the world.
Ifow stands the South in this regard P In Georgia, slaves as¬
sembling for public worship may be " corrected, without trial, by
"receiving on the bare back twenty-five stripes with a whip,
" switch, or cow-skin." * In Mississippi, according to the code of
1849, it is necessary for the Slave to obtain a written permit from
the master or overseer to attend worship, even when the service
is conducted by a white man. In South Carolina, free negroes
may not meet for worship, unless a majority of the persons pre¬
sent be white ; and even in the event of a quorum of white persons
being present, the assembly may be broken up by warrant of one
magistrate. After nine o'clock, p.m., it does not even require a
warrant to authorise any person whatever to disperse the
assembly. In Virginia, according to the code of 1849, if negroes
* Only think of "the chivalry" whipping women on the "bare back," for
assembling to worship God!
13
assemble, day or night, for worship, with a negro to conduct it,
they are to be punished "with stripes." The number of stripes
is not specified, so that we may infer there is no limit to the
amount of punishment.
With these details before us, shall we wonder that the Con¬
federates have sent to Great Britain for a free supply of bibles ?
Surely they want bibles badly in Dixie'^ land.
6. The education of the young has long been regarded as of
the very first importance. What efforts have been made, and are
being made, to bring all under its benign influence! It is lament¬
able to find that even here the same contrast which prevails in
other things, between the Northern and the Southern States, is
not less marked.
The oldest Boston record is dated 1634. In 1635 is found this
entry: " It was likewise unanimously resolved, that our brother,
" Philemon Purmont, should be appointed school-master for the
" instruction and education of our children/' Thirty acres of
land were at the same time granted for the use of the master.
In 1642 the General Court of Masachussetts enacted, that each
householder should take care that his children and servants were
able "to read fluently the English language, and to acquire a
" knowledge of the penal laws, under a penalty of twenty shillings
" for such neglect." By another law, passed in 1647, children
and servants were taken from the charge of parents or masters
who neglected this duty, and were placed "with guardians, males
till twenty-one and females till eighteen years of age. By other
laws schools in the various townships, and a University (Harvard,
founded in 1636) were established. When the colonies renounced
the government of George III. the wise laws to encourage learn¬
ing were not only maintained in the New England States, but
were greatly strengthened. To quote from the Massachusetts
Constitution of 1780 is to give only a just idea of the spirit
which animated all the other five States. The following is chap.
5, section 2: " The encouragement of learning.—Wisdom and
« knowledge, as well as virtue, diffused generally among the body
" of the people being necessary for the preservation of their rights
" and liberties, and as these depend on spreading the opportuni-
14
" ties and advantages of education in the various parts of the
" country, and among the different orders of the people, it shall
" he the duty of the legislators and magistrates, in all future
" periods of this Commonwealth, to cherish the interest of litera-
" ture and the sciences, and all seminaries of them, especially the
" University of Cambridge, public schools and grammar schools
" in the towns ; to encourage private societies and public institu-
" tions, by rewards and immunities for the promotion of agricul¬
ture, arts, sciences, commerce, trades, manufactures, and a
" natural history of the country; to countenance and inculcate
" the principles of humanity and general benevolence, public and
" private charity, industry, and frugality, honesty and punctuality
" in their dealings; sincerity, good humour, and all social affec-
" tions and generous sentiments among the people."
In these New England States white and coloured children
are taught in the same schools, side by side. In Boston, indeed,
separate schools are provided; but coloured children are not
obliged to attend these. If parents wish they can send their
children to the schools frequented by the whites. If refused
admission, they can proceed with an action at law, and recover
damages for the injury sustained. In New York, Pennsylvania,
and other States towards the west, with the exceptions to be
hereafter mentioned, ample provision is made for instruction ;
and though it is much to be regretted that the wise, just, and
liberal provisions of the New England Codes are not extended
to these States; still it is matter for no small praise that the
people heavily tax themselves in order to educate every poor
child, whatever its colour may be.
In the South the poor whites receive but little education.
Even where nominal provision is made by the State, it is of
the paltriest and most ineffective kind. The laws, however, if
they do not provide for the education of the whites, at least do
not actively oppose it. But in regard to the coloured races,
whether bond or free, there is absolute prohibition. The severest
penalties are levied npon those who dare to cultivate the minds of
persons who form in some States a majority of the population. This
assertion is amply borne out by the following extracts from the
15
existing laws. In those laws is to be found tlie ultimate result
of human ingenuity to keep in darkness the minds of men. In
no other country in the world, and in no other age of the world,
have there been such unwearied attempts made to shut out
knowledge. If the coloured races of the South are not brutal
in every instinct of their nature it is not owing to any want of
care on the part of the chivalric race which keeps them in bondage.
If legislation could completely efface the image of Grod from the
soul of man, the laws which are about to be quoted would surely
accomplish that end. But let them speak for themselves.
In 1740 South Carolina enacted—"Whereas the having of
"slaves taught to write, or suffering them to be employed in
"writing, may be attended with great inconveniences, be it
" enacted, that all and every person and persons whatsoever who
" shall hereafter teach or cause any slave or slaves to be taught to
" write, or shall use or em-ploy any slave as a scribe in any manner
" of writing hereafter taught to write, every such person or persons
" shall for every such offence forfeit the sum of £100 current
"money." Thus early began Slave State legislation against
education. Without repealing the act of 1740, in 1800 the
following law passed:—"Assemblies of slaves, free negroes,
" mulattoes, and mestizoes, whether composed of all or any of
" such description of persons, or of all or any of the same and of
" a proportion of white persons, met together for the purpose of
" mental instruction in a confined or secret place, &c., are declared
" to be an unlawful meeting, and the magistrates are hereby
" required, &c., to enter into such confined places, &c., to break
" doors, &c. if resisted, and to disperse such slaves, free negroes,
" &c., and the officer dispersing such unlawful assemblage may
"inflict such corporal punishment, not exceeding twenty lashes,
" upon such slaves, free negroes, &c., as they may judge neces-
" sary for deterring them from the like unlawful assemblage in
"future." Another section of the same act declares "That it
"shall not be lawful for any number of slaves, free negroes,
" mulattoes, or mestizoes, even in company with ichite persons, to
" meet together for the purpose of mental instruction, either
" before the rising of the sun, or after the going down of the same."
lb
Again by the act of December 17, 1834, South Carolina
enacted: " If any person shall hereafter teach any slave to read
" or write, or shall aid in assisting any slave to read or write, or
"cause or procure any slave to be taught to read or write, such person
" if a free white person, upon conviction thereof, shall for every such
" offence against this act be fined not exceeding $100, and
" imprisoned not more than 6 months; or if a free person of
" colour, shall be whipped not exceeding fifty lashes, and fined not
" exceeding $50; and if a slave shall be whipped not exceeding
" fifty lashes; and if any free person of colour or a slave shall keep
" any school or other place of instruction for teaching any slave
" or free person of colour to read or write, such person shall
"be liable to the same fine, imprisonment, and corporal punish -
" ment, as are by this act imposed and inflicted on free persons of
" colour and slaves, for teaching slaves to read or write."
It is thus seen that time, which in other countries has tended
to ameliorate the condition of the labouring classes, has brought
no softening influences to bear upon the chivalric race which rules
in South Carolina. The different epochs of legislation serve only
to mark the progressive severity of repressive laws. Observe the
sweeping character of these ordinances. Not only are mere read¬
ing and writing not to be taught—some one might be found
hardy enough to evade the law prohibiting such exercises;—a
most comprehensive phrase is therefore used—-"mental instruc¬
tion!" Who could evade a law forbidding this? What act
relating to intercourse with the coloured race is not liable to be
construed into "mental instruction ?" To give mental instruction
to a free man is such a crime that the lash is to be used in
punishing it! Then, too, observe the happy phrase, "either before
the rising of the sun or after the going down of the same!"
In Georgia, in 1829, it was enacted: "If any slave, negro, or
"free person of colour, or any white person, shall teach any other
"slave, negro, or free person of colour to read or write either
"written or printed characters, the said free person of colour or
"slave shall be punished by fine and whipping, or fine or whip¬
ping, at the discretion of the court; and if a white person so
"offending, he, she, or they, shall be punished Avith fine not
IT
"exceeding $500, and imprisonment in the common jail at the
"discretion of the court." In 1833 it was further enacted: " If
"any person shall teach any slave, negro, or free person of colour
"to read or write either written or printed characters, or shall
"procure, suffer, or permit a slave, negro, or free person of colour
"to transact business for him in writing, such person so offending
"shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and on conviction, shall be
"punished by fine or imprisonment in the common jail, or both,
"at the discretion of the court." Thus the Georgians punish,
not merely for the crime of teaching a free coloured man to read,
but they punish with equal severity if the free man who has been
taught by some one else, some one unknown, be employed in
transacting any business in which his skill in writing may be
turned to useful account. According to the revised statutes of
North Carolina "any free person who shall hereafter teach, or
"attempt to teach, an}'' slave within this State to read or write,
"the use of figures excepted, or shall give or sell to such slave or
"slaves any books or pamphlets, shall be liable to indictment &c.;
"and upon conviction shall, at the discretion of the court if a
"white man or woman, be fined not less than #100, nor more
"than $200, or imprisoned', and if a free person of colour, shall
"be fined, imprisoned, or whipped, at the discretion of the court,
"not exceeding thirty-nine lashes, nor less than twenty lashes."
For a similar offence a slave shall receive thirty-nine lashes on
his or her bare back. Haynau was mobbed in London for whipping
women—Mason and other Southern upholders of flogging
women on the bare back are feasted and flattered by the Lord
Mayor and the magnates of the land !
Mr. Mason's own State is not behind others in dealing severely
with the criminals who dare to teach their fellow creatures.
Whipping, is a favourite punishment there. The Virginian code
of 1849 says: "Every assemblage of negroes for the purpose
" of instruction in reading or writing shall be an unlawful assembly.
" Any Justice may issue his warrant, to any officer or other person,
" requiring him to enter any place where such assembly may be,
" and seize any negro therein ; and he or any other Justice may
" order such negro to be punished with stripes. If a white person
18
" assemble with, negroes for the purpose of instructing them to
" read or write, he shall be confined to jail not exceeding six
" months and fined not exceeding #100."
In Louisiana, in March, 1830, it was enacted that—"All persons
" who shall teach, or cause to be taught, any slave in this State
" to read or write shall, on conviction thereof, &c., be imprisoned
" not less than one month, nor more than twelve months."
In Alabama the law is carried to a singular extreme. The
Slaveholders of that State not only prohibit their slaves from
learning to read, but fearful that knowledge of the most rudimental
kind should be imparted, they prohibit free negroes from learning to
" spell." Lest this inferior negro race should, by its own in¬
genuity, learn to put syllable to syllable, and so eke out words, it
is absolutely decreed that they shall not be taught to spell! The
following is the law:—"Any person who shall attempt to teach
" any free person of colour or slave to spell, read, or write, shall,
" upon conviction, &c., be fined in a sum not less than $250, nor
"more than #500."
7. It has been shewn that in all the Northern States slavery
has long ceased. It is hence impossible, in this aspect, to contrast
the position of the slave, North and South. At the same time,
this sketch would prove very incomplete without referring to some
of the legislation specially affecting slaves, and sometimes inci¬
dentally affecting free coloured men also. The following extract
from Stroud's "Work on the Slave Law, faithfully lays down the
principles of Slavery as exhibited by the law and the practice
of the Southern States. His book fully bears out each position
advanced:—
1. " The master may determine the kind, and degree, and time
" of labour to which the Slave shall be subjected.
2. "The master may supply the Slave with such food and
" clothing only, both as to quantity and quality, as he may think
" proper, <?r find convenient.
3. " The master may, at his discretion, inflict any punishment
" upon the person of his Slave.
4. "All the power of the master over his Slave may be
" exercised not by himself only in person, but by any one whom
" he may depute as his agent.
19
5. "Slaves have no legal rights of property in things real or
" personal; but whatever they may acquire belongs in point of
" law to their masters.*
6. "The Slave being a personal chattel, is at all times liable
" to be sold absolutely, or mortgaged, or leased, at the mil of his
" master.
7. " He may also be sold by process of law for the satisfaction
" of the debts of a living or the debts and bequests of a deceased
" master, at the suit of creditors or legatees.
8. " A Slave cannot be a party before a judicial tribunal, in
" any species of action against his master, no matter how atrocious
" may have been the injury received from him.
9. " Slaves cannot redeem themselves, nor obtain a change of
" masters, though oruel treatment may have rendered such change
" necessary for their personal safety.
10. " Slaves being objects of property, if injured by third
" persons, their owners may bring suit, and recover damages for
" the injury.
11. "Slaves can make no contract.
12. " Slavery is hereditary and perpetual."
It has been indicated that in the North there are marked
exceptions to the generally fair treatment of the negro race ; did
these instances relate to the conduct of individuals merely, it
would not be necessary to dwell upon them at length, because in
an affair of this magnitude National or State action only can be fairly
criticised. If the laws themselves be equitable and the administra¬
tion of them impartial, the intention of the community is shewn.
* In 1846 a case of this nature was decided in South Carolina—Elizabeth P. Gist
v. Maurice Tookey. "The plaintiff's slave, "William, made over and above his
" wages, and placed it in the hands of the defendant to aid in purchasing his
" ("William's) children. The children were purchased by the defendant. Held,
" that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the money from the defendant, notwith-
" standing any promise by the master that his slave shall have certain acquisitions,
" all the acquisitions of the slave in possession are the property of his master."—
Stroud, p. 80.
"A slave was allowed by his master to enlist in the North Carolina line, and for
u his services he received a grant of land, just as was bestowed on other enlisted
" soldiers. It was held that this land belonged to the master."—Stroud, p. 81.
£
20
By these circumstances ought the community to be judged. In
the North two States stand in dark contrast to their neighbours—
they are Indiana and Illinois. The former entered the Union in
1816, the latter in 1818. It has been stated that both, when
adopting constitutions, prohibited slavery. Under their constitu¬
tions coloured men settled within their bounds; owing, however,
to the state of feeling in reference to the negro, but few entered
either State.
On 7th March, 1848, a new constitution was adopted by Illinois.
Under this revised instrument of government coloured men were
prohibited from entering the State for the purpose of settling there,
except under penalties to be afterwards designated by the legis¬
lature. This provision did not apply to the coloured people who
had previously acquired a settlement. According to law a negro
entering Illinois is seized and advertised as a supposed fugitive
slave. If claimed, the United States marshal for the district
adjudicates upon the case. If unclaimed, or if the claim be not
established to the satisfaction of the marshal, he is hired out to
the highest bidder for a time sufficient to pay the official fees and
the cost of his maintenance whilst in prison. At the end of the
term agreed upon, the negro is allowed a certain number of days
(ten, I believe) to leave the State. If he be 'found after that
period he is liable to treatment similar to that he has already
borne ; only this time there is increased severity, as the costs are
doubled.
On August 4, 1851, Indiana adopted a revised constitution.
"Respecting coloured people, it is provided that no negro or
" mulatto shall come into or settle in the State; all contracts
" made with such shall be void, and all persons employing them
"shall be punished by a fine of $10 to #500, and the proceeds of
" such fines shall be appropriated for the colonization of those
" negroes and mulattoes, and their descendants, in the State at the
" adoption of the Constitution, and who are willing to emigrate."*
These laws are certainly very harsh and unjust. They
stand alone in infamy in the legislation of the Northern States.
In the South only can they be paralleled; there, unfortunately,
* Dr. Fisher's U.S. Gazetteer. New York, J. H. Colton, 1853.
21
they are far exceeded in cruelty. No fitting word can "be uttered
for the people who passed them, or for those who tolerate them,
but that of unqualified condemnation.
What is the reason that Illinois and Indiana stand in such
marked contrast to the other free States in their negro legislation ?
It is worth while to inquire, as the answer is not difficult, and
the light thrown upon the general subject is of considerable
importance.
Upon referring to the map it will be observed that these two
States border upon slave territory. The greater portion of the
western border of Illinois is formed by Missouri, the whole of the
southern border by Kentucky. Indiana has Illinois for its western
neighbour, and Kentucky on the south. Thus intimately are the
two States associated, and thus closely do they approach the
slave territory. The southern portion of each State was settled
by refugees from the South. These people left their homes be¬
cause they found that labour was debased by contact with slavery.
They had no capital but their labour, and that was degraded and
deteriorated by the fact that the great bulk of the labouring
population around them consisted of slaves. It was held to be
not respectable to work ; and as they must work or starve, they
left their homes in the South and took refuge in the North. They
were in abject ignorance and poverty. Generally their property
consisted of no more than what a horse or a mule carried upon his
back. Is it wonderful that these people, poor and ignorant, and
believing that their misfortunes arose from their contact with a
degraded and enslaved negro population, should not be able to
discriminate between the cause and the instrument of their degrada¬
tion? that they should be unable to distinguish between the slave
system, which was the true source of their wrongs, and the poor
slaves who were the unwitting visible representatives of the
power which crushed them? Far wiser people than they might
well have fallen into the error. From hating slavery which had
so grievously injured them, it was easy and almost natural to pass
on to hate the equally suffering slave. When this point was
reached, how natural to transfer their contempt and hatred to the
whole race of which the slave was a part. The original settlers
b 2
22
having suffered so much from contact with negroes, discouraged
the settlement of any of that race. Even previous to the existence
of any express law to prohibit immigration very few entered the
new States. In the year 1820 there were only 1,786 coloured
people in the two States together, out of a total population
of 202,389.
I have no means at my disposal at present to ascertain in what
proportions the coloured population is distributed throughout the
various counties of these States; I have Reason to believe that it
is found mainly in the northern sections. Certainly in the north¬
ern counties the anti-negro laws remain a dead letter, public opinion
there forbidding the putting of them into force; whilst in the
southern counties they are not unfrequently put into execution.
This arises from the different sources whence the population was
derived. The southern sections were peopled by refugees from
the Slave States; the northern parts by emigrants from the Free
States. The north of Illinois is more free in its sentiments than
the corresponding part of Indiana. This confirms what is stated.
It is to Chicago in Illinois that the settlers from the Eastern
States direct their route. It is the great terminus of the lake
navigation, and from it radiates the tide of immigration. Bearing
these facts in mind it will not be difficult to account for various
otherwise inexplicable phenomena.
In elections the Democratic party secures the full pro-slavery
vote; to do so it has almost invariably made itself a mere tool of
the Southern Oligarchy. When in 1860 it became somewhat
restive under its obligations it was cast off by the South, with
what results we know. It has been a pro-slavery party, and
therefore an anti-negro party. As might be expected, it is parti¬
cularly strong in Indiana and Illinois. In these States it no
doubt finds many adherents for its anti-protectionist advocacy; but
it is supported mainly in the southern counties for its pro-southern
tendencies. In the northern counties it has lately given way
before the reviving breath of freedom; but in the southern
districts it is still not only strong, it almost stands alone. The
contrast between the two divisions in this regard may be seen
23
"d °™£ Particulars. In the year 1856 the contest
"vr t? res^en^s^P lay between Colonel Fremont, Republican,
r. more, Pro-Slavery Whig, and Mr. Buchanan, Pro-
aveiy Democrat. Colonel Fremont pledged his influence to
establish freedom in the Territories, and to withstand the spread
of slavery; the other two candidates were ready to do anything
which would give satisfaction to the slaveholders. "With these
issues the contest proceeded. The result was that the free cause
advocated by Fremont had majorities in all the northern
counties; whilst his opponents had overwhelming majorities in
all the counties bordering upon Slave States. Take examples of
voting in Illinois. The Missouri border extends from Hancock
county southward to Alexander county. These are arranged
according to their geographical position in the first of the follow¬
ing statements; in the second table are set forth those counties
bordering upon Kentucky; and in the third, all counties not in
the former two, but which are upon or south of the line of
the St. Louis railroad.
(I.) Voting at the election of 1856 in the twelve Counties
bordering upon Missouri :—
Fremont. Buchanan. Fillmore.
Hancock 1120 2011 ...... 999
Adams 2226 3311 662
Pike 1053 2163 1010
Calhoun 70 391 163
Jersey 387 702 530
Madison 1111 1451 1658
St. Clair 1996 1728 973
Monroe. ....... 346 900 518
Randolph 709 1222 546
Jackson 14 1056 322
Union 46 1283 246
Alexander .... _15 _401 _230
Total 9093 16619 7857
24
(2.) Voting in the five Counties bordering upon Kentucky:
Fremont.
Pulaski 21
Massac 5
Pope 11
Hardin 4
Buchanan.
Fillmore.
473 ...
... 166
630 ...
.. . 251
855 ...
.. . 214
332 ...
... 229
764 ...
.. . 423
3054 ...
.. .1283
(3.) Voting in seventeen
St. Louis Railroad:—
Fremont.
Clinton 161
Marion 150
Clay 29
Richland. .... 39
Lawrence .... 89
Washington . .- 244
Jefferson .... 60
"Wayne 129
Edwards. ..... 176
Wabash 122
Perry 200
Franklin .... 5
Hamilton .... 9
White 27
Williamson . . 10
Saline 4
Johnson 2
Total 1456
Counties upon or south, of the
Buchanan.
..840 .
. .1150 .
.. 731 .
.. 786 .
.. 729 .
..1132 .
. .1278 .
. .1218 .
. . 283 .
..481 .
..671 .
. .1051 .
..1135 .
. .1062 .
. .1419 .
. .1004 .
..1144 .
Fillmore.
.. 362
.. 413
.. 540
.. 440
. . 533
.. 283
.. 426
. . 402
.. 310
. . 485
.. 433
.. 251
.. 162
.. 845
.. 188
. . 229
.. 74
16114
6376
It will be perceived that in the first table there is but one
county which, gave a majority for Fremont. Probably were we
acquainted with that locality we should find some peculiarity in its
circumstances to interfere with the general result. That general
25
result is, that but little over one-fourth of the votes oast were given
to Fremont. In the next table there is but one vote for Fremont
out of each sixty-eight recorded ; and according to the third state¬
ment he had only one vote in seventeen. The counties in each
section in which he stood lowest are those in the extreme south
of the State, where the combined slave influences of both
Missouri and Kentucky operated against him. Advancing north¬
ward, his supporters are found to be more numerous.
To further elucidate the matter, it will be necessary to begin
again at Hancock, and examine the counties of the Northern
boundary; namely, upon Iowa and "Wisconsin, and so far upon
Indiana as a point opposite to Hancock, whence we start.
(4.) Yoting in thirteen Northern Counties bordering upon Free
States:—
Fremont.
Buchanan.
Fillmore.
Henderson .
. 757
... 610 ...
... 158
Mercer . ..
. 1141 ...
... 769
... 140
Rock Island.
.1439 ...
... 1114 ...
... 276
Henry
. 1924 ...
... 876 ...
... 47
Whiteside .
. 1902 ...
... 613
... 210
Lee
. 1804 ...
... 601 ...
... 32
De Kalb. ..
. 2254 ...
... 381 ...
... 75
Kane , .. ..
. 3570 ...
... 912 ...
... 29
Du Page....
. 1387 ...
... 542
... 2
Cook
. 9020 ...
.: 5680 . ..
... 342
wm
2393 ...
... 1575 ...
... 10
Kankakee .
. 1386 ...
... 258 ...
... 60
Iroquois . ..
. 750
... 460 ...
108
Total. .29727 ...
...14391 ...
...1489
The contrast between the northern group of counties and the
southern is thus plainly seen. In the latter there was an over¬
whelming majority against Fremont; in the former he had two
votes to each one registered by his opponents. Unfortunately,
the great majorities in the south more than counterbalanced
the free voice of tho north. At the following election, that of
26
1860, notwithstanding the continued activity of the pro-slavery
party, Mr. Lincoln received the vote of the State. Let it be re¬
collected, however, that his majority was both unexampled and
unexpected, and that if there seem to be any marked reaction in
the State it is more apparent than real. It will take time for the
friends of freedom to secure their position. They year by year
increase, as emigration from New England proceeds; and,
no doubt from this cause, even if from no other, Illinois will ere
long be found more faithful than hitherto to the great principles
of freedom which are embodied in its constitution.
One other point in reference to these tables may prove instruc¬
tive. The counties on the Missouri line which were most marked
in their hostility to Fremont were in the extreme south, where
the influence of Kentucky bore, probably, with even greater weight
than that of Missouri itself. Now, it is notorious, that Kentucky
is much more hostile to emancipation than is Missouri. This evil
influence is as observable in Indiana as in Illinois. A point to
be further noted is, that Missouri has taken means to free her
slaves; and it is probable that ere 1865 it will be a free State.
As soon as the final date of emancipation is settled (for that point
alone remains to be arranged between Missouri and the United States'
Congress), then its influence will no longer be so evil in its effect
upon its neighbours. Illinois will then be more open to the higher
influences of the eastern States.
It will not be necessary at present to dwell upon the case of
Indiana;—an examination of the election returns affords results
similar to those already given in the neighbouring commonwealth.
It is well worthy of special remark, that the baneful influence
of proximity to Kentucky is seen also in the votes given by the
southern counties of Ohio at the same election. Everywhere
contact with slavery corrupts both individuals and communities.
It is the great lesson taught by these facts.
I have thus fully dwelt upon the exceptional States of the
North; the only two States in which coloured men are legally
illtreated. I have not apologised for them. I condemn them.
I have, however, tried to account for the bad state of feeling
prevailing. Probably the subject is new to most, and will be
instructiYe.
27
I shall now proceed to deal briefly with some laws of the
Southern States not yet touched upon, hut without reference to
which this sketch would he very incomplete.
A short time before the present war began various slave States
passed ordinances for the immediate expulsion of all Free Negroes
within their bounds, upon pain of being seized and sold into
permanent slavery. These laws were strictly enforced. The
condition to which these free men were thus reduced has been in
part described; and now it is proposed to learn a little more of
that condition.
In accordance with law, " the master may, at his discretion;
" inflict any punishment upon the person of his slave." He may
whip his slave to death, and yet he cannot be punished. The
Slave Codes provide for the possibility of death under the lash; it
is an accident and shall not be punished. The master may by
any means he pleases kill his slave or maim him; yet, if there be
no free white person present to testify to the crime, he cannot be
punished. However many slaves or free coloured men were
present, he would escape; because, " it is an inflexible and
" universal rule of Slave Law that the testimony of a coloured
"person, whether bond or free, cannot be received against a
" third person."
Cutting off the ears, nailing the ear to a post, and branding
with a hot iron in open court, are legalised modes of punishment.
The following law could easily be adduced to sanction the most
atrocious cruelties. According to the revised statutes of North
Carolina, a slave for resisting his master by force, or outlawed
for running away, lurking in swamps, &c., and not returning
home immediately, may be killed by any body, " by such means as
"he shall think fit, without accusation or impeachment of any
" crime for the same." There is no provision for investigating as
to whether the man be indeed a slave before proceeding to kill
him. Who is to decide ? The man who is authorised to kill
him—any man.
The following law of South Carolina is nominally directed
against slaves; but in its application it also will apply to either
bond or free. The white man questioning the negro is not bound
28
to inquire first if lie be a slave; lie may question any negro and
inflict death upon him in accordance with this statute. " If any
" slave who shall he out of the house or plantation where such
" slave shall live or shall be usually employed, or without some
" white person in company with such slave, shall refuse to submit
" to undergo the examination of any white person, it shall be
"lawful for any such white person to pursue, apprehend, and
" moderately correct such slave; and if such slave shall assault
" and strike such white person, such slave may be lawfully killed."
The following law of Mississippi is as ingenious in its cruelty
as can well be imagined. It does not go so far as to inflict death;
but it provides for a course of whipping and imprisonment, which
could hardly fail to prove fatal. It is to be observed that females
and males are to be treated alike :—" When any slave or slaves
" shall be committed to any jail in this State, as a runaway or
" runaways, it shall be the duty of the jailer of said county to
" interrogate him, her, or them, as to his, her, or their, owner's or
" owners' name or names and place of residence; and the account
" thus received, together with a description of the slave or slaves,
" the jailer shall forthwith transmit by mail to the owner or owners
" named by the slave ; and if the statement made by said slave
" or slaves shall prove to be false, it shall be the duty of the jailer,
" without delay, to give the said slave, or each of them, 25 lashes,
"well laid on, and interrogate him, her, or them, anew, and trans-
" mit the intelligence obtained, together with a description as
" aforesaid, to the owner or owners again named, and whip as
" before directed, if a second false account is given; and so on, for
" the space of six months, it shall be the duty of the jailer alter-
" nately to interrogate and whip as aforesaid, whenever the said
" slave or slaves may give a false account of his, her, or their
" owner's or owners' name and place of residence."
We have now before us a fair statement of the legal status
of the negro North and South. It will hardly be affirmed, after
careful consideration, that the laws of the North bear as severely
upon the negro as do those of the South. With the two excep¬
tions named, coloured men may settle anywhere in the North
and receive the protection of the law in both person and estate.
29
In the South, there is not a State in which he can settle "without
being immediately sold into perpetual slavery.
But it is sometimes said that the laws and the constitutions of
the Northern States speak in the dialect of the old statesmen
before the Americans had time to be corrupted by the working of
democratic institutions. If, however, it be found that not only
before our emancipation era the Northern States led the van,
but also, that since that time, the people have been true to the
principles of their fathers, what will remain but to confess that
British opinion has grievously wronged a great kindred nation ?
Passing over the " liberty laws " of the several States,—laws
enacted to prohibit the rendition of fugitive slaves, and which,
being unconstitutional, were void from their inception,—it may be
asked what course opinion has taken in the North upon this point;
and here let it be understood, that until the begining of the present
generation, the Southern states did not take up any extreme
ground in reference to slavery. It was almost universally re¬
garded as an evil which ought sooner or later to be got rid of.
The difficulty of dealing with the subject was alone urged as an
apology for its continuance. The North had parted with its slaves
at its own cost and in its own way; it found Southern opinion differ¬
ing from its own only upon the minor question of how and when to
emancipate; it, therefore, reasonably trusted to time to present
some mode of escape for the whole nation from the untenable posi¬
tion maintained by a part. Not until the Slave Power became
aggressive and overbearing, not until the language of apology had
been exchanged for that of menace, did the North awaken to the
perception of the fact that the system must be dealt with, or it
would become ascendant. Thereupon the Abolitionists rose into
notice.
Unfortunately the Abolitionists took up one or other of two
false positions. The first was, that whilst a constitution that
indirectly recognised and thereby legalised slavery endured, they
would not take any part in the government of the country, either
as voters or as legislators. They denounced the constitution as a
league with "sin and hell," and refused to be bound by it.
30
Standing outside the constitution, they lost all hold upon the
sympathies of the nation. The people knew that whatever were
the defects of their instrument of government it had great merits.
They felt that it practically secured to them the blessings of liberty
in a greater degree than had been enjoyed by any other nation,
ancient or modern. They therefore denounced the Abolitionists as
dangerous fanatics. Another section maintained that the consti¬
tution was made for freemen by freemen, and that any clause
which covertly tended to convey the idea that man could hold his
fellow-man in bondage, was of no binding force. Neither had
these men much effect upon the general policy. In 1844 they
voted for Mr. Birney as President. He polled only 62,300 votes.
Still the very fact that an Abolitionist candidate was before
the public, helped to fix attention upon a controversy then in its
infancy.
Four years later, in 1848, a new party entered the field. I
propose briefly to trace its history, because it is the narrative of
the great awakening of the North to a sense of its position in
relation to the Slave States.
It has been already stated that the Democratic party has been
the ally of the Southern oligarchy. For the sake of peace and
power, it has willingly entered into all the measures demanded by
the Slave Power. In 1848, a portion of this party, in New
York, refused to remain any longer the tools of men who ruled
the nation in the interest of slave institutions. A meeting was
held in Utica, New York, on 22nd June, 1848, and, by adjourn¬
ment, at Buffalo, on 9th August following, at which a new poli¬
tical party was formed. The first proposition affirmed was as
follows:—"We have assembled in Convention as a Union of
" Freemen, for the sake of freedom, forgetting all past political
" differences in a common resolve to maintain the rights of free
" labour against the aggressions of the Slave Power, and to secure
" free soil to a free people." In the second resolution it is
affirmed that neither of. the great parties, "Whig or Democrat,
" can be supported by the opponents of Slavery Extension with-
" out a sacrifice of consistency, duty, and self respect." In vari¬
ous resolutions it is maintained that it is the duty of Congress to
31
stop by legislation the extension of slavery into new territory;
and tliat "free grants to actual settlers" should be made out of
the public lands. The last resolution adopted is as follows :—
" That we inscribe on our banner—' Free Soil, Free Speech,
"' Free Labour, and Free Menand under it we will fight on, and
" fight ever, until a triumphant victory shall reward our exer-
" tions." From the first watch-word of its banner this became
known as the " Free Soil" party. Organised in haste, and with¬
out the necessary machinery to operate extensively upon the
masses, the Free Soilers nevertheless astonished their opponents
by polling 291,263 votes. I remember well the hearty congratu¬
lations with which the friends of freedom greeted each other when
the result of this contest was known. It animated them to " fight
" on, and fight ever, until a triumphant victory should reward
" their exertions."
During the next four years the Free Soilers gained various
local elections, which materially strengthened their position, by
bringing their name and principles more before the public. In
1852, General Scott was adopted by the Whigs as their candi¬
date. Scott was a Whig; but it was also understood, and I be¬
lieve correctly, that he was in favour of the non-extension of
slavery to the Territories. A very large proportion of his sup¬
porters in the Nomination Convention were members of the Free
Soil party. This circumstance made the direct vote of this party
look feeble and poor compared to what it ought to have been.
Its direct candidate, Mr. Hale, polled only 155,825 votes. Never
afterwards, however, did the Free Soil and pro-slavery elements
mingle together in the Whig organisation. The next election
showed the Whigs that, as a political party, they had practically
ceased to exist. They then received half-a-million of votes fewer
than they had done in any of the three previous elections; whilst at
the same election the Free Soil vote rose to 1,341,264. In 1860,
this vote increased to 1,857,610, when Mr. Lincoln was elected
President. Such is a brief epitome of its history until its final
triumph, when its determination to halt only in victory was
fulfilled.
Did the Free Soil party gain its victory by departing in any
32
degree from its principles ? On the contrary, as it progressed its
principles were more fully developed. In 1852 it adopted tlie
same " banner" as in 1848. It further declared slavery to be a
sin against God, and a crime against man; and that there could
not be a settlement of the slave question until the government
as a government had entirely separated itself from all complicity
with slavery maintenance or extension, either by allowing new
Slave States or by the permission of slavery in the Territories.
In 1856 it affirmed it to be " a self-evident truth that all men
" are endowed with the inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the
"pursuit of happiness;" and that it was "both the right and
"the duty of Congress to prohibit in the Territories those twin
"relics of barbarism—Polygamy and Slavery." Its sense of
national honour and public good faith is exhibited in a declaration
in reference to the " Ostend Conference" about the acquisition of
Cuba:—"That the highwayman's plea, 'that might makes
" right,' embodied in the Ostend circular, was in every respect
" unworthy of American diplomacy, and would bring shame and
"dishonour upon any government or people that gave it their
"sanction." Nor was the platform adopted in 1860 less favour¬
able to liberty. In it is the memorable doctrine that the
"normal condition" of the Territories is freedom.
Thus consistent in its whole course previous to its advent to
power, this great liberty party has since put into operation, as far
as practicable, the principles it had advocated whilst in comparative
obscurity. Under its* influence, Congress has abolished slavery in
the district of Columbia, in the Territories, and in the public dock
yards. Nor has it done this with even the appearance of harsh¬
ness to individuals. Out of the public purse it paid the value of
the manumitted slaves. It has put an end to the Slave Trade, so
far as its citizens are concerned, by enforcing the laws which
under pro-slavery influences had become a dead letter; and by,
at the same time, conceding to Great Britain that right of search
so necessary to stop the nefarious traffic. The natural equality of
man it has vindicated by recognising, and receiving diplomatically,
the black representatives of the republics of Hayti and Liberia.
In freeing the slaves of all rebels Awlr§ij^eiiithe rl/njjted States
33
armies move, it strengthens its hands by a legitimate war
measure; but it shows its disinterested love of freedom, too, by
offering to pay all loyal owners to give up their slaves. It offers
full compensation to any State which will free its slaves, leaving
to that State to do it in its own way, and in its own time; thus
removing, by its liberality and constitutional moderation, all
possible objections to its action. And, finally, it has fulfilled its
pledge by passing a law against polygamy.
In power then, as well as out of power, this great party has been
true to the interests of freedom, and deserves our unqualified
admiration and sympathy. Shall its great principles and noble
acts appeal to us in vain ?
A word as to the position of Mr. Lincoln. Ex-Governor More*
head called him to his face a " minority president," and, in his
speech before the Liverpool Southern Club, took great credit to
himself for this impertinence. Mr. Lincoln replied, that if he
were a " minority president," he was not the first which had been
accepted. In this country the taunt is frequently repeated. How
stands the case ? In 1844, Mr. Polk was a minority president;
in 1848, General Taylor was a minority president; in 1856, Mr.
Buchanan was a minority president. Why did the Slave
Oligarchy not obje'et to these? Because they were their own
nominees. The two first were slave owners; the last was the
framer of the infamous Ostend circular. It may not be much
known, that this so much calumniated "minority president"
polled more votes in his favour than any man that ever filled the
presidential chair. He is truly a national president, and, in
electing him, the nation has pledged itself to freedom. How
nobly it is fulfilling its mission future times will bear witness.
When the heats of controversy shall have been forgotten, and the
turmoil connected with a great upheaving shall have passed
away, then the great North American people shall have justice meted
out to it. It can await that day in cheerful confidence. In the
meantime let all true-hearted men judge charitably, and with an
eye to the difficulties which have to be surmounted. Let their
mission be to strengthen the hands of those who are fighting the
battle ^jJ^^Ameriea alone that is concerned,
34
though it falls to the lot of America to pour out its best blood
like water. But no sacrifice now made upon the altar of duty
shall be forgotten by Him in whose hands are the issues of the
struggle. Purified by suffering, ennobled by self-sacrifice, a destiny
great beyond the dreams of the most sanguine awaits that
nation, which, throughout its history, has been the refuge of the
oppressed of every land. Let it be now and ever faithful to its
great mission, and to its noble memories, and in all coming
generations it will continue to be, as it has been in the past, the
hope of the world.
miNTED 6Y HENRY YOUNG, SOUTH CASTLE STREET, LIVERPOOL,
LATELY PUBLISHED, PRICE TWOPENCE,
"SLAYERY IE THE UNITED STATES OE AMERICA.''
A LECTURE, DELIVERED IN LIVERPOOL, DEC., 1861,
BY ROBERT TRIMBLE.
LONDON: WHITTAKER & CO. LIVERPOOL: HENRY YOUNG.
MANCHESTER: ABEL HEYWOOD.