Q^ 'o \> „ -^ * > „ -< -* . ^ ^ ^^ ■-^^0^ .r SIB ^. '^^ c^ ^ ^^«^' ^ "-^ ^^^ %.^" 1° tf ^^^:^^^^% ^^^:^^^% ^^^■^^;;^^% r % \H ^^^'i^'Sp c?^oi;i:^>^ oo^o_:^.>^ V^ ^ ^ • ^ -^ V ^^'°A^ -^ V ^ cy, ^ ^C>^ --^ v^n v"-^ "^^^^^^ -*^;.v-, .*.«? -> ^Adi / ^^> /? DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE : EMURACING AN EXAMINATION OF THE SCRIPTURE DOCTRINES ON THE SUBJECT, A\n AN IXQITIRY INTO THE CHARACTER AND RELATIONS OF SLAVERY. ,,: . A- ^ j I BY LEICESTER A. SAWYER, A. M. 6^* ^ Prove all things; hi)ld fast that which it; good."— Paul. NEW HAVEN: PUBLISHED BY DURRIE & PECK HITCHCOCK & STAFFOUD, PRINTEUS. 1837. Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1837, ^ BY LEICESTER A. SAWYER, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of Connecticut. ^f CONTENTS. Introduction, - - - -- - -5 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE, - - - - - 9 SECTION I, Patriarchal Servitude, -...-- 9 SECTION II. • The Servitude of the Mosaic Institutes, - - - 19 SECTION III. The New Testament doctrines respecting Servitude, - - 35 SECTION IV. The Slavery of the Greeks and Romans, - - - - 49 SECTION V. The nature of Righteous Servitude, - - - - 57 SECTION VI. The different kinds of Servitude, - .... (.5 SECTION VII. Is Slavery wrong 1- - - - - --75 SECTION VIII. I Ought Slavery to be immediately abolished] - - . . 88 INTRODUCTION. The following Dissertation is devoted to an extensive subject, and one of great practical importance. Servi- tude occupies a prominent place in the Scriptures, and is illustrated by a great variety of Scripture precepts and examples. It enters into several of the most im- portant institutions of civilized and christian society, and opens a field for investigation, pertaining to the deepest principles of morality and religion. This subject in all its branches is now brought into discussion, by the existing excitement in relation to slavery. The advocates and apologists for slavery, are examining it for the purpose of fortifying their positions and maintaining more effectually their tottering cause. The opposers of slavery are examining it for the op- posite purpose ; namely, that of assailing more effect- ually the object of their opposition. This subject, there- fore, is one of interest to all classes of persons. The order pursued in this Dissertation, has appeared to the writer to possess several important advantai^es. It follows the divine communications on this sul)ject, be- ginning with the earliest, and proceeding regularly to the latest. On leaving them, it proceeds naturally from the more simple to the more complicated and dilficiilt topics of inquiry. Whatever may liave been his suc- cess, the writer has sought diligently and honestly for the truth, in respect to tiie Scripture exam})les of servi- tude, and the doctrines they inculcate on tliis subject. Those doctrines and exam})les, as they liave appeared to him, are herein impartially set forth, and are com- 6 INTRODUCTION. mended, not to the blind credulity, but to the diligent investigation of every reader. Truth will bear examination. It is our high privi- lege to prove all things by free and liberal inquiry ; and we must do it in order to attain and hold fast that, and that only, which is truly good. The present inquiry has led the writer to several con- clusions which he did not anticipate at the commence- ment of it. Many of them have been hio^hly gratifying to his feelings, and in his opinion, favorable to the honor of religion. As far as those conclusions are according to truth, and no farther, he would be glad to conduct oth- ers to the same. The truth is not bound. It is not altogether con- cealed, nor yet does it all appear to the superficial and hasty inquirer. It must be sought for with diligence and patience, and with continued attention and repeated eifort, in order to its being fully explored even in its most simple developments. Moral truth must also be sought with a humble, submissive, teachable, and chris- tian spirit, in order to its being fully understood and appreciated. Labor and argument are often expended in vain upon the unhumbled and unteachable, already wiser in their own eyes, and in entire ignorance, than seven men who can demonstrate the truth of their opin- ions. Prov. xxvi. 16. A christian spirit is peculiarly necessary in the inves- tigation of the nature and relations of slavery. Here it becomes us all to feel that we are but men, and that truth is of God. Here our inquiries ought to be prose- cuted with special deliberation and care, remembering that we are responsible to God for our opinions and words, as well as for our actions. Errors of opinion lead to those of affection and action. We must think right on all practical subjects, in order to feel and act right. The subject of slavery is one of practical interest to every citizen of the United States. We all have some- thing to do with it as citizens, to approve or disapprove, INTRODTICTION. 7 to eiicourao^e or discouras^e, to build up or pull down. We have done too much in ignorance ; it becomes us now to act with intelligence and discretion. Not to feel a desire to understand this subject, indicates an un- usual and criminal apathy in respect to the interests of humanity and religion ; and also in respect to the influ- ence which we are bound as individuals to exert. Slavery is not only supported by the slave-holding states and districts in which it exists, but by every por- tion of the United States. Every part of the Union is implicated in its support, by the action of their repre- sentatives in congress. The national legislature has assumed the responsibility of continuing it in the Dis- trict of Columbia, the heart of the nation, and the very Citadel of freedom, and in other districts under its entire control, at the South and West. It has permitted this acknowledged evil to increase and extend itself from year to year, till its present alarming magnitude has been attained. In this procedure of the national govern- ment, the North and non slave-holding states have gen- erally co-operated. The voice of remonstrance from this quarter has been occasionally heard ; but it has been only occasional, feeble, and consequently ineftectual. This co-operation of the North in the support and ex- tension of slavery, is the more surprising on account of the general condemnation and abhorrence of this insti- tution by the mass of northern men. It is acknowledged to be wrong. It is deplored as a great political evil, and a source of imminent peril to our liberties as a na- tion. Over the South it is seen to hancr like a dark portentous cloud of the wrath of the vVlmighty, wiio de- clares both by his word and providence, that though hand join in hand, the wicked shall not be unpunislied ; (Prov. xi. 21 ;) and that evil shall pursue them. A sentiment has generally prevailed, that something effec- tual ought to be done to check this extending and in- creasing evil ; but till this time it has gone on uncheck- ed, and is now in the full tide of advancement. In the opinion of the wisest and most discerning INTRODUCTION. minds, this matter must ultimately come to a crisis. If it is not prosecuted and overtaken with remedial mea- sures by us, it will ultimately become too great and dreadful to be sustained, and will recoil upon its sup- porters with tremendous and wide-spread ruin. We ought not to close our eyes against approaching danger ; but to forsee the evil which is advancing upon us, and if possible, avoid it. On the church of Christ the subject of this Disserta- tion possesses undoubted and peculiar claims. That association was formed for the purpose of promoting the exercise of justice and mercy. We are bound to exercise mercy towards men, as the necessary condition of our receiving it from God. James ii. 13. We are bound as christians to sympathize with the afflicted and op- pressed everywhere, but especially within the sphere of our immediate influence. If slave-holding is wrong, the church ought not in any way to countenance or encourage it. Here the light of truth ought to shine with unclouded radiance ; and from this sacred enclosure, the law of love ought to proceed. " Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, and of good report ; if there be any virtue and any praise, think of these things ;" pursue them steadily and earnestly ; " and the God of peace shall be with you." Come thou blessed Jesus in the glory of thy truth and love, and send forth judgment to victory ; (Matt. xii. 20 ;) and let every one that readeth say come. DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. SECTION I. PATRIARCHAL SERVITUDE. The state of society in the early periods of our race, is in- volved in considerable obscurity. The Bible is the only source of authentic information on this subject, and the information which it contains is necessarily limited. It teaches us, however, that marriage existed from the commencement of human society, and that the relations of husband and wife, and of parent and child, were recognized in the family of Adam, and continued, and respected in every succeeding age. At the commencement of human society, all government was naturally and almost necessarily patriarchal. Adam probably long continued to be the patriarchal head of his increasing pos- terity, and to exercise over them some degree of patriarchal au- thority. Each succeeding family was, however, a little kingdom of itself, having acknowledged rights and privileges of its own, and looking to its immediate head as the fountain of authority in respect to all ordinary affairs. How far family government was modified by patriarchal authority, or within what limits patriarchal authority was restrained, it is impossible to determine with j)re- cision. Abraham was not subject to any patriarchal authority exerci- sed by his ancestors, after his departure from Harari, when he was seventy-five years old. Gen. xii. 5. Previous to that time, he seems to have been in some degree under the authority of Terah liis father, as did also Lot his nephew, (icn. xi. 31. In Egypt, Abraham submitted to the monarchical government 2 10 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. then existing in that country, and was for a time protected by it. At this time he possessed " sheep, and oxen, and asses, and men- servants, and maid-servants, and camels." It appears also, that Lot had not yet separated from him. Gen. xii. 14 — 20. Men-servants and maid-servants are here enumerated among Abraham's possessions. What authority he exercised over them, or by what right he held them in a state of servitude, we are not informed. It is evident, however, that Abraham's author- ity over his servants was not derived from the civil government of the countries in which he lived ; but that it was entirely inde- pendent of those governments. It made no difference as to that, whether he was in Egypt or Canaan ; within the domains of an absolute monarchy, or where no civil government of any kind extended its authority over him. In Gen. xvi. we find an account of Hagar, an Egyptian fe- male servant belonging to Sarah, Abraham's wife. After a res- idence of ten jears in the land of Canaan, Sarah seeing that she had no children, requested Abraham to take Hagar her maid- servant as his concubine, or wife of the second class. Abra- ham complied with her request, and thus brought upon himself the stain and guilt of polygamy, and planted the seeds of severe domestic afflictions in his family. It is to be presumed that this female servant did not become the wife of Abraham without her consent, or contrary to her own will. The word JTT'lsJi mistress, which expresses the relation of Sarah to Hagar, Gen. xvi. 8, 9, is applied in other parts of the Bible to denote a person of high rank, generally a queen. " And Hadad found great favor in the sight of Pharaoh, so that he gave him as a wife, the sister of his own wife, the sister of Tahpenes Ji-i"^!!:;'" the queen." 1 Kings xi. 19: xv. 13; 2 Kings X. 13; 2"fchron. xv. 16. The severity which Hagar experienced from Sarah, was prob- ably as inexcusable as tb.e sin of polygamy, into which Abraham had been led by the advice of his first and principal wife. We are told that Abraham made provision for the sons of his concubines, and that he sent them eastward into the East country, while he yet lived. Gen. xxv. 6. The word concubines is the translation of D"'^":ib'>S and de- notes wives of an inferior class, such as Hagar. In Gen. xxv. 10, 13, Hagar is called |-i7:M incorrectly translated bond-woman. Hannah applies this word to herself, 1 Sam. i. 11,16; Abigail, PATRIARCHAL SERVITUDE. 1 I the wife of Nabal, does the same, 1 Sam. xxv. 24, 27, 28, 31, 41 ; and the wise woman of Tckoa, 2 Sam. xiv. 15. It undoubt- edly denotes a state of subjection, in opposition to one of autlior- ity ; and an inferior, considered in ix-spcct to rank. But it does not denote a slave, or a person held as property. Ha^^ar was not so held by Abraham ; certainly not after lie had taken her to be his wife. An important dilference of meaning between this word and the ordinary name of a female servant, is clearly indicated in 1 Sam. xxv. 41, where Abigail requests David to take herself for a servant. In Gen. xx. 14, Abimeleck, king of Gerar, to compensate Abraham for an injury he had ignorantly done him, " took sheep and oxen and men-servants and women-servants, and gave them to him." These were probably given as subjects are transfer- red from one civil government to another. In Gen. xxx. 43, Jacob is said to have had " many sheep, and maid-servants, and men-servants, and camels, and asses." These passages bear a striking resemblance to Gen. xii. It), where we have a similar inventory of the possessions of Abraham. The most common names of patriarchal servants, were D"'^^:? men-servants, and nhsilJ female-servants. They are several times, however, mentioned in the patriarchal history by dilTerent appellations. In Gen. xiv. 14, Abraham's servants are called iri"»n "^T'b"' children of bis family ; probably the same as family or house- hold servants — servants belonging to his family. Of these he led out in person three hundred and eighteen, who were trained for military service, on a sudden expedition against the con- querors of Sodom and the adjacent country, by wiiom nis nephew Lot had been taken captive. With this force and his confederates he marclied from Hebron to Dan. Here he attacked them by night, retook their spoil and captives, and pursued them with great slaughter to Hobah, west of Damascus. These were probably comprehended among those referred to as belonging to Abraham, Gen. xii. 10, under the appellation of men-servants. They may however have denoted a cUlss <»f servants, attached in a peculiar manner to their master and civil governor, and liable to be called upon on any sudden emer- gency in preference to others, and may have been entitled to pe- culiar privileges. In Gen. xvii. 12, 13, 23, n^n n^b"^ child ol" the family, occurs 12 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. as the appellation of a class of servants who were so far under the authority of Abraham, as to be required by him to receive circumcision ; and of course they must have been equally under his control, in respect to other manifest duties. They are in this chapter distinguished from others in a state of equal subjection so far as religious duties were concerned, termed p]D3-n2[P/j the purchase of silver, or of money. This latter name, derived from the mode of their acquisition, by pur- chase, denotes a distinct class of servants, without defining the nature of their servitude. It seems that all the servants of Abraham belonged to one or other of these classes. Properly translated, the passages referred to read thus : " 12. He that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man-child in your generations ; the household servant or child of the family, and the purchase of money, him that is bought with money. 13. The household servant and he that is bought with thy money, must be circumcised. 23. And Abra- ham took Ishmael bis son, and ail his household servants, and all his bought servants, every male among the men of the house or family of Abraham, and circumcised them in the same day, as God had commanded him." The household or family of Abraham comprehended these two classes of servants. It must of course have been very large, for we have three hundred and eighteen of one only of these classes mentioned on a former occasion, and those such as had been qualified by appropriate instruction and exercise for military service, and such as could be called into the field upon the shortest notice. In Gen. xv. 2, 3, Abraham not yet having had any children, complains of his having no child to inherit his property and au- thority, and that Eliezur of Damascus, a household servant, was likely to be his heir. It appears from this remarkable passage, that in respect to the inheritance of property and authority, the household servants took precedence of all other relatives, except lineal descendants ; for Abraham had a nephew near, namely, Lot, and had other relatives in Haran ; yet Eliezur his servant was at this time liis presumptive heir, to the exclusion of all his relatives. In Gen. xxiv. 2, mention is made of a patriarchal servant, the elder or ruler of Abraham's house or family, who is described as exercising under Abraham the highest authority, and havins all PATRIARCHAL SERVITUDE. 13 the affairs of this extensive patriarchate or family, under hisim. mediate supervision and control. The word translated eldest, in our common version of verse 2, is generally translated elder, and ought to be so rendered here. It is the common Hebrew name for a ruler of any kind, whether civil or religious, or both. This ruler calls himself Abraham's servant, verse 34, and calls Abraham his master, and describes him tts having been greatly blessed, and as being a man of great distinction. Vei>;e 35. He describes the possessions of Abraham as consisting chiefly in flocks, and herds, and silver, and ,«;old, and men-ser- vants, and female servants, and camels, and asses. All these possessions are said to have been given or translerred to Isaac, as his successor and heir. Verse 30. Abraham seems to have exercised the authority of a prince or chief. He was the sole head and ruler of the little dyucusiy which was composed of his servants and children, and which is repeatedly referred to by Moses, as his n'^i patriarchate or fam- ily. The person who ruled under him, over all that he had, v>q.s only ']'r\^2 "ipT the elder or ruler of his family. Abraham's family or household, which he commanded to keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment, (Gen. xviii. 11),) comprehended all his servants, both the servants of the family, properly so called, and those bought with money. Gen. xvii. 12, 13, 23. The covenant of grace formed with Abraham, as the visible head of the church, extended its kind provisions to his servants as well as to his children, inasmuch as they, equally with his children, were required to receive the mark of circumcision, the external seal of that covenant. Gen. xvii. 12, 13, 14. The extent of his authority over his servants, so far as it is indicated in the inspired record of Moses, does not appear to be greater than it was over his children. He was the civil and re- ligious sovereign of both. This sovereignty was probably vested in him partly by inheritance, partly by the usages of the times and countries in which he lived, and still more by the consent of his subjects. Men who live in society must be the subjects of some govern- ment ; they must bow to some authority which they become oh. ligated to uphold, and which becomes obligati'tl in its turn, to af- ford them protection. The government of Abraham was upheld by the combined support of his servants. 2* 14 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. So far as appears from the inspired account of this dynasty, that support must have been voluntary, or chiefly so. There was no higher power by which a reluctant submission could have been enforced. There was no middle class to stand be- tween Abraham and his servants, who in consequence of pecu- liar privileges, might have had an interest to assist him in oppres- sing them. He stood nearly if not quite alone, with nothing to bind his servants to him, but the benefits they could derive from his government, patronage, and protection. Those benefits, we liave reason to believe, were not few nor small ; for his was a government in which the doing of judgment and justice was strictly enforced. Gen. xviii. 19. A kindred species of government and of servitude still contin- ues in the East, though with far less of judgment and justice, and with far more of the exercise of arbitrary power, than can rea- sonably be attributed to Abraham and his successors in office. When Jacob left his father's residence, in order to escape the displeasure of Esau, whom he had both injured and offended, he visited Laban, his mother's brother, and abode with him for tlie space of a month. Gen. xxix. 14. Laban then " said anto him, because thou art my brother, shouldst thou therefore serve me for nothing? Tell me what shall be thy wages." Gen. xxix. 15. This passage teaches, that Jacob resided with Laban in the capacity of a servant, and that as such he was entitled to wages. In verse 20, we are informed that Jacob served seven years for Rachel. At the expiration of that term, he received Leah, an older sister, in place of Rachel, contrary to the terms of the agreement. He then had the offer of Rachel on condition that lie should continue to serve Laban seven years more, verse 27, which he accepted. Jacob's wives received the gift of a maid- servant for each, from their father. Each of these maid-servants became at a later period the in* ferior wives of Jacob, at the request of their mistresses respect- ively. Gen. xxx. 4, 9 ; xxxv. 22. The servitude of Jacob for his wives, consisted of two periods of seven years. It may be denominated septennial servitude, in distinction from that which is perpetual. It corresponds in re- spect to duration, to our present system of apprenticeship to trades, which is generally for a term of years, and in many ca- ses that of seven. An apprentice is a servant, and continues such during the period of his apprenticeship. For aught that appears in the inspired nai'rative, the condition of Jacob during PATRIARCHAL SERVITUDE. 1") the period of his servitude for liis wives, was substantiallv the same as that of others who were servants for ViU;, or durin«^ the pleasure of their masters. He may liave lx>en as mucli in the power of his master for the time beinjx, as they were lor life. The word haiid-maid, which so often occurs in the Old Tes- tament, is the same as maid-servant, being a less eligible trans, lation of the same word. Isaac says to Esau, respecting the blessing which he had pro- nounced upon Jacob : " Behold, I have made him thy lord, and all his brethren have I given him for servants." Gen. xxvii. 37. The nature of the patriarchal government administered by Isaac, is here clearly indicated. Esau was Isaac's apparent heir by right of primogeniture. As such, he had evidently ex- pected to be invested with the government of the patriarchate, on the decease or retirement of his father. In the solemn patriarchal benediction, however, Jacob had been distinctly designated as the immediate ruler of the patriarch- ate, in preference to Esau, and his family as the ruling branch of the family of Isaac. In pronouncing this blessing upon Jacob, his father had acted under a false impression that he was blessing his first-born. But he was conscious of having acted under the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and he had no authority to recall what he had said. In giving Jacob his brethren for servants, Isaac obviously in- tended to invest him with the exclusive government of the patri- archate. He did not divide that government among his sons, but he purposed to give it to the oldest, agreeably to the usages of those times. The brethren of the proposed sovereign in the ])atriarchal dynasty, were given to him not as slaves, but as sub- jects. Jacob was designated as the lawful successor of Isaac, and was to succeed to the exercise of his authority over his own brethren, as well as over the other subjects of his father. This election of Jacob to succeed his father in the patriarchal government, does not appear to have resulted in his immediate elevation to that oflice. He was soon obliged to leave tlie principality to the govern- ment of which he had been ai)pointed, in order to escape the murderous displeasure of Esau ; and in his absence the reins of the patriarchal government seem to have fallen into Esau's hands. Jacob, however, in pursuance of the high destination which the prophetic blessing of his father had assigned him, laid liic 16 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE foundation of a new patriarchate, separate from that which fell into the hands of his less pious brother, and became the real successor of Isaac and Abraham, by succeeding to the exercise and maintenance of the patriarchal religion, and to the effectual establishment of the same among his descendants. He realized the fulfilment of his father's prophetic blessing, by the standing which he ultimately attained through many trials and difficulties, as a prince having power with God, and swaying by his influence the destinies of men. He and his descendants are first ; Esau and his descendants, second. Jacob and his de- scendants became the light of the world, the salt of the earth, in whom all nations are blessed ; whereas the patriarchate of Esau was far inferior, in political consequence, to that of his brother. The facts referred to in the foregoing pages, few as they are, comprehend every thing of importance in the patriarchal history, relating to the system of servitude which they administered ; a system which is erroneously regarded by many as similar to modern slavery. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, are described as successive chiefs or patriarchal rulers of a dynasty, founded by the first of these distinguished men. They Avere all men of uncommon excellence, and are justly enrolled among the benefactors of their race. They commen- ced a train of exertion to promote and perpetuate true religion among men, w^iich is yet, after the lapse of so many centuries, but partially developed ; and which is destined to fill the world with righteousness, and heaven with redeemed and rejoicing worshipers of God. These lights of the world were, however, but men, compassed with the usual infirmities of our fallen nature, subject to tempta- tion, to errors of judgment, to perversions of moral feeling, to sin. As such they are described by Moses. A poet or novel- ist would have described them as angels. But the pen of inspi- ration, faithful to truth, has drawn their picture, diversified with all the varieties of light and shade which belong to man, both as human and depraved. In their faith and devotion to the service of God and to the promotion of piety, they were examples for our imitation. In the blessings which they received as the con- sequence of their piety, they were examples for our encourage- ment. But in their errors and sins, they were examples for our warning, and were designed to illustrate the weakness and im- perfection of human virtue, even in the best men. TATRIARCHAL SERVITUDE. 17 We have no evidence that the patriarchs held their sen'ants in a state of slavery. There are no traces in the patriarchal Ijisto- ry, of" laws which resemble the modern systems of legislation de- signed to support the institution of slavery. Abraham doi^s not appear to have been a slave-holder, but a patriarchal ruler or chief, such as the state of society in that period and country required. His example, therefore, and that of the other patri- archs, cannot be safely relied on as affording any scriptural war- rant for slavery, particularly that of the United States. The fact, that some of Abraham's servants were accjuired by purchase, docs not prove that they were acquired without their consent, or that they were held as property, or that they were required to surrender to their masters tlieir rights of free-tigency, and to submit to an irresponsible sovereignty, established and administered for the exclusive benefit of the master. Abraham's servants were accounted members of his family, equally with his children, and entitled to high privileges as sucti. It does not appear that they were deprived of the rights of mar- riage, of holding and transferring property, or of acquiring knowledge and improving their minds to any extent possible. But the contrary is clearly established. Even if Abraham and the other patriarchs were convicted of holding their servants in a relation in any respects similar to that of slaves, it would not prove slave-holding to be right. Abraham and Jacob lived in the practice of polygamy, hi vio- lation of the Divine institution of marriage, handed down from the beginning of the world. God's institution of marriage con- templated the union of two persons, one man and one woman, in the matrimonial relation, and no more. Under that institution, no man had a right to more than one wife, luid no woman to more than one husband. Polygamy never has been conforma- ble to the Divine law. It was not right in the days of the patri- archs, and it is not now. God's displeasure against the patri- archs for this sin, wa.s unequiv(jcally expressed by the domestic trials which were brought upon them by this means. The most severe atllictions of Abraham arose from his polygamy. Tiio same was true of Jacob. Tiie lives of both those patriarciis were greatly embittered by the evils which came upon them us the consequence of their sins in this respect. Their families were divided against themselves, and greatly distressed on this account. The sale of Joseph into Egypt, and all the trouble 18 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. which it occasioned, arose from the fact of his heing the son of a favorite wife, and not of the only one. The sin of polygamy, though doubtless a sin, in the days of the patriarchs and in the state of society then existing in Pales- tine, is still more criminal now, in this and other christian coun- tries. The same is true of oppression, by holding persons in un- righteous servitude. There are various modifications of servi- tude which are right. That of a subject to a lawful sovereign ; of a child to a parent ; of an apprentice to the master to whom he is apprenticed ; and of other servants who are hired for law- ful purposes, and who are duly recompensed for their services, are all right and necessary. These servitudes were always right. If the servitude of the patriarchs was oppressive in any way, it was so far wrong, and as truly so as polygamy was. So far as any modern systems of servitude upheld in christian and civ- ilized countries are oppressive, they are still more criminal than the same would have been in the less enlightened and less impro- ved times of the patriarchs. It is not the design of God, that we should imitate the examples of ancient saints, without careful discrimination. They were but men, compassed with the infirmities of our fallen and corrupted nature, and but partially delivered from the bondage of moral corruption. As such they are described by the inspired writers. The most important facts of their lives are set before us with a sparing distribution either of commendation or blame. The in- spired writers seldom interrupt their narratives to commend the virtues, or censure the vices which they describe, but leave both to awaken their appropriate feelings, and make their due impres- sion on the minds of their readers. In these records are developed the true and universal princi- ples of human nature, both in its renovated and unregenerate state. In showing us wherein the best and wisest of men have erred, they administer salutary admonition to ourselves, and point out the particulars in respect to which we have need to be especially on our guard. The virtues of the patriarchs we ought to imitate ; their sins we ought to avoid. The record of their sins was not intended to embolden us in sin, but to deter us from it, and to encourage, if penitent, in seeking for pardon. They lived in a dark age, from the influences of which they THE SERVITUDE OF THE MOSAIC INSTITUTES. 19 did not entirely escape. The system of servitude which they adopted, corresponded in some degree to the institutions general- ly prevalent in that age and country. It is not necessary to sup. pose that they were entirely justifiable in respect to their civil in- stitutions and authority, in order to vindicate the honor of Cnxl in bestowing upon them marks of his special favor. And if they were to some extent guiUy, their guilt may have been lar less than would be contracted by the exercise of similar author- ity in christian lands, at the present time. Those who in this country endeavor to justify themselves in oppressing their fellow-men by the example of the patriarchs, will find ere long, and pei-haps to their everlasting sorrow, what they oughi to have learned long since, that Scriptural examples are no justification of injustice ; and that they have either mista- ken the facts in respect to patriarchal servitude, or else are ma- king a use of them, the very opposite of that which those exam- ples were designed and are adapted to answer. Those who claim the patriarciis as slave-holders, and charge them with having sustained this relation to the subjects of their patriarchal authority, are guilty of highly slanderous representa- tions of the characters of those holy men, and of their religion. Their representations are slanderous, because they invo've the charge of a gross violation of the pi-inciples of justice and mercy, and are not sustained but contradicted by the evidence relating to the case. To represent them as lawful sovereigns exercising a mild, reli- gious, and civil authority over their subjects, permitting such as choose to leave their dominions for those of any other j^rince or chief, is evidently most accordant to the facts relating to this sub- ject, as they appear from the Scripture narrative. SECTION II. THE SERVITUDE OF THE MOSAIC INSTITUTES. The servitude of the patriarchs previous to the time of Moses, is involved in some obscurity, lor want of a particular account of the laws and usages by wliich it was regulated. All tlial we 20 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. know of it is derived from incidental allusions to this subject, and illustrations of it contained in the book of Genesis, and from reasonings based on contemporary institutions and usages, and those of later times. The system of servitude as it existed among the Israelites in later times, is more fully explained. The account of the Israel- itish polity as established by ]\Ioses, embraced several important enactments or ordinances relating to this institution, which enable us to determine its character with considerable precision. No part of the Israelitish polity opens a more curious and interest- ing field of inquiry, than this. It is deeply interesting as a mere matter of history ; still more so as one of sacred history, and es- pecially so at the present time. But notwithstanding the interest it is adapted to excite, there is reason to believe that it is very imperfectly understood by the great mass of the most enlightened christian communities. It cannot be well understood without considerable attention and effort. Many among us seem to have mistaken its true charac- ter entirely, and have expended powerful and learned effort in giving plausibility and currency to their mistakes. The laws of Moses on the subject of servitude are recorded in the following passages, and principally in the order hei-e ob- served. Several of them were communicated verbally by God, on the occasion of his uttering the ten commandments, when he descended in fire on Mount Sinai. All were dictated by his wisdom. 1. Ex. XX. 10: "But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God ; in it thou shalt not do any work, thou nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates." The same is repeated in Deut. v. 14. This passage recognizes the existence of servants of both sexes, and makes it the duty of the master to afford them the opportunity of observing the Sabbath. In respect to the ob- servance of the Sabbath, the servant is put on an equality with the son and daughter. It appears also from the mode of expres- sion here adopted, that the master was not only required to allow his servant to enjoy the rest of the Sabbath, but that he was in. vested with authority to command it, and required to exercise that authority when necessary for this purpose. In Deut. V. 14, there is added to the commandment, as stated in Ex. XX. 10, "that thy man-servant and maid-servant may THE SERVITUDE OF THE MOSAIC IN'STITTTES. 'Jl rest as well as thou ;" sliowing that particular stress is laid on the part of the conimandmeut which relates to the rest of ser- vants. Servants were entitled to the same privileges as children and others, in respect to the great annual festivals of the Israelites. Deut. xvi. 9 — 17 : " Three times a year shall all thy males ap- pear before the Lord thy God, m the place which he shall choose." These laws respecting the observance of the Sabbath and the annual religious festivals by servants, prove that this class of persons were considered, in the eye of the law, its having the rights of men, and that they were not reduced to the low le\ el of things. They develop a principle of law which needs only to be carried out into its various legitimate applications, to secure every right and subserve every interest wliich we possess as moral beings. Ex. XX. 17: "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wit'e, nor his nian-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's." Consider in connexion with this, Ex. xx. 15, "Thou shalt not steal." The words man-servant and maid-servant, as they are used in the ten commandments, must be interpreted in their most com- prehensive sense. They do not denote a particular class of ser- vants, but those of any ckiss whatever. The command, thoa shalt not covet thy neighbor's servant, docs not prove that ser- vants were held as property, any more than tiie similar injunc- tion in respect to the neighbor's wife, proves that wives were held as property. Men may be possessed as servants, without being possessed as property. Children and wives are the objects of possession, as children and wives, but not as chattels personal. They may be claimed by the titles of wife and cliild, but not by that of a chattel personal. The passages above quoted, comprehending the tenth and eighth commandments in the moral and municipal law of the Israelites, establish a j)rinciple which is inconsistent with holding men as property. The law respecting covetousness, says, " Thou shalt not covet any thing that is thy neighbor's ;" that is, any thing that justly belongs to thy neighbor. It comprehends every thing tiiul a man, considered with respect to his fellow men, may call his own, whether held as property or iii any other relation of possecj- 3 22 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. sion. It of course comprehends a man's faculties and rights as a rational and moral being, and his labor. These the Israelites were not allowed to covet nor to invade. The limitation of these moral precepts so as to make them signify merely, Thou shalt not covet nor steal what is thy neighbor's, by virtue of hu- man laws and the usages of the society in which you happen to live, however unrighteous those laws and usages may be, is a gross perversion of their true sense. 2. Ex. xxi. 1 — 11 : "Now these are the judgments which thou shalt set before them ; if thou buy or procure a Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve, and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. " If his master have given him a wife, and she have borne him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall say, I love my master, my wife, and my children ; I will not go free ; then his master shall bring him to God, (incorrectly translated judges,) and he shall bring him to the door or to the door post, and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall be his servant forever. " And if a man sell his daughter for an Jil^i^ a maid-servant, (of a higher and peculiar class, not an ordinary female servant,) she shall not go out .as the men-servants do. If she is disliked by her master, so that he will not take her for a wife, he shall release her, or allow her to be redeemed. He shall not have power to sell her to another family after his having rejected or defrauded her. If he betroth her to his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. If he take to him another, (that is, another wife or concubine,) her food, her clothing, and her marriage duty, he shall not diminish. If he afford her not these three, then shall she go out free, without money." From this passage it appears that Israelites might be sold into sexennial, but not perpetual servitude. No Hebrew could be bound to another in the capacity of a servant, for more than six years, with the exception of the female servants sold for concubines or wives. No person belonging to the Theocracy was allowed to contract with another member of the same for his service in the capacity of a servant, for a longer period than six years ; and as none could acquire authority over a Hebrew as a servant, for more THE SERVITUDE OF THE MOSAIC INSTITUTES. 23 than six years, so none could transfer such authority for a longer period. This law for the regulation of servitude, is one of the most striking and singular of the Mosaic institutes. It was an abridgment of civil liberty in favor of liberty, and to prevent injustice and oppression, and was worthy of a Divine Lawgiver. It appears from Deut. xv. 18, that those called hired-servants, contracted only for three years at a time. A sexennial servant was worth a double hired-servant. The same is indic;ited by Isa. xvi. 14 : " Within three years as the years of a hireling," &c. If a master gave to his man-servant, a female-servant as a wife, he still retained authority over her as his servant, till her time of service expired. Her chikh-en were also his. E\. xxi. 4, compared with Deut. xv. 12 ; Jer. xxxiv. 9, 10, 11, 16. Servitude was to some extent hereditary among the Israelites, though not perpetual. Those born of servant-women, in certain circumstances, were the heirs of a servitude similar to that of their parents ; but only for a limited period; like children wlio are born to a state of temporary servitude to their parents, as children. Besides the sexennial servitude above described, there was an institution of perpetual servitude, which was not hereditary. After having served a master six years, and having found his service agreeable, the servant might by a solemn public declara- tion of a desire to be bound for life to that master, expressed in a prescribed form, become his perpetual servant. Ex. xxi. 5, G. The mode of setting persons apart to perpetual servitude, cor- responded to the meanness of that relation, and was at the same time adapted effectually to prevent this servitude from being as- sumed unwillingly, and to discourage the assumption of it at all. It was done before God or before the ecclesiastical and civil an- thority, which officiated in God's name, and was j)recedetl by ;ui avowal of the servant's desire to have an ignominious rite per- formed for the purpose in question ; and finally, this rite was per- formed by the master whose service was thus publicly chosen in preference to liberty, and who by his participation in the cere- mony, signified his acceptance of the person thus voluntarily sur. rendered to him, in the capacity of a perpetual servant. Daughters might be sold by their parents, as maid-servants of a higher class, or wives of an inferior order, whose condition, like that of lawful wives, was perj)etual. If however the maid- servant of this class became an object of dislike* to her nuuster, so that he should refuse to take her for a wife, or to betroth licr 24 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. to his son, she was entitled to her Hbcrty. Her master had no right to dispose of her to strangers, or out of his family. If a master betrothed a maid -servant of this description to his son, he was required to treat her as a daughter. A man might have several wives of this class, but he was required to afford them the maintenance, and allow them the privileges of wives ; and in case of his failing in any important respect to discharge the duties he owed them, they were entitled to their hberty. Ex. xxi. 7—11. Ex. xxi. 1 — 11, contains a summary of the laws of Moses, on the subject of servitude generally, and of that particular nfiod- ification of it, which prevailed in respect to females, who were termed in this statute ni^l?2i< maid-servants, but who are in other parts of the scriptures denominated concubines. See Gen. xxii. 24 ; XXXV. 22 ; Jud. xix. 1, 9, &c. ; 2 Sam. xv. 16 ; xx. 3 ; 1 Kings xi. 3 ; 2 Chron. xi. 21. The identity of the maid-servants here described, and the con- cubines of David, Solomon, Rehoboam, &c., does not admit of a reasonable doubt. The concubinage of the earlier patriarchs was probably of a similar character. It was a system of matri- monial servitude, and analogous to the matrimonial state as in- stituted by God. Ex. xxi. 7 — 11, affords an explanation of the otherwise inex- plicable conduct of David, Solomon, and others, in having concu- bines. The concubinage which they supported, was a species of servitude permitted by their laws. It had existed and been handed down from the earliest times. To them it was lawful, considered in reference to a universally acknowledged rule of conduct. This law however did not enjoin concubinage. It only permitted it, and that under restrictions which were found- ed in benevolence and justice. The laws of Moses gave no other countenance to this system of servitude, than simply not to prohibit it, and to lay such re- strictions on it as were calculated to protect the concubine from intolerable oppression. They did not therefore declare or make it right. Concubinage prevailed under these laws as it had done before they were enacted, to the reproach even of good men, who upheld it by their examples. The law which did not for- bid this iniquity, was doubtless in many cases incorrectly under- stood to sanction it, as it has been in later times. It is not to be presumed that no instruction was given on this subject, but what is recorded in the Scripture narrative. The THE SERVITUDE OF THE MOSAIC INSTITUTES. 25 requirements of God in relation to marriage, were doubtless un. derstood and more or less explained, long before tiie institution of concubinage was rclinquisbed. The gradual inci-ea.se and dif- fusion of ligiit on this subject, from experience and reason, and from the more perfect understanding of the will of God, ;is made known in the Scri|)turcs and by j)rophets, at length .sub- verted entirely the institution of concubinage among the woi-shi[). ers of God, by its coming to be considered both injurious and irreligious — contrary to reason and revelation. It does not appear that these laws respecting sexennial servi- tude, applied to the case of heathen servants who continued in a heathen state. Such, for aught that appears, might be held in a state of servitude for a longer period than Israelites. 3. Ex. xxi. 20, 21 : "And if a man smite his man-servant, or his maid-servant, with a rod, so as to produce immediate death, he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if the servant continue for a day or two, the master tshall not be punished, for he is his money." This law makes no difference between the crime of killing af servant and any other person, provided death is immediate. When the injured person survives a day or two, the law [)re- sumes the injury accidental, on the ground that the injurer had a pecuniary interest in the life of the person injured. Persons may be presumed not to have intended injurious conduct, which was manifestly contrary to their pecuniary interests. Yet tiio infliction of punishment in case of immediate death, shows that this was only a subordinate principle of evidence, and that the intentional killing of a servant, when it was clearly j)roved, was a crime of the same nature, and rendered the culprit hable to tlie same penalties, as the killing of any other person in like circum- stances. 4. Ex. xxi. 10 : "He that stealeth a man and selleth him, or if he be found in his possession, he shall surely be jiut to death." Deut. xxiv. 7 : " If a man be fi)und stealing any of his brelh- ren of the children of Israel, and makelh nserchandise of him or selleth him, then that thief shall die, and thuu shalt put away evil from among you." Man-stealing is here prohibited by the se- verest penalties. The crime delined under this title, is evident, ly that of seizing a human being with a view to reduce him to a state of servitude, and subsefjuently treating him and dis|>osing of him as a servant under the power of a maater. It applied of 3* 26 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. course to tlie seizure of children, as well as to that of persons of mature age. The penalty of man-stealing was death. 5. Ex. xxi. 26, 27 : " And if a man smite the eye of his- servant or the eye of his maid, he shall let him go free for his eye's sake ; and if he smite out his servant's tooth or his maid's- tooth, he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake." This law was designed to protect servants from personal injury. Injuries of the eye and tooth only, are particularly mentioned. Other- personal injuries of a serious nature undoubtedly entitled theser- vant to a similar privilege. " The eyes and teeth," says Rosen- miiler, " seem to be here used as examples of the greatest and least mutilation ; in conformity with which, sentence was to be given in all analogous cases of mutilation whatever. The loss of a finger or other member, was a greater injury than that of a tooth, and less than that of an eye." 6. Ex. xxii. 3 : "If he (a thief) have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft." If a thief was unable to make the restitution for his theft which the law required, he might be sold for the amount wanting. It does not appear from this law, that tlie thief was sold into per- manent servitude, but that he was sold for a time sufficient to raise the amount wanted to fulfill the law of restitution for theft. The institution required was four or five-fold according to the nature of the articles stolen, and the amount of injury done. Ex. xxii. 1. The preceding laws were enacted 1491 B. C, at the time of the giving of the law from Mount Sinai. Considerable time was occupied in settling the Hebrew polity, in building the tab- ernacle, &c., as far as these are related to have been carried forward in Exodus. The enactments and occurrences recorded in Leviticus, are supposed to have belonged to the following year, 1490 B. C. 7. Lev. xix. 20 : " And if a man lieth carnally with a woman that is a maid-servant, espoused to a husband and not duly re- deemed, nor her freedom given her, she shall be scourged. They shall not be put to death, because she was not free." The word here translated scourged, means examined, exposed, animadverted upon, and lastly, punished, without indicating the particular kind of punishment intended. As a matter of fact, scourging was probably the kind of punishment inflicted in such cases, and that on the man as well as on the woman, and with a severity proportioned to the supposed criminality of the offend- THE SERVITUDE OF THE MOSAIC INSTITUTES. 27 crs. Death was the penalty for the same crime, if committed with a free woman in similar circumstances. This is intimated by the reason given for the milder punishment inflicted in this case : " They shall not be put to death, because she was not free." And a law to that elfect is recorded in Deut. xxii. 23, 24, B. C, 1451, after an interval of thirty-nine years. It does not appear that in any other case except that specified in Lev. xix. 20, the laws which guarded the chastity of lemale servants, differed from those relating to other females. Deut. xxii. 28, 29, 8. Lev. XXV. 8— 10; verses 10, 54: " And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liherty throughout the land to all the inhabitants thereof. It shall be a jubilee unto you, and yc shall return every man to his possession, and ye shall return every man to his family." During tliis year the Israelites recovered their lands, however they might have been lost ; and all who were held in a state of servitude, not a modification of the marriage relation, were re- leased and made free. The object of this law was, to prevent oppression. Verse 14 : " Ye shall not oppress one another, a man his brother." The same is repeated verse 17, with the in- junction of the fear of the Lord, as the corresponding and anti- thetical duty, where the word translated another, is r.^^y neigh- bor or fellow. It does not appear that the law limiting the servitude of the Israelites to six years, or that requiring the proclamation of lib- erty to all the inhabitants of the land every fiftieth year, applied to heathen servants. The phrase inhabitants of the land, seems to denote Israelites, those and those only who adopted the nation- al religion and became incorporated with the nation ; a privilege secured to all. Gen. xvii. 12 — 14. Lev. xxv. 44 — 46, which follows almost immediately after the enactments respecting the year of jubilee, seems to recjuii-e this limitation, as it contains a manifijst exception to the rule by which the nation was to be governed in dealing with Israelites, and states expressly, that they might deal wiUi the heathen according to a different rule. The words translated bondmen and bondmaids, in Lev. xxv. 44, and in several other places, are the same as those which are usually and more correctly translated men-servants and maid-servants, and ought to be uniformly so translated. Israelites were not allowed to be held in permanent servitude, because they were the Lord's servants. Lev. xxv. 41 — 43. This reason did not exist or apply in favor of limiting the servitude of 28 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. the heathen. When they became the Lord's servants, then they were entitled to the privilege of a hmited servitude under the Theocracy, and to the other privileges of Israelites, but not till then. The more rigorous servitude to which the heathen were allow- ed to be reduced, was required to be administered with justice and humanity. It does not appear to have differed from the sex- ennial servitude of the Israelites, except in being for an indefinite pei'iod. In a community which was designed to be strictly re- ligious, all the arrangements and regulations of which were de- signed to promote the exercise and cultivation of piety, it is not strange that a difference should be made in respect to privileges between those who were professedly the servants of God, and those who were not. God brings various evils upon men as sinners. He does so in regard to the heathen generally, and his justice in doing so is unimpeachable. He had a right to appoint a rigorous system of servitude for the purpose of discouraging the wickedness of those heathen who fell into the hands of the Israelites. He had a right to make his own people the administrators of his displea- sure against the heathen, as such, by means of the system of servitude, which he authorized them to exercise over this class of their fellow men. The Divine warrant was enough to justify the administrator. If such a warrant could be pleaded for slavery in modern times, and by christian nations, it would amply justify the administration of that. But it cannot. The perpetual servitude of the slave is not based in any degree on religious considerations. He is not consigned to this servitude on the ground of his being a hea- then, or on the ground of any other moral delinquency. He may be the most devoted of God's servants, and submit most cheerfully to the religious and political institutions of the land, those of slavery alone excepted, and be kept in slavery still. Besides, the character of servitude is not to be determined merely by a consideration of the length of time during which it may last, but of the principles upon wliich it is founded, and by which it is administered. A system of servitude may be un- righteous, though it lasts but a day ; and it may be righteous, though extended to many years. The Israelites were not allow- ed to reduce the heathen indiscriminately to a state of servitude. The law did not distinguish between stealing and oppressing a heathen and an Israelite. None, whether Israelites or heathen, could lawfullv be reduced to a state of servitude, without just THE SERVITUDE OF THE MOSAIC INSTITUTES. 20 cause or a divine warrant ; and none could lawfully be retained in that state exce])t on similar grounds. The institution of the year of release and of jubilee, as re- corded in Lev. xxv. took place 1490 B. C. The renewal of the former is recorded in Dcut. xv. 1 — 11, in 1451 B. C, thirty- nine years later than its first ap[)ointment by Divine authority. In Deut. XV. 12 — 18, is a re-enactment of the statute record, ed hi Ex. xxi. 1 — 7, in relation to the sexennial servitude of the Israelites ; also hi relation to the only sp(;cics of perpetual servitude which was allowed, and which was sealed by boring the ear of the servant with an awl, &c. Here there is an additional statute in respect to the sexennial release of servants, requiring them to be furnished liberally at the time of their release, with whatever is needful for their comfort. Deut. XV. 13, 14: "And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty : thou shalt fur- nish him hberally out of thy flock, ajid out of thy floor, and out of thy wme-press ; of that wherewith the Lord thy God hath blessed thee, thou shalt give him." The law in respect to a sexennial release applied to ordinaiy maid-servants, in the same manner as it did to men-servants. Deut. XV. 17: "And also imto thy maid-servant thou shdt do likewise." 9. Deut. xxiii. 15, 16 : "Thou shalt not deliver to his master the servant who is escaped from his master unto thee. Ho shall dwell with thee, even among you, in whatever place ho shall choose, witliin one of thy gates where it pleaseth him best. Thou shalt not oppress him." The Israelites in the land of Ca- naan were surrounded by nations less enhghtened and humane than themselves. Among these nations scr\ants were often op- pressed. This law provides, that if any person of a foreign na- tion, held in unrighteous servitude, fled to them, he shouKI Ix; i*e- ceived and protected as a freeman, and jieither returned to his master, nor oppressed by them. It made the Theocracy tho sanctuary of the oppressed, from all nations. This law recog- nizes also the right of all persons to liberty, who are competent to take care of themselves. It applied to servants held among the Israelites, equally with others. If such left their m.'isters, they were allowed to shift for themselves, and if competent to take care of themselves without submitting to a state of servi- tude, they were allowed to do so. The servants among the Hebrews, so far as servitude was rcg. 30 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. ulated by law, comprehended concubines, or females held in a kind of marriage state, as wives of an inferior class, and ser- vants not held in any modification of the marriage state, or common servants. The subjection of concubines to their mas- ters, was analogous to that of wives to their husbands, and was rewarded with corresponding privileges. The condition and rights of the concubine were, in most respects, similar to those of the wife. This institution, however, was evidently one of the inventions of man, which God did not originally appoint, as he did that of marriage, and which he never sanctioned. There is a natural demand for the institution of marriage, as it was estabhshed by God ; but there is none for that of concubinage. The demand for concubinage is unnatural and criminal. This institution existed in the time of Abraham, and was up- held by him and succeeding patriarchs. Moses found it still prevalent, and laid it under such restrictions as he consistently could, but did not abolish it. What instructions he gave, and what doctrines he promulgated on this subject, farther than is re- corded in the brief history he has given us of his doings and in- structions, we know not. It is to be presumed that the inspired autiior of the first five books of the Holy Bible, was not igno- rant of the disagreement between the institution of concubinage, as it existed in the times of the patriarchs, and as defined in his institutes, and that of marriage, as established by God, and re- corded by himself, under Divine direction, in Gen. ii. 21 — 24. The institution of marriage, as instituted by God, was different from that of concubinage, in several important respects. The other classes of servants besides concubines, compre- hended both males and females, and corresponded more nearly to that of apprentices among us, than to that of slaves. No per- son was consigned to permanent servitude, except by his own choice, or else as a punishment for crimes, pai'ticularly the crime of theft; and that only when legal restitution required his sale as a servant for life. When there would arise a neces- sity to sell a thief, in order to make legal restitution for the things stolen, his sale for a Umited time, was all that the c^se required. In ordinary cases, no person could acquire authority over another as a master, for more than six years, without the servant's consent, expressed before the civil and ecclesiastical authority, in a manner prescribed, and that after six year's trial of the service of the master chosen. SERVITUDE OF THE MOSAIC INSTITUTES. 31 How far the Mosaic system of servitude was agreeable to the principles of natural justice and pure religion, it may not be easy to decide. Concubinage was undoubtedly wrong. It was a manifest corruption of God's institution of marriage, and was attended with undoubted marks of the Divine displeasure, both before and after the time of Moses. Unnumbered and severe trials to Abraham, to Jacob, to Da- vid, and to Solomon, emenated from this source, and from sins of a similar nature. The institution of concubinage was per- mitted to continue by Moses probably for the same reason that he permitted divorces for trivial causes at the pleasure of the husband. Deut. xxiv. 1 ; Matt. v. 31, 32; xix. 3 — 9. In answer to the question. Why, then, if it was wrong, did Moses command to give writing of divorcement, and to put the wife away ? Jesus Christ replied, Matt. xix. 8 : " Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, sulfered you to put away your wives ; but from the beginning it was not so. Verse 9 : Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery ; and whoso mar- rieth her which is put away, doth commit adultery." If Moses tolerated any violations of the principles of natural justice in the laws which he enacted on the subject of servitude, they may be explained in a similar manner. If injustice was tolerated, it was only tolerated for want of power to suppress it. It was not approved, still less enforced as a duty which any one was bound to perform. The servitude of those who were not held as concubines, but as ordinary servants, was not necessarily, j)erhaps not gener- ally criminal. It originated either in the convenience or neces- sities of the servant. It was commenced and continued witii liis consent, or with that of his parents or other lawful guar- dians. In ordinary cases he could not dispose of his liberties by making himself the servant of his fellow man, for a longer period than six years, at the expiration of wliich he became free. The law respecting those born in servitude, is not fully ex- plained, or at least is not as ex|)licit a.s might bo desired. It af- fords no evidence, however, that the children of Israelites coulil be forcibly retained in servitude after becoming of age ; and since it is hardly credible that such could have been the fact, without evidence of it having been incorporated in tiie Mosaic history and institutes, we are authorized to suppose that it was 32 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. not the fact ; and we are left to infer, that the children of Israel- itish servants became free at the same age ns other children. It is common at the present time to engage persons as servants for a year or for years, without at all depriving them of their liberties to such an extent as to be oppressive. Apprenticeship is a species of servitude which is usually extended through sev- eral years. Persons are frequently sold into this species of servitude by their parents or guardians without being oppressed, because it is with their consent and for their benefit. The same was probably the case with the sexennial servitude of the Jews. Persons sold themselves, or those of whom they had the right- eous guardianship into it, for their own benefit, and when the period of servitude agreed upon expired, the servants resumed their freedom. Every seventh year the servant resumed his freedom by law, just as the young man becomes free at 21 years of age. The Hebrew servants were laid under no legal disabilities in respect to education or religion. They might be educated in the most perfect manner ; and were entitled to all the privileges of religious instruction and worship, which were necessary for their spiritual and temporal welfare. Whenever they were com- petent to support themselves in independence, they were pro- tected by law in deserting their masters, and in the honest sup- port of themselves as freemen. The system of sexennial servitude must have been attended with several advantages to the servant as well as to the master. It af- forded him a somewhat permanent location ; and saved him the expense and loss of time incident to frequent removals from place to place, and from one employer or master to another. It also tended more or less to promote stability of character, to strengthen habits of order and regularity, and to prevent both idleness, expense, and dissipation. For aught we know, it may have been as necessary and as useful in the state of society then existing, as the prevailing system of apprenticeship is now. B_y making the relation of servant as a general rule somewhat permanent, the Mosaic institutes gave him an interest in the family to which he belonged, and that family an interest in him, which could not have been created in any other way. The ser- vant was not a transient and perpetually-shifling appendage to the family of his master, but almost a permanent member of it. The interests of the family were of course identified with SERVITUDE OF THE MOSAIC INSTITUTES. 33 his own, in a degree corresponding to the permanence of liis re- lations as a servant. The servitude autliorized by the Mosaic institutes, was modi- fied both by the general character of those institutes, and by many specific and general laws, not relating particularly to this subject. The fundamental principles of the Mosaic economy arc de- veloped in the following passages : — Deut. vi. 5 : "And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." So Deut. x. 12. Lev. xix. 13 : " Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbor, neither rob him. The wages of him that is hired shall not abide with thee all night until the morning.'' 15. " Ye shall do no un- righteousness in judgment. Thou shalt not respect the {)erson of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty ; but in right- eousness shah thou judge thy neighbor." 17. " Thou shaltnot hate thy brother in thy heart." 33,34. "And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him. But the stranger that dwelleth with you, shall be unto you as one born among you ; and thou shalt love him as thyself, for ye were stran- gers in the land of Egypt. I am the Lord your God." Deut. X. 19: " Love ye therefore the stranger, for ye were strangers in the land of 'Eg\pt." Deut. i. 16, 17. Lev. XXV. 17 : "Ye shall not therefore oppress one another, but thou shalt fear thy God, for I am the Lord your God." 35 — 37 : " And if thy brother be waxen poor and follen into decay with thee, then thou shalt relieve him, yea, though he be a stranger or a sojourner, he shall be with thee and serve thee unto the year of jubilee. Take thou no usury of him or increase, but tear thy God, that thy brother may live with thee. Thou shalt not give him thy money u[)on usury, nor lend him thy vict- uals for increase." The principles of benevolence and mercy were iiiculcatents to retain their children in perpetual servitude, and arrangements to keep those children in ignorance, to deprive them of the advantages of a common education, in order that they might be made less un- 68 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. willing and obstinate victims of such a system of oppression, would excite universal indignation. It would be regarded as a scheme of almost unparalleled wickedness and inhumanity. Such a conspiracy against the liberties of a single child, even though that child were an orphan, and thrown by ac- ident into the hands of his father's creditor as his guardian, would excite universal indignation, as an unprovoked, and selfish, and sordid infraction of the rights of an immortal being, whom God has re- quired us to love and serve. The laws and usages of differeht countries have invested pa- rents with different degrees of authority over their children. In our own country, children are protected by law in the enjoy- ment of a reasonable amount of hberty, and their interests are carefully looked after and secured. No legal impediments pre- vent parents from giving full scope to their feelings of benevo- lence, and doing tlie best for their children they possibly can. The child leels that in serving his parents during the period assigned for that purpose, he is only repaying in part, and gen- erally but in part, tlie debt he owes them for services received. The authority of parents is limited by the laws of God, both nat- ural and revealed. Beyond those hmits it cannot be rightfully extended either by legislative authority or general usage. 2. The servitude of apprentices. Apprentices are persons who are bound to service for a hmit- ed time, with a view to learn some particular art or occupation. The master becomes obligated by the terms of the apprentice- ship, to afford the apprentice an opportunity of making himself acquainted with the business in question, and of acquiring suffi- cient ability and skill for the successful prosecution of it. He also assumes the responsibility of providing for the maintenance of the apprentice during the time of service. For these benefits, to wit, instruction in the theory and practice of some trade or calling, and support during tlie time within which the instruc- tion is to be given, the apprentice becomes obligated to serve his master in the exercise of his industry and skill. He is bound to be dutiful and obedient to all reasonable commands and require- ments. Such requirements as are manifestly unreasonable and wrong, he is at liberty to disobey. No commands or solicitations of his master, can make it his duty to involve himself in crime, either against the laws of God or man. The servitude of apprentices is limited by contract, and va- ries from six jnonths to seven years. It may be terminated pre- THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF SERVITUDE. ()1) vious to the time stipulated, at tlie request of citlicr of the parties, by a civil process, if it appears lliat there is sutliciciit ground for tliat request. Parents and guardians cannot bind out their chil- dren and wards a.s apprentices beyond the period of their lx;com- ing of age. Persons wiio are of age may obligate themselves to serve in the capacity of apprentices for any reasonable length of time. Apprentices, like children, are protected by law, in the enjoyment of a reasonable amount of liberty, during the period of their apprenticeship, also from personal injury and abuse. The autliority of the master, and the subjection of the appren- tice, are founded in benevolence and justice. They are necessa- ry to the attainment of the important benefits whicli result to liie parties concerned, and to society, from this source. 3. TIic servitude of domestic servants. Domestic servants are those who arc employed in the families of their masters, for the purpose of assisting in the care or busi- ness of the family. They become servants by being hired for that purpose. This servitude may be modified within any n.-a- sonable limits, by the terms of the argrecment. Tiic; law which regulates it is principally that of general usage and natural justice. The domestic servant does not resign to his niLvster his entire powers of moral agency ; he docs not obligate himself to prac- tice unqualified submission to his master's will. He only con- cedes the authority to direct and control his actions within cer- tain limits, either specified in the contract, or determined by law and general usage. Within tliese limits he virtually promises due submission and obedience, and is bound to fulfil his engage- ment with promptness and fidelity. Beyond the limits assigned to the master's jurisdiction, obedience on the part of the servant is not required. The institution of domestic servitude is of indispensable ncces. sity. The demand for domestic servants is imperious, and can- not be set aside without overturning the whole fabric of society. The supply of this demand is also amply [jrovided, ami the ap- propriation of this supply may take place on principles which are equally just and benevolent. The servant employs his in- dustry and skill under the direction, and for the benefit of liis employer, and receives an equitable compensation for the same. In being at liberty to pursue this or any other mode of life for which he is (lualified, as he can best suhserve his iiitcrrsts, the price of service naturally regulates itself according to liie princi- ples of justice and benevolence. 70 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. As a general rule, every person ought to pursue that mode of life in which he can do best for himself and others. Other things being equal, the profitable departments of industry ought to be prosecuted in preference to those which are unprofitable ; and the more profitable, in preference to those which are less so. By acting universally on this principle, the greatest amount of wealth is produced, and the greatest amount of happiness secured. 4. The servitude of occasional or transient servants. Domestic servants are employed by the month or year ; occa- sional servants, by the day or week. The necessities of mankind create a demand for some ser- vants of this class. Their subjection to their employers and masters, for the time of service, may be as great as that of do- mestic servants or apprentices. In many cases, however, it is far less, though conformable to the same principles. As far as they engage in the service of their fellow men, they are bound to act according to the reasonable wishes of their employers. 5. TJie servitude of agents^ factors, &c. An agent or factor is one entrusted with the business of anoth- er. The business committed to a man as an agent, to be per- formed in behalf of another, is termed his agency. An agent is a servant to the person or persons in behalf of whom he assumes an agency, so far as the agency which he as- sumes is concerned, but no farther. The terms of an agency are such as the principals see fit to establish. If they involve a criminal subjection to the will of the principal, they ought not to be accepted by any one. If the business proposed to persons as agents, is lawful and right, and the terms reasonable, it may be undertaken ; and in such cases the agent is bound to comply with the terms of his agency, and to transact the business com- mitted to him, according to the instructions received. The terms may be more or less definite, and the instructions more or less explicit, according to the nature of the business and other circumstances. Agents may be of two classes, temporary and occasional, or permanent. In some cases their subjection to the will of their employers is very slight, having reference only to the thing to be done, while in respect to the mode and time of doing it, they are left entirely, or almost entirely, to their own discretion. In other cases the subjection of the agent to his employer is as great as that of any class of servants can justly be. Persons are responsible for THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF SERVITUDE. 71 the conduct of their agents, within the hmits prescribed by the terms of their agency. 6. The servitude of professional men ; of artists^ inecJianics^ tradesmen^ &c. These different classes of persons engage more or less in the service of their fellow men, and become obligated to tliem in the capacity of servants. Physicians and surgeons serve tlieir fel- low men as physicians and surgeons; ministers of tlie gospel, as ministers of the gospel ; artists of various kinds, as artists, &c. The terms of professional servitude are determined partly by law and general usage, and partly by contract. This species of servitude is analogous to that of agents. The professional servant is as truly a servant as the subject, the domestic, or the child. When he consents to use his pro- fessional skill for the benefit of an employer, he is bound to do it in subjection to the reasonable will of that employer, and in sub- servience to his true interests. The employer stands in the rela- tion of the person served, the professional man, &c., in that of the servant, to be governed in the service he performs, by sub- stantially the same principles as other servants. By actual service, all the classes of servants above described, with the exception of children and apprentices, become legally entitled to wages. Children and apprentices are not entitled to wages, on the ground of having performed service for their pa- rents and masters, because the support, instruction, and experi- ence, which they acquire in these states of servitude, are suppo- sed to be an equivalent for their services. The principle that the laborer is worthy of his hire, and that of benevolence to both the parties, lies at the foundation of all these modes of servitude, it applies equally to the servitude of children, apj)rentices, domes- tic servants, occasional servants, agents, professional men, ar- tists, &c. The services of all are required for benevolent pur- poses, and they are considered as having a just claim for the true value of their services. The value of service is determined by circumstances. It is sometimes greater and sometimes less. Whatever it is worth, the servant is entitled to receive for it. In this respect, industry and skill stand on an equal footing with any other merchantable commodity. It is the property of the laborer. He nuiy e.\i)end it for himself, or exchange it for other commodities, as he judges best. He ought, in the disposal of it, to be governed by the same principles as in disposing of other property. 72 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. The just value of service, like that of other commodities, h what it will bring in an open market. It is not a matter of arbi- trary appointment, either by servants or their employers. The former would be likely to estimate it too high, if its value was to be determined entirely by them, and the latter too low. Where liberty is left unrestrained, and every person may pursue that branch of industry and skill, in which he supposes he has fairest hope of success, and from which he has a prospect of reaping the greatest advantages, the wages of servants will naturally regulate itself. It will be precisely what it ought to be ; no more and no less. Any legislative interference for the purpose of regulating the wages of servants, would be as unjust as it would for that of regulating the price of grain, cattle, or any other article of property. The different kind^ of servitude above described, are recogni- zed and sanctioned by the laws of most civilized nations, and are thus incorporated into the civil institutions of mankind. They are not, however, merely the creature of human laws, but rather of human necessities. Laws sanction and sustain, but do not originate them. Their existence in the modifications specified, is coeval with that of society in any improved form. They can- not be abolished. The abolition of them would involve the de- struction of society itself. They would exist, from the necessi- ties and wants both of servants and masters, though all human enactments sustaining them should be repealed. The object of legislation in respect to them, is to define them and the duties they impose on both the parties concerned, and to make provision for the enforcement of those duties, and the pro- tection of each of the parties in the enjoyment of their respective rights. This is the general purpose and design of human laws. It is to protect persons in the enjoyment of natural rights, and to enforce the discharge of duties which would be obligatory, by virtue of the constitution of the human mind, and the arrange- ments of Divine providence, had human laws never been enacted. 7. The servitude of the suhjecis of civil government. Civil government is an institution of the greatest importance to the welfare of men. It is, therefore, of God ; and civil obedi- ence is a duty which has the sanction both of reason and revela- tion. Rom. xiii. 1 — 7; 1 Pet. ii. 13 — 18. Civil government implies civil subjection, and requires that authority should be vested somewhere and in some persons, for the control of its sub- jects. That, like all other authority delegated to men, is limited THE DIFFERENT KLNDS OF SERVITUDE. i 3 by the known laws of God, the principles of benevolence and justice. Within those limits it ought to bo implicitly ubeyed. The obedience of tiie subject to the civil authority, is as njuch a duty, as that of children to their parents, or as any other of the obligations of benevolence. Tlie use of civil government by those in power, for purposes of seltishness and injustice, is a perversion of it, which is deeply criminal. Where such perversions occur, those oppressed by them have a right to use all reasonable and proper means to ob- tain redress, as injured persons, and to turn back the slieam of civil authority into its appropriate and healthful channels. Volun- tary submission to injustice, from the exercise of civil authority, is not a duiy. Neither is it a duty to look with inditlcrenco upon the civil oppressions of others. Relief from injustice of every kind, is an appropriate object of pursuit, botli in our own cases, and in those of others. Obedience to a reasonable and equitable civil authority, is compensated by ample rewards. This servitude, therefore, un- der proper regulations, is an amply compensated one, and like that of children, is founded in reason and justice. The sanction which it borrows from revelation, is the sanction of justice, and nothing more ; certainly nothing contrary to this. 8. Slavery^ or the servitude of slaves. Slavery is a species of servitude in which the servant is under the absolute control of his master, and subject to his disposal as a personal chattel, or personal property. " A slave," says the slave-law of South Carolina, "is a chattel personal in the hands of a master or possessor, to all intents and purposes whatsoever." The municipal law of another slave -holding state, describes a slave as one '• who is in the power of a master, to whom he be- longs. The master may sell him, dispose of his person mid his industry. The slave can do nothing, possess nothing, and ac quire nothing but what belongs to his master." These delinitious apply to slaves generally. They distinguish this class of human beings from all others, by a line of dcniarka- tion that need not be nnstaken. They may be employed in la- bors and pursuits appropriate only to human beings, but ihey are held by the same tenure as brutes, or inanimate objects ; nanic-^ ly, as property. The slave is a servant. His state is one ol subjection to a master. But liis servitude dilFers from that of every 7* 74 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. Other class of servants known to the world, by its degrading as- similation to the servitude of b: tites. Attempts have frequently been made to identify slavery with some other and equitable modifications of servitude. It has been asserted to be the same in principle as subjection to civil government, to parental authority, and to employers in the ca- pacity of hired servants. Civil government, parental authority, and that exercised over men as hired servants, may be perverted and degraded into sys- tems of injustice and tyrannical oppression. In that case, they may be assimilated to slavery so far as to leave no important or perceptible distinction in principle between them. But in their unperverted state, the difference between them and slavery is too obvious to be unobserved, or unappreciated by the most careless eye. All men who are at all acquainted with the subject, whatever theoretical notions they may hold and promulgate respecting it, make a great practical distinction between slavery and the other modifications of servitude. None regard it as an eligible con- dition either for themselves or children. They may contend for it as very suitable and useful for the children of the slaves, but they W'Ould in most cases prefer to follow their own children to an early grave, rather than see them consigned to the dominion of slave-holders, as chattels personal. Slavery differs essentially from the other kinds of servitude described in this section, in the following particulars : 1. It is founded in a regard chiefly if noi solely, to the inter- ests of the master, and not in a common and due regard for those of both the parties concerned. The servitude of children, apprentices, &c., is instituted for the benefit of the servant as truly as for that of the master. The object of other servitudes is to secure cer^ ain benefits to one of the parties, for which com- pensation is made tv> the other, either in service or wages, or in- struction and support. But the chief end of slavery is the ben- efit of the master. As far as the interests of the slave can be secured in subordination to those of the master, they are, to some extent, provided for. But no farther. No sacrifice of the interests of the slave, whether for time or eternity, is too great to be made, when the interests of the master require it. Such is the theoiy of slavery, and the practice is generally in dread- ful agreement with it. 2. Slavery invests the master with a greater degree of author- IS SLAVERY WRONG ? 75 ity, than any other modification of tlie institution of servitude. The first peculiarity noticed relates solely to the |)rinci|)le on which this investment of authority is made. That which is now suggested, relates to the amount of it invested. The restriction of the authority of slave-holders, within the same limits its ob- tains in respect to parents, the masters of apprentices, of do- mestic hired servants, &c., would prove fatal to the institution of slavery. It would be a virtual abolition of it. 3. It is artificial and unnatural. Other kinds of servitude are natural and necessary. They do not borrow their existence from legislative enactments, but result from the necessities and wants of mankind. Slavery is entirely a creature of humun laws. Laws are necessary to its institution and establishment, and the moment they are repealed, it ceases to exist. So far from being necessary to the great interests of society, slavery is an invasion and sacrifice of them. It sacrifices many of the liighest and dearest interests of the slave, to the supposed tem- poral but less important interests of the master. Slavery has been substantially the same in all ages in which it has existed, and in all countries. It has always been character- ized by selfishness, tyrranical authority, and a sacrifice of the highest and dearest interests of the enslaved, to the less impor- tant interests, and often to the caprice of their masters. Such was the character of this institution among the Greeks and Ro- mans ; and it is such still, amid all the improvements of Christi- anity and of modern times. The greatest restraint upon the authority of slave-holders in this country, is not that of municip- al law, jealous for the rights of the servant, but that of public opinion, an opinion which lends its sanction to the invasion of the dearest ric^hts of rational and social beings. Such restraint must of course be very inadequate to the wants of the slave, and the ends of justice. SECTION VII. IS SLAVERY WRONG ? This question has been supposed by many to Ix^ too plain to |uirc discussion. Public opinion and the public conscience, 76 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. have given theii* decision in the affirmative, under circumstances which seem almost to preclude the possibility of error. The best of men, in their best frames of mind, with no interest to bias their judgment, and in great numbers, have participated in the con- demnation of slavery, and that in the most earnest and unquali- fied manner. In multitudes of cases, tliis opinion has been form- ed as the result of extensive and accurate information, both in respect to slavery and the subject of morals generally. Some, however, have not acquiesced in this condemnatory judgment ; and many who profess to acquiesce in it, do not sub- scribe to it in full. Many suppose the existing modifications of slaveiy to be wrong in some, or even in many respects, and to be hable to some abuses, who do not unite in the condemnation of the institution as wrong in itself. Some too, who profess to regard slavery as wrong in itself, however modified and adminis- tered, understand imperfectly the statement of their professed sentiments, and reject and oppose the inevitable consequences to which those sentiments lead, and which they involve. There are not a few in this country who advocate the institu- tion of slavery, as nearly or perfectly right ; as agreeable to the laws of God and to the dictates of reason and experience. Per- sons of this class are found in the Southern churches and minis- try. They do not regard men as criminal for holding their breth- ren as property, for buying, selling, and using them in other re- spects as slaves, but only for exercising their authority with rigor and cruelty. If compelled to admit the unrighteousness of slavery as it is generally administered, they contend for it as administered in some cases, and if unable to vindicate it as it is really is, they still advocate it, as in their opinion it might be. This diversity of sentiment respecting the moral character of slavery, creates a demand for diligent inquiry and thorough in- vestigation. The interests involved are of the most vital and permanent character. An investigation, therefore, the design of which is to determine the true relation of slavery to those mter- ests, ougat to be entered upon, by all whose minds are yet in any degree unsettled, or whose opinions have been formed on superficial and slight grounds, and ought to be prosecuted with diligence and candor, and with earnest prayer to God, for the enlightening influences of that Spirit, whose office it is to lead every humble inquirer into all important moral truth. IS SLAVERY WRONG ? 77 The question whether slaven' is wrong or not, may be rcsol- ved into the two following : 1. Is the institution oi" slavery wrong? 2. Is it wrong to sustain and exercise the office of slave-holder under that institution as established in slave-holding states ? 1. Is the institution of slavery icroug ? The institution of slavery consists in those laws and gen- eral usages or customs, which determine the character of this modification of servitude, where it is supported by law. As an institution, it may be compared to that of filial subjection, or the servitude of children ; to that of aj)prentices ; and to that of civil government ; but it is specifically different from any exist, ing varieties of either. Though different from every other institution of society, it is capable of being greatly motlified, and exists under different modifications, in different slave-holding states. In determining the character of the institution of slavery, it will conduce to clearness of apprehension, to consider it first, as it is, and secondly, as it might be ; or as it may reasonably bo supposed possible to constitute and restrict it. (1.) The institution of slavery is wrong, considered as it is, or as it actually exists in different states and territories. It authorizes manifest injustice and cruelty, and deprives the rational creatures and subjects of God, of rights and privileges which belong to tnem as rational and moral beings. It inter- feres, therefore, with the d ities which men owe to themselves, and to each other as men, and with those which they owe to God as his subjects. This interference is generally acknowledged, by reasonable and pious men of all parties. Consequently, they have founded their apologies for it in most cases, ratlier on their opinions as to what it ought to be, than on the facts demon- strating what it is. Charges of injustice are sustained against the existing modi- fications of slavery, in respect to the following j)arliculars : They divest the'ser\ ant of his rights as a moral being, and do- grade him to a thing, a personal chattel, or an article of personal property in the hands of a possessor and master ; and this, for no crime of his, but merely for the real or sujiposed benefit and convenience of the master. They deny the slave the benefit and protection of those laws which are enjoyed by all other classes of persons, and which are justly regarded jis of inestima- ble value; and cast liim upon the mercy of an irresponsible 78 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. master, with no adequate power to maintain his dearest and most sacred rights as a rational and moral being. They deprive him of the right to seek his happiness by all such honest and rea- sonable means as he may choose ; compel him to labor at such employments as his master may see fit to appoint ; and that, without putting it in his power to obtain a fair compensation for tlie same. They deprive him of the advantages of a com- mon and Hberal education, thus dooming him to perpetual igno- rance and imbecility ; and take from him the institution of mar- riage, and the power to educate his children for happiness in this hfe and that to come. All these injuries are inflicted by the in- stitution of slavery, in all its existing varieties. This institution, as it exists, therefore, is manifestly wrong. It is a violation of the most unquestionable principles of justice and benevolence. (2.) No modification of slavery can make it right, which does not amount to a formal or virtual abolition of it. Let us suppose a thorough reform of this institution to be prosecuted, till nothing wrong should be left. What would be re- moved 1 And what would remain ? The marriage relation would be restored to its integrity, the laborer entitled to a compensation equal to the value of his labor, the rights of personal liberty, of property, and of conscience, all acknowledged ; laws prohibiting instruction repealed, arrangements for extending the advantages of common and liberal education as widely as possible, adopted and prosecuted with vigor, and parents, the natural guardians and masters of their children, designated to this office by the provi- dence of God, allowed by the civil authority to exercise all the appropriate duties of the parental relation, in the government and instruction of their children, and to make what provision they can for their temporal and eternal welfare. In such a reform, slavery will indeed be corrected ; its abuses will be removed, but it will be by the entire subversion of the institution itself. Those who are now in slaveiy might still, in some cases, be servants ; but they would not be slaves. An equitable apprenticeship to business is not slavery ; an equitable domestic servitude is not ; no person who enjoys the rights of property and of personal liberty, can justly be considered a slave. Perhaps, however, a much less thorough reform of this insti- tution, than now indicated, would satisfy the wishes of some, and accord with their apprehensions of what justice requires. But which of these improvements is not necessary, in order to render this species of servitude right ? In respect to wiiich of the par- IS SLAVERY WRONG ? 79 tlculars referred to, is not slavery wrong? If every other enact- ment of our present systems of slavery was repealed, but the right to exact service, and that without paying for it at the market price, the remnant would be wrong. TIkj power to ex- act service of our fellow men, cxcej)t on the ground of some ob- vious necessity, or in satisfaction of some equitable claim, is an invasion of their undoubted rights, and is criminal. But what is the claim of the slave-holder 7 Whence is his title derived ? Is that claim for value received by the slave ? Not at all. The slave has received no benefit from him, for which the surrender of his liberties is an equitable exchange. From iiis earliest 3-ears he is, in most cases, the subject of injurious treatment by his master, in various respects, particularly in respect to the means of intellectual and moral im{)rovcment. The master's claim to a fellow being as his slave, cannot be sustained on the ground that the slave is justly indebted to him to that amount, for the care and expense bestowed on him in his infancy. That admission would lay a foundation for the enslaving of children, as such. It would entitle all parents to hold their children as slaves, which is contrary, not only to the dictates of benevo- lence, but to the best established principles of justice. Parents have not a right to enslave their children, and laws that should invest them with this right, would be unjust and unreasonable. The title of a master to an African who is torn from his coun- try and sold as a slave by the man who seized him, is that deri- ved from the thief and robber. The thief and robber, however, cannot give a just title to the property they have seized and ta- ken from the true proprietor. The owner has a just title to his property, notwithstanding its seizure. The man who buys of a robljcr, purchases the robber's title, nothing more. That title is no better when transferred to the hands of a jiurchaser, than it was before. Every transfer that may succeed, is a transfer of the same insufficient title. The owner of the stolen jn-operty mav be destitute of power to enforce his claim to it, but that claim remains uncancelled, till it is equitably destroyed. Has the claim of a stolen African to himself, been equitably cancel- led? The property which a human being hiLs in himself, is of the most sacred character. It ought manifastly to he secured to the true proprietor, by all possible; ;uid reasonable means. Are there no possible and rcasonable means, then, of securing it to the stolen African? The answer to this question is obvi- ous. Means of securing the property in question to the original 80 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. proprietor, are abundant. That property, therefore, ought to be secured to him. The proprietor is at hand with his title, and ready to assert it. He that purchases a stolen man, purchases a false title, in the very presence of the true proprietor, and with the amplest means of discovering the validity of the proprietor's title to the property. Laws which recognize that false title as valid, are therefore manifestly wrong. Whence does the slave-holder derive a title to the child of his slave, as a slave? The child commences its existence a crea- ture of God, and in the first instance, under obligations only to God, as his servant. His relations to an earthly parent, indicate that parent not as his possessor, but merely his protector and guardian, during the period of his incompetency to take care of himself. It is the duty of the parent to bring the child forward to such a degree of improvement, that he may be able to take care of himself as soon as practicable. He is bound, in duty, to consult for the; happiness and welfare of the child, as truly as he does for his own. For whatever care and labor he judicious- ly expends on the improvement and support of the child, he is entitled, in justice, to a compensation. That compensation must be made ciiiefly in service, as the child has no other means of making it. But the service which the parent has a right to ex- act of his child, is not the subjection of a slave ; far from it. Neither is it perpetual servitude of any' kind. The judgment and experience of the world have acquiesced in assigning the child to a state of servitude, not slavery, to his parent, till he at- tains the age of twenty-one years ; making it the duty of the pa- rent to afford him support and instruction till that period, and giving the parent a right to what service he can obtain in the mean time, as a compensation for parental care and expenditure. This arrangement is generally considered just to both the parties concerned. It is attended with great advantages to both, and affords the parent as great a pecuniary compensation as justice and benevolence authorize him to require. The duties of parental oversight and support may be trans- ferred to others, in which case filial obligation will undergo a cor- ' DO responding transfer. But in this transfer there is no fundamen- tal change of obligations and relations. The relations of the child are substantially those of a child, and those of the guar- dian are, in most respects, the same as those of the father, which were transferred to him ; never greater. The parent has no equitable title to his child as a slave, and IS SLAVERY WRONG ? 81 cannot convey such a title to others ; for he can only convey to another what he possesses himself. The title of the slaveholder, therefore, to the children of his slaves, is false on two «,nounds : (1.) On the ground that the parents are not equitably his, but, their own, by a title which has not been equitably cancelled, and which is therefore of un(|ucstionable validity. (2.) On the ground that even if the parents were equita- bly his, a title to the parents does not comprehend an equitable title to the children as slaves, but only as children. On the whole, it appears that the institution of slavery, or the laws and usages investing men with a title to their fellow men as slaves, are plainly repugnant to justice ; that slavery is therefore wrong, and that those who have the power, and upon whom the responsibility is devolved by Divine providence, ought to unite in pulling down this enormous system of oppression. 2. Is it wrong to sustain and exercise the otHce of slave- holder under existing slave laws ? Human laws do not make wrong right. The greatest crimes may be legalized, as has often been done ; but they are crimen; still. Laws, for example, authorizing persecution, have existed in many countries. Thousands of innocent persons have be^n subjected to imprisonment, torture, confiscation of property, exile, and death itself, by due process of human laws. But do any suppose that those executions were right ? Did the neighbor who impeached the innocent, or the judge who condemned him, or the executioner who confined, or tortured, or beheaded, or burned him, do right? Human laws, indeed, justified them, hut are they acquitted in the sight of God, and at the bar of enlight. ened conscience ? If human laws can make it right for a judge to condemn the innocent, or for an executioner to put him to death, they can reverse the law of Jehovah, and subvert his moral government over men. If the legalizing of crime makes it right in any sin- gle case, it may have this etFect in another, and another case, till all crime is legalized and destroyed. Where then will be the government of God? Where the immutable distinction between right and wrong, which is so much the boast and glory of the christian morality? What a mere figment is the Divine law, if it is not to be enforced in opposition to the laws of men ? (lod says, respect the life of the innocent ; the liuman legislator says, no, kill him. Which of these is the higher authority, it is easy to decide. An apostle decided this (juestion long since, when 8 82 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. he declared — "Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken to you more than to God, judge ye." Acts iv. 19. God has not established one rule of conduct for apostles, and another for others. He has established one rule for all men, and that is the rule of obedience to him, the opinions, enact- ments, and inflictions of men to the contrary, notwithstanding. Matt. X. 28 ; Luke xii. 5. On the same principle that the three servants of God, though standing alone, refused to worship the image set up by Nebu- chadnezzar, at the peril of their lives, (Dan. iii. 8 — 26,) they would, if in power, have refused to support or enforce such wor- ship. The principle on which they acted, was that of the su- premacy of God and of his law. The wonderful interposition of God in their favor, is a sufficient testimony to the correctness of that principle. The supremacy of God and of his law is the fundamental principle of correct morals. It is the pole star of piety and virtue. Right and wrong are founded in the nature and relations of moral actions, considered with reference to the laws of God as the supreme rule of moral action. A consideration of human laws may be left out of the account, in determining the moral quality of actions. They are of no use in these determinations, except as far as they correspond with the law of God ; and where they differ from this, are liable to be of the greatest injury in perverting our moral judgments. If we judge of conduct by an incorrect rule, our judgment will necessarily be erroneous. By the law of God, it is wrong to hold men as things, be- cause they are more than things, and have rights of personal lib- erty and of property, that are invaded by their being held in subjection of this kind. By this law, slaves are as truly entitled to the right use of their faculties, to a full equivalent for their in- dustry, to the liberty of acquiring property, and the power of holding, enjoying, and using it, as any other class of persons. The invasion of these and other rights, in the case of the slaves, is as truly prohibited by the law of God, as in that of others. Tlie idea that a man derives a just right from human laws to hold his fellow men in a state of servitude, which is contrary to the law of God, is absurd. Human authority cannot make it our duty to violate one of God's requirements. Scripture examples and precepts have placed this truth on the most unquestionable ground ; on the firmest basis. However others act, he who sub- IS SLAVERY WRONG ? 8S mils to the Scriptures as tjic law of his life, may not do evil that good may come. If the law of God may not be violated, wIumi the violation of it is positively required by human laws, and those requirements enforced by the heaviest penalties, still less may this be done with impunity, when those laws merely grant permission and af- ford authority to tlie subject to do it if he chooses, without impo- sing any obligations on him to that effect. Permission to exercise the office of slave-holder, and support in doing it, are all that is done for slavery, by the laws of slave- holding states. No man is compelled by law to become a slave- holder, or to continue in this practice contrary to his will. It is a melancholy fact, that legal permission to practice injus- tice in any department of human agency, is enough to open wide the flood-gates of iniquity anywhere. Take away from human life, or from any kind of property, the safe-guards thrown around them by the law, and none of us would be secure for a week. Such has been the experience of the world in respect to slave- ry. Permission is given to enslave all who are born in cer- tain circumstances. And lo ! it is done ! The christian and infidel are alike eager to seize the unprotected as their lawful prey. These victims of oppression are given up to their Icllow men to be enslaved for life. The whole grant is improved, and as a general rule, death alone is the herald that proclaims liberty to the captive, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound. It appears then, that if slave-holding is wrong in itself, the authority which it derives from human laws, cannot niake it right, or diminish in any degree, its criminality. Tiie question, there- fore, whether it is wrong to hold men as slaves, under existing slave-laws, must be answered according to the previous question, whether the institution is wrong ? That answer is an allirmative one ; this must consequently be affirmative. Tile criminality of holding men as slaves under existing slave- laws, may be farther illustrated by the Ibllowing considerations : 1. It involves all the guilt inherent in slave-holding. tJod's law, both natural and revealed, is a rule of action, the authority of which is far above that of municipal statutes. It is the only proper and supreme rule of moral action, other laws having no^ tbrce where they come in collision with this. All the guilt of slave-holding arising from the undue restraint of liberty, the 84 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. education of human beings for working machines, wthholding from the laborer a just compensation for his labor, &c., is charge- able upon the slave-holder under existing slave-laws, as truly as if there were no laws to sanction this procedure. The idea that the slave-holder can shift his responsibility to the laws is entirely erroneous. God's law binds him irrevocably to the practice of justice and mercy, human laws to the contrary notwithstanding. By God's law, not by that of men, the moral- ity or immorality of his conduct must be determined. By this he will stand or fall at the last day. 2. The man who assumes and administers the office of slave- holder, virtually gives his assent to the laws establishing slavery, and becomes a supporter of this institution. A slave-holder may denounce slavery as wrong in words ; he may profess to abhor the system of legislation by which it is created and upheld ; but his act of holding slaves is a practical support of that system, which does far more to perpetuate it, than he can possibly do by other means to pull it down. Every instance of slave-holding contributes to the extension of slavery, by multiplying its victims : and to the stability of it, by its effect, considered as an example for the imitation of others. This is particularly the case in re- spect to pious slave-holders, and others who are considered as being persons of correct moral principles. The examples and countenance of such persons are the principal supports of slave- ry. It is sustained in credit, chiefly by their names; and if not thus sustained, could not long stand at all. The examples of good men are often followed without reflection or inquiry. They are supposed of course, to be safe. Good men, therefore, are under greater responsibilities than others, and ought to act with corresponding circumspection. Their sins are both more criminal and more injurious, than those of others, in proportion to the light and knowledge which they possess, and the standing which they have in the community. 3. Every slave-holder is responsible, to a great extent, for all the injustice and cruelty which attend unnecessarily, the admin- istration of slavery. Slavery is the occasion of a vast amount of wickedness, which is not inherent in the system, and insep- arable from it, but which attends it as a natural accompaniment, and which flows from it as a natural consequence of undue au- thority and subjection. Some may administer it with humanity, making the necessarily galling )oke of this bondage as light as possible ; others will do it with rigor, making it unnecessarily severe IS SLAVERY WRONG ? 85 and oppressive. The instances in which slavery is made as light, and clothed with as little injustice as possible, in which it is at- tended with no evils but such as are inse[)arable from it, are comparatively few. Those in which its attendant and inciden- tal evils are numerous and oppressive, are not few. They are numbered by thousands and tens of thousands. For all these incidental injuries, relating as they do both to temporal and eternal interests, partly occasional and partly habitual, the institution of slavery, and all who unite in uphold- ing it, are justly responsible. A single insulated act of injustice docs not draw after it a train of responsibilities to be compared with that which is con- nected with extensive systems of evil doing. Holding men as slaves has this disadvantage, that it belongs to a system of op- pression, and tends to the support of that system, in all its parts, and with all its abuses. Where the emancipation of slaves is prohibited by law, or the benevolent ends of it frustrated by legislative enactments, designed to prevent this result, the path of exact duty may not be always apparent. The slave-holder, in circumstances of this kind, finds himself invested with legal rights, which it is mani- festly wrong for him to exercise. He has the legal right to sub- ordinate the temporal and spiritual interests of his fellow men to his own. He may do this in the case of tens and hundreds. But he cannot do it innocently. He may verily think he is do- ing God service, in the exercise of oppression ; but his thinking so does not make it so. The existing laws impeding the eman- cipation of slaves, render this class of persons peculiarly depen- dent upon their masters, and peculiarly liable to injustice. Op- pression is encouraged, justice and mercy discouraged. In such cases, what ought the slave-holder to do? He ought to consult for the welfare of his slaves, on the same princi|)les that he does for that of himself and children. If, on mature deliberation, and after a careful estimate of slavery, he would be willing to have been trained up for it, and consigned to it him- self; if he would be willing to train up his children for it, and consign them to it, did the laws permit ; if he finds it conducive to the temporal an.' eternal interests of all the parties concerned, and agreeable to the law of a holy God, who forbids all inirigh- teousness, on pain of liis eternal displeasure; then let him |)rosc- cute the intention of the law, and subject his horse and his brother to the same arbitrary sway, and hold them alike by the title of 86 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. "chattels personal, to all intents and purposes whatsoever/' But if conscience shrink from such a procedure, however authow rized and encouraged by men, then let him that is armed by law with the power of exercising this oppression, forbear. Let him put that armor off as quickly and as entirely as possible. But the question still returns, What shall the slave-holder do? Let him make all reasonable efforts and sacrifices to place his servants, in his estimation and in that of justice not his slavesy beyond the reach of injustice and oppression. Let him exercise a noble generosity, a pure benevolence, in respect to this matter. Let him take no advantage of his power, for the injury of his servants either in tlieir persons, characters, property, or civil and religious rights as men. But let him act in relation to them, on the principles which led the Redeemer of the world, though rich, to become poor, that we through his poverty might be rich. It is not necessary that a slave-holder should dismiss his slaves from his care, in order to acquit himself of the guilt of slave-holding. He may release them from the bondage of slavery, and still hold them as apprentices, hired servants, and objects of guardianship, in the relation of children or wards. He ought to give them an interest in his property, equal to their just dues, after all reasonable deductions are made for the expense and responsibilities incurred in taking care of them ; or else to pay them at the mai'ket price for their services, in some other way, and to allow them to expend or invest the same for theiF own benefit, and according to their discretion. In other words, the man who is now a slave-holder, ought not to exercise in any case, the despotism contemplated by the slave-laws ; but, in the place of it, a righteous sovereignty, limited by the strictest justice and the most impartial benevolence, in which the interests af his servants should be respected according to their true value, as really as his own. But even in the exercise of such an authority, the master would not be justified in claiming his fellow men as his perpetual servants. The subjects of civil government have the liberty of going from one country to another. This is the case even under those which are most despotic. The right of exchanging one coun- try, and the jurisdiction of one government, for another, is found- ed in justice and benevolence, and the invasion of it without just cause, is an act of manifest and flagrant injustice. On the same principle, servants of mature age ought to be allowed to ex- IS SLAVERY WRONG ? 87 change the sovereignty of one master for that of another. A smaller amount of liberty than this, is altogether less th.'»n their necessities require, and is insutlicient for the purposes of justice. By adopting the princii)lcs above recommended, the slave- holder would be converted into a master with limited authority, and the head of a limited and righteous sovereignty; that which is now a stock or herd of slaves, into a principality of free-men, under an equitable government, having liberty to exchange the same for any other, whenever they could honestly do it, and whenever, in their opinion, such a change was expedient ; and slavery would be entirely abolished by the voluntary relinquish- ment of it on the part of masters. On the whole, it appears both that the institution of slavery is wrong, it being a system of laws and usages authorizing gross injustice, and conflicting with the highest interests of men as im- mortal beings ; and that exercising the office of slave-holder under this institution, is also a wrong for which the institution is no proper justification, which existing circumstances do not re- quire, and which God does not allow. Those who may be still unconvinced of the truth of these po- sitions, are requested to consider the following additional topics of argument. It is believed that they atford strong confirmation of the reasonings and conclusions above stated : 1 1. The etfect of slavery on the temporal prosperity of all the persons concerned, the masters and slaves. 2. Its etlect on the intellectual and social improvement of all the persons concerned. 3. Its effect on their religious and moral improvement, consid- ered particularly in respect to the number of actual conversions, and the degree and amount of piety and holiness attained. 4. Its effect on the interests of the colored race generally in this country, in depressing and otherwise injuring them. 5. Its effect on the interests of this nation, considered with reference to all classes of persons. 6. The dangers to be apprehended from this source, if they are not averted by timely repentance and reformation. 88 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. SECTION VIII. OrGHT SLAVERY TO BE IMMEDIATELY ABOLISHED ? Some persons think it a matter of little consequence, to inquire what ought to be done, in respect to the abolition jf slavery, under the apprehension that the determination of this question in the most satisfactory manner, will be entirely ineffectual as to the attainment of the desired result. " If men were willing to do what they ought to do," say they, " the case would be very dif- ferent from what it is at present. But as it is, we had better consider what slave-holders and the slave-holding community are willing to do, and leave the inquiry, what they ought to do, for future and subsequent consideration." God, however, has not acted on this plan, and those who are engaged in his service, and who acknowledge his authority, have no liberty to adopt it. God does not adapt his requirements and expostulations to the wishes of men, but to the demands of justice and benevolence. " He utters his judgments against them touching all their wick- edness." Jer. i. 16. He commands the friend of righteous- ness, " Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and show my people their transgressions, and the house of Israel their sins." Isa. Iviii. 1. He says of the false prophets, '' If they had adhered to my counsel, and caused my people to hear my words, then they would have turned them from their evil way, and from the evil of their doings." Jer. xxiii. 22. Again, " He that hath my word, let him speak it faithfully. Is not my word like a fire, saith the Lord, and iiku a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces ?" xxiii. 28, 29. Those who distrust the adaptation of truth to promote righ- teousness, or its efficiency by the Divine blessing to smite down the idols and to slay the very leviathans of wickedness, must have an imperfect knowledge of its past successes, as well as of the declared purposes of God respecting it. Moral truth has a power over the conscience, which never yet has been fully appreciated. The empire of sin is maintained chiefly by shrink- ing away from the clear light and renovating influences of truth. " He that believeth not is condemned," is urder the dominion of sin ; " and this is the condemnation, that light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil." John iii. 18, 19. OUGHT SLAVERY TO BE IMMEDIATELY ABOLISHED ? 89 The principles of the Bible are sufficiently clear and decisive on this subject, for the direction of ail who respect its authority as the \vord of God. They have been amply tested by expe- rience. Truth, when spoken in faithfulness, and accompanied with the prayer of the righteous, has achieved the most surpri- sing victories over selfishness and other forms of sins. Slavery has already felt its power. Some of the strongest fortresses of this giant evil have been stormed with success, and others are giving way. If this son of Anak cannot be smitten down and destroyed by the sword of the Holy Spirit, that weapon and the invisible hand of the Almighty, by wiiich it is widlded, are unworthy of our confidence ; and wo must seek for light from some other quarter of the universe, or sit down in hopeless despair. Truth however, strong as it is in the power of the Almighty, does not go forth alone to the achievement of its victories over the conscience and heart of man. God's providential govern, ment leads, pursues, and sustains it, in every stage of its progress. The battle that is now being fought against slavery, against all the inherent and accompanying wickedness of this deeply rooted and strongly fortified system of oppression, may severely try our faith, our benevolence, our generosity, our compassion, our cour- age. But it is the Lord's, and if we come to the attack in sub. jection to his will, and in his spirit, the words that we utter shall not return unto us void, but shall accomplish that wiiich he de- sires, and shall prosper in the tiling whereto he sent them. Isa. Iv. 11. The question, Ought slavery to be immediately abolished 1 resolves itself into the two following : 1. Ought slavery to be ever abolished ? 2. Ought those who possess the legitimate power, to abolish it immediately ? 1 . Ouglit slavery to be ci^er abolished ? That it ought to be abolished at some time, and in some way, is conceded by nearly all candid men, wlio have not a [)ecuniary or secular interest of some kind, in its being uj)held. It is con- ceded, moreover, by the great majority of intelligent slave-hold- ers themselves. The philanthroi)ist, the politician, the moraHst, and christian, all cry out against slavery, ;is involving a violation of the laws of God, and of the un(]uestionable rights of man. In denouncing slavery as a curse tp the world, as a great politi- cal and moral evil, chilling the buds of happiness, and blasting 90 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. the fruits of virtue through all the ranks of society, but espe* cially in the bosom of the slave, there is great unanimity among intelligent and good men ; a unanimity not exceeded in any other instances of a similar and legalized enormity. If any additional argument were needed for the establishment of the opinion now prevalent, that slavery ought to be abolished at some time, the preceding exposition of its nature and relations might be referred to, as sufficient. But there is no need of ar- gument on this point ; or if such argument is needed in some cases, those are not the cases to which this dissertation is partic- ularly addressed. I conclude, therefore, in accordance with the judgment of the civilized world, that slavery ought to be abolished ai some time, because it is \yrong ; and as such, tends to diminish the happi- ness, and impair the virtue and piety of men ; and also to oh- scure the glory of God, and thwart the benevolent ends of his righteous government over the moral universe. 2. Ought those who possess the legitimate pov/^er, to abolish slavery immediately ? Slavery is an institution of man, not of God. It has been shown to be fundamentally unjust and oppressive, and conse- quently, directly opposed to the law of God, and hostile to the best interests of mankind. The obligation to abolish it at any time, arises from the fact of its inherent criminality, and of its inevitable consequences of mischief and misery ; consequences that are a manifest infraction of the law of love, to which the moral universe is subjected. To abolish slavery, is to cease to uphold it by law ; or it may be considered, as comprehending the abrogation of the existing systems of slave-laws, and the enactment of laws forbidding the reduction of human beings to a state of slavery, and the holding of them in it. It is of course the work of the law-making power. If it ought to be done at all, it ought to be done by those who possess that power, either originally as the source of it, or by delegation, as the depositories and agents of the exercise of it, within pre- scribed and constitutional limits. The power to abolish slavery is lodged somewhere ; either with the people collectively, or with their representatives ; in some cases, with the former, and in others, with the latter. Wherever lodged, it is laid under eter- nal responsibilities, for the doing of the greatest possible amount OUGHT SLAVERY TO BE IMMEDIATELY ABOLISHED ? 01 of good, and the prevention of the greatest posssible amount of evil. In the first instance, and during every successive period of its existence, slavery has been the creature of men. Men created it. They sustain it at this moment. The first originators of it were responsible to God and to the universe, for their agency in bringing it forth. Those who now sustain it arc equally respon- sible for the agency they exert in upholding it. The character of slavery cannot be understood without considering it in con- nection with the agents of its support and continuance. Sepa- rate from them, it has no moral character. Considered in its true relations to them, it has been shown both to have a moral character, and to have one which is deeply depraved ; a charac- ter of aggravated wickedness. Those who possess the power to abolish shivery, are, under God, the trustees of the slaves. Tiye execution of their high trust, involves the immediate aboli- tion of slavery. It cannot involve less than this ; for less would not be right ; and less not being right, could not tend to the greatest good ; but in proportion to its defection from strict righ- teousness, would necessarily tend to evil. Righteousness alone is good, and tends to happiness ; sin is evil in all its varieties and degrees, and tends to misery. The reasons for immediately abolishing slavery, may be com- prehended under the following heads : 1. The institution is fundamentally wrong and oppressive. It is not founded in impartial benevolence, but in gross selfish- ness and injustice. That which is wrong cannot be useful even for a time, and we are not allowed by God to do evil, in the vain and delusive hope that good may come. Rom. lii. 8. 2. It ought to be done immediately, because tiie injuries which slavery inflicts are immediate and immense. The insti- tution of slavery is doing constant injury. It maintains an in- cessant and fatal conflict with the interests of immortal minds. Every hour multiplies its injuries at an enormous rate ; adds to the long catalogue of its cruelties and other crimes, and inllicts new wounds on its bleeding victims. Many of those injuries arc remediless. Many of those wounds are incurable. Many of those victims are sacrifictxl to eternal sorrow. The tide of slavery is one of moral desolation and death. It is rolling on with tremendous force, and bearing every moment new victims on its bosom, and inflicting new injuries in its progress. Those clothed by Divine providence witli legitimate authority to say to 92 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. this torrent, " Thus far shalt thou come and no farther ; here shall thy proud waves be stayed, thy moral desolations end ;" stand in the true Thermopylae of freedom and the world. The %ht of Leonidas and his compatriots was but children's play, in comparison with the achievement reserved for them, and placed within their power. There is here a victory to be gained in the cabinet, which is worthy to cast an eternal shade on the most splendid achievements of the battle-field. This achievement is the redemption of millions in the very garden of the world, from the most degrading bondage. It calls for a pure heart, a clear head, unshrinking courage, and a determined purpose. Did Di- vine providence provide a Leonidas and his compeers for the dreadful exigency of an ancient state, when the tide of exorbi- tant and unlawful power was sweeping over it ; did the Almighty lay under contribution the vast accumulations of stores for ele- mental warfare, treasured up in the natural world, in order to the deliverance of the Israelites from the bondage of Egypt? Will not the same Divine providence, the same unaltered and unchangeable Jehovah, nerve with an adequate portion of his strength, enliven with his Spirit, and enlighten with his wisdom, the subjects of this immense responsibility in respect to the abo- lition of slavery, do they but come up to his help against the mighty, with the generous fervor of the true patriot, and the self- denying and self-sacrificing devotion of a far greater than he, the Irue christian? God has never been wanting to the cause of humanity, and in respect to that, he has ever been a God at hand, and mighty to save. He will not be wanting in this case. The obligation to abolish slavery immediately, is not diminish- ed by the fact that it is shared by many, and that many must concur in order to effect the entire and universal abolition of it. It is just as much the duty of the many, as it would be that of a single individual, or of any number however limited, were the power to achieve this end, vested in that individual or that num- ber. The unwillingness of any on whom this work devolves, to co-operate in it, does not diminish either their obligation to unite in doing it, or the obligation of others who share this power, to use it vigorously for the end in question. Unwillingness to dis- charge duty, does not cancel obligation. The argument is this : slavery pours forth a mighty torrent of mischiefs upon mankind. Its victims are numbered by mill- ions even in these United States. Many of its injuries are in- OUGHT SLAVERY TO BE IMMEDIATELY ABOLISHED? 93 calculable and eternal. These are multiplying and increasing every moment. But there ai'e men having ample powers to bind up this dragon, red with the blood of miHions, and still thirsting for more. They can brand him with the mark of Cain, and banish him from the realms of civilization and Christianity. They cannot indeed, repair the mischiefs he has done, or dry up the tears he has wrung from suffering humanity. But they can pluck the infant from his den, and deliver those in the midst of life from being any longer the objects of his cruelty. Shall they bind him and banish him at once and forever ? or shall they let him continue his ravages ? The voice of God, like the noise of many waters, and of mighty thunderings, commands that he be bound, and banished, and allowed no more to afflict the world. He speaks to our hu- manity as men, to our pity as christians, to our personal inter- ests, as yet to be judged and sentenced to endless life or eter- nal death, according as we have exercised kindness and charity, or not, in this sulTcring world. Matt. xxv. 31 — 46. God places us here for the trial and exercise of our benevolence, as well as for that of our faith. On the manner in which we sustain this trial, our own interests for eternity chiefly depend. The interests of others are indeed involved, but not to the extent of our own. Every blow that we strike at the interests of a fellow being, re- turns with redoubled force upon ourselves ; so that, in all the injuries we inflict, whether by the activity of our malice and selfishness, or by the deficiency and sluggishness of our love, we ourselves are chiefly injured, and are ultimately the principal sufferers. 3. Those who have the power, ought to abolish slavery im- mediately, because it may not be in their power to do it at a future time. God invests men with legislative power for the purpose of their doing good with it. Tlie period of its invest- ment in the hands of individuals is short and uncertain. The man that enjoys this investment to-day, may be called to resign it to-morrow. It becomes him, therefore, to do with his might whatever good work his hands find to do. That of abolishing slavery requires his attention more than any other work, depending on the exertion of uncertain powers, on account of the greatness of the interests wiiich it involves, and of its liability to be neglected by others, if it is by him. His neglect to attend to it may induce others to similar neglect 9 94 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. at the same time, and may serve as a precedent for his succes- sors. In this way it may be the cause of irreparable present mischief, and may place an incalculable benefit now attainable, beyond the possibility of future attainment. 4. Slavery ought to be abolished immediately, because the work of abolishing it is easier now than it is hkely to be at any future time. We are authorized to judge of the future by the past. Since the first introduction of slaves to this country, they have been constantly and rapidly increasing. They now amount to more than two millions, and will doubtless continue to increase for years to come. The difficulty of emancipating them, other things being equal, is in proportion to their numbers ; conse- quently it is daily increasing in the ratio of their numerical in- crease. In other respects we possess every advantage at the present time for accomplishing their emancipation and turning it to profitable account, that we can ever hope to possess. The slaves are as well prepared for emancipation as they can ever be. Slavery is incompatible with any considerable de- gree of mental improvement. The key of knowledge and means of improvement are taken away from them, in order to keep them in peaceful subjection as slaves. This severity is not practiced merely for purposes of cruelty, but for those of security on the part of the masters. If it is necessary now, it will continue to be necessary ; and will be a perpetual bar in the way of their improvement while they remain in the condition of slaves. Various other impediments exist in the way of the elevation and improvement of the great mass of them, the re- moval of which it is preposterous to expect, except by the abo- lition of slavery. Here then, is a great work of justice and benevolence to be done at some time. The generation which shall do it, will be the benfactors of millions existing at the time, and will send down the stream of their beneficence, widening and deepening as it flows, to future ages, and to millions on millions yet unborn. This work is not only one of justice and benevolence, but one of necessity and mercy. It can be done now. There is ample power to do it. All that is wanting is a willing mind on the part of a majority of those who have the power. The difficul- ties to be encountered in doing it are indeed great, far greater than they would have been at an earlier period ; but they are OUGHT SLAVERY TO BE IMMEDIATELY ABOLISHED ? 95 less than they will probably ever be again. Will this generation do the work ? Having suifered its difficulties to accumulate with its increasing magnitude thus far, will those who have the power, do the work which it belongs to them to do ; or will they pass it on to a future age, to be done with more difficulty, and with diminished usefulness by other hands ? 5. Another reason for abolishing slavery immediately, is, that the sooner this work is done, the greater will be the probable utility of it. Do it now, and the benotits of it will commence from this time to continue, and probably continue increasing, in all future time while the world shall stand, and while eternity shall endure. Even the difference of a single year is of great consequence in this matter ; that of a generation is inconceiv- ably great. The delay of this work for a year will doubtless change the destiny of many immortal souls forever. The delay of it for an age must be fraught with the most amazing conse- quences of temporal and eternal injury to men. The work of the abohtion of slavery, therefore, above all things demands dis- patch. It is a work of the utmost urgency. 6. The increasing danger of servile insurrections, and other Providential judgments on account of slavery and its accompa- nying sins, is another and strong reason for immediately abolish- ing this institution. The history of other nations and of past ages, is full of ad- monition and warning on these points. The slavery of the an- cients was, in many cases, visited upon them by Divine provi- dence, with terrible retribution. Greece, Rome and other an- cient states, suffered severely from this cause. The Scriptures also inform us, that this was the case with Tyre, Edom, Ammon, Moab, Assyria, Babylon, and the king, doms of Judah and Israel. It may be the case with the United States, unless prevented by speedy repentance and reformation. Tlie extreme sensitiveness of the South on the subject of slave- ry, arises from their apprehensions on this point, and it indi- cates a state of mind and of things, which must be exceedingly uncomfortable. If profound silence would avert the danger, or remove it to any considerable distance, there would be some propriety in the exorbitant demands of many Southern men on this subject. It would be cruel in the extreme to blow upon coals liable to ig- nite of themselves, and capable, under the providence of Clod, of producing the most dreadful explosion, and the most wide-spread 96 DISSERTATION ON SERVITTTDE. ruin among all classes of persons. But the profoundest silence on the part of his friends or of himself, would not purchase se- curity to the adventurer, advancing in darkness and unconcern to the verge of a dreadful precipice. It would not distance for a moment the danger before him, or mitigate in any degree, the final catastrophe. So it is in regard to slavery. This great moral phenomenon continues its progressive development, whether observed or not. Much of its work of mischief, like the guilt of its perpetration, is in secret, and if not seasonably abolished its final catastrophe will, in all probability, burst with surprising suddenness and fury upon the land, and deluge it with dreadful ruin. It is not necessary that a prospective evil should be certain, in order to furnish a reasonable ground for precautionary mea- sures. If the evil apprehended is great and probable, or mere- ly possible at no distant period, it ought to be provided against by the most vigorous and efficient means. Such is at least the fact with the evils of servile insurrections, and other national judgments to be apprehended from slavery. These evils are more than possible at no distant period, they arc altogether probable ; and at the same time, are of a nature the most terrific and in- tolerable. There is no certain means of correcting them but by the immediate abolition of slavery ; to this measure, therefore, as one of protection and self-defence, the supporters of the institu- tion are loudly called. 7. The immediate abolition of slavery is demanded by a due regard to the national honor. In the memorable declaration of our independence, we used as a nation the following language : " We hold these truths to be self-evident : That all men are created equal ; that they are endowed by their Creator with cer- tain unalienable rights ; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ; that whenever any form of govern- ment becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new govern- ment, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness." This declaration has never been revoked ; it is the language of the nation still. In pursuance of these principles, the strug- OUGHT SLAVERY TO BE IMMEDIATELY ABOLISHED? 97 gle of the revolution was prosecuted with glorious success. The yoke of the British crown was declared to be oppressive, and was broken, that we might enjoy the liberty which we claim- ed as our undoubted and unalienaljle right. We ascertained our own rights, and secured them at great expense and hazard. But how have we dealt with our neighbor? Have we loved him as ourselves ? Have we thought the yoke of oppression as ill adapted to his interests as ours ; as galhng to him as to us ? The answer to these questions is found in the humiliating fact, that at the very time of the declaration of our rights, and of the struggle for our independence, we were exercising over men " created free and equal" with ourselves, a degree of oppression, in comparison with which, the oppression that we complained of and resisted as intolerable, was not to be named ; and still more, in the additional fact, that for more than sixty years we have en- joyed the benefits of our blood-bought freedom, during which time the praise of liberty has never ceased, and the course of our prosperity has been one of unrivalled progress, and we have not yet found it in our hearts to proclaim liberty to the captive, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound in the most oppres- §ive servitude, by our authority. Weil may we say wiih the perpetrators of a memorable instance of injustice in ancient times, " We are verily guilty concerning our brother, in that we saw the anguish of his soul, when he besought us, and we would not hear." Gen. xlii. 21. For a pittance of the price at which we purchased our own political independence, we might have procured the redemption of our slaves. But we have not done it, and as a nation are as little inclined to do it now as we ever have been. Slavery is a reproach to any people, but more so to us than to any other, on account of the high ground we have taken in respect to liberty and justice, wherever our own political rights are concerned. Our system of slavery would disgrace the most despotic gov- ernments of Europe and Asia. How much more then is it dis- graceful to ourselves ? And inas; :!uch as we regard the national honor as above all ])rice, and desire to hold it up to the world in the native purity of freedom, untarnished by national crime, we ought to labor for the immediate abolition of slavery. The flag of freedom is deeply dishonored by being made the symbol of bondage to millions of our oppressed fellow countrymen. 9* yW DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. There is at this moment a large and dark stain upon it, which nothing less than the at' 'ition of slavery can wipe away. The grounds which have now been stated, are deemed a firnn support for the doctrine that slavery ought to be immediately abolished. If this doctrine is true, it ought to b^j understood and promulgated. If it is not true, either let the fallacy of the reasonings by which it is supported be pointed out, or let liie con- trary opinion be established. There is no unkindness in urging important practical truth even upon unwilling ears, or in admin- istering deserved rebuke to a slumbering conscience. Such offi- ces are often required, and if the present should prove to have been a case of tliis kind, it will not be a solitary one. To the argument for the immediate abolition of slavery as now submitted, the following objections will occur : 1. That the slaves are incompetent to enjoy liberty with ad- vantage to themselves. 2. That they ai^e incapable of civil government in an emanci- pated state. 3. That their immediate emancipation would produce intoler- able pecuniary embarrassment among the mass of slave-holders, and throughout the country. These objections I will now consider. 1. The imii.ediate abolition of slavery is declared to be im- practicable, on the ground that the slaves are incompetent to enjoy liberty. The liberty referred to in this argument, is deliverance from a state of slavery. It is compatible v> ith a state of apprentice- ship ; of domestic servitude for wages, to which the servant may bind himself for any reasonable length of time, and on any reasonable and equitable conditions ; and of guardianship, to which persons incompetent by immature age or imbecility ari- sing froiJi any other cause, to take care of themselver, may be assigned by the civil authority, in order to their being properly taken care of. With this view of the liberty contemplated, is it true that the slaves are not competent to enjoy liberty ? Are not many of them competent to cnguge as hired servants to the very masters whom they now serve as slaves 1 Are they not competent to hire out as servants in the same departments of industry in which they now labor ? Will there not be a demand for them as hired servants, proportionable to that which now exists for tliem as slaves ? These questions admit only of an affirmative 99 answer. The man who is competent to labor as a slave, is com- petent to do so as a hired servant, in the department of labor to which he is accustomed. It requires no more skill to labor as a hired servant, than it does as a slave. But it is said, that having always been accustomed to work for an absolute master and un- der the lash, they will not be willing to work when delivered from a state of slavery. To this it may be answered : (1.) That the slaves if liberated, would be under the necessi- ty of laboring for their own support and for that of their families. They would have no other means of obtaining a living, even the most meagre. Their wants, therefore, would furnish the most powerful motives to the performance of some degree and some kind of labor. The kind which they would adopt would of com'se be that to which they are accustomed. To the adoption and prosecution of it, they would be impelled not only by their most pressing wants, those which are adapted to influence the mind in the lowest stages of improvement ; but by the desire of wealth, of an improved standing in the community, and a spirit of rivalship, together with the increased and increasing develop- ment of the parental and other social affections. It is impossible that these motives should be entirely ineffective. It is deeply to be regretted that the slaves of the United States, and slaves generally, are shut up in ignorance of letters, and ex- cluded from the various means of improvement afforded to others. But it is greatly in their favor considered as candidates for liber- ty, that they are bred to habits of industry and self-denial. An acquaintance with some branch of industry is of the highest consequence to those who are thrown upon their own resources. That attainment is generally possessed by the slaves, and in con- sequence of it they are far less impotent than many suppose. (2.) Laws may be enacted enforcing habits of industry, by authorizing the civil authority to bind out as a hired servant aiiy person who is found to be without regular employment, and at the same time without a visible supj)ort. Such laws exist in England and in some of the non slave-holding tates of this country. The immediate abolition of slavery might render them necessary to some extent, for the enforcement of industry, subsequent to that event. If a resort to them was necessary, they no doubt might be made an eflicient means of attaining the end in question. (3.) If the natural motives to industry, and legal enactments for the encouragement of the same, should prove iiisuflicient in 100 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. some cases to secure the desired result, and to place the subject beyond the reach of pinching want, the fault would be visited chiefly on the head of the delinquent. As far as that should be the case, no injustice would be done ; and it is better that many should suffer as the consequence of their own faults, than that one should experience injustice and suffer by the faults of others. But wherein are the slaves incompetent to enjoy liberty ; libera- tion from a state of slavery ? Wherein are they unfit to enjoy either perfect liberty, or that of children and apprentices ? Chil- dren are not slaves by virtue of their relation to their parents as children ; apprentices are not slaves by virtue of their relation to their masters as apprentices. What then is the necessity for keeping in slavery those who are now in that condition, so far as their interests and wants are concerned ? The idea of such a necessity is absurd. It may be honestly entertained, but it is in palpable contrariety with the plainest decisions of common sense, and with the general experience of mankind. Slaves are human beings. Injustice and oppression are no more needful to them than to their masters. Their children are in no more need of the discipline of slavery than those of their masters. The state of children, not that of slaves, is best adapt- ed to the development of the intellectual and corporeal faculties of the children of slaves, and to that of their social and religious affections. An equitable condition is the only proper one for older persons. In regard to other portions of the human family, slavery is never supposed to be necessary. The poor, the feeble, the young, the ignorant, and the inexperienced, find other relations and institutions which suit them far better. On the same prin- ciple, the slave may be far better situated than in a state of slaveiy. Other relations and conditions are far better adapted to his necessities and wants as a rational and moral being. 2. The immediate abolition of slavery is declared to be im- practicable, on the ground that the slaves are incapable of civil government in an emancipated state. The government of slaves is an unlimited despotism. They do not enjoy the protection and benefit of those equitable and be- nevolent laws, which the experience of mankind has shown to be necessary in order to secure the administration of justice. The entire government of the slave is in the hands of his mas- ter, and may be administered with mildness or rigor, according as the master is inclined. OUGHT SLAVERY TO BE IMMEDIATELY ABOLISHED ? 101 The abolition of slavery will still leave children and others who are supposed, on legal grounds, to be incompetent to take care o\' themselves, in the care of responsible parents as children, or ehii in a state of apprenticeship, or of subjection to masters as their guardians. Others will generally be employed as free, hired servants, in the different departments of industry to which they are accustomed. Thus situated, the civil authority will enjoy every facility for enforcing the observance of order, and for pro- curing obedience to all reasonable laws. The liberated slaves will not have the means of making effectual resistance, if they were in some cases disposed. The civil and military power of the slave-holding districts will be in the same hands after the abolition of slavery, in which it is now. It will be in every respect as great as it is now, and will admit of being greatly strengthened and increased by the influence ar\d co-operation of such liberated slaves, and other colored persons, as will find it for their interest to support the government. Every motive of interest and duty which can actuate the hu- man mind, will be capable of being put in requisition for the gov- ernment of liberated slaves. Such modes of punishment may be resorted to as the circumstances shall require. If the question related to their capacity for self-government, it would be very different from what it now is. It might, with some plausibilty, be contended, that they are not capable of self- government. If left unassisted to the work of erecting and sus- taining civil institutions, they would be in great danger of prov- ing unequal to such a task. They will not be called to this by the abolition of slavery. Civil institutions, the product of the experience of ages, are already in existence around them. The modification and additions which their liberation from a state of slavery will require, will be but slight, in comparison with the extent of the social edifice as it now stands. The work of making those modifications and additions will naturully devolve on experienced and able statesmen ; some of whom are as much so as any the world contains. There is not wanting, therefore, either the ability or the power requisite for the crisis contem- plated. The question, therefore, is not whether the liberated slaves will be able immediately to construct and support a civil govern njunt, but whether it will be possible to extend over them, and to support among them, a government already established on the firmest earthly basis ; a government of great strength, in consequence of the wisdom, justice, and benevolence of its in- 102 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. ternal conformation ; and every part of which is upheld by the power of all the different states and districts which compose the Union. If liberated from slavery, those who are now slaves will have the greatest interest in supporting the government which liberates them. To that government they will be compelled to look for protection. They will find themselves at once depend- ant upon it for every privilege that is dear and valuable. It will be the charter of their rights. By its authority they will hold both their persons and their property. Their ignorance is not so great but that many at least would learn the importance of this government to their security, both in respect to their persons and property, of which they will become possessors for the first time by the act of emancipation. Some of the slaves would be easily governed. This would be the case with all who are truly pious, and with many who are but partially imbued with the principles of the christian reli- gion. Their religious sentiments and principles would facilitate their control by civil laws. The fear and love of God would incite them to obey the equitable laws and ordinances of man, under which they are providentially placed. Most would be very much under the influence of their masters and employers. All would be influenced more or less by the fear of punishment. Those who, under the influence of these and other motives, would naturally submit to the civil government, would contribute by their example and influence, to promote general submission even among the more refractory. The considerations above suggested certainly go far to prove that the slaves are capable of civil government. They derive, however, additional weight from the following facts : (1.) Multitudes of the human race, equally uninstructed and uninformed, are living in actual and peaceful subjection to civil government. Before the invention of printing, the condition of almost all nations was one of as great ignorance as that of slaves. The peasantry of many countries in Europe are still in almost as great ignorance of letters and other branches of general knowledge, as the slaves ; yet they are the peaceful sub- jects of civil government. If ignorance does not incapacitate other portions of the human family for a state of subjection to civil government, it does not incapacitate slaves for the same. (2. ) The African race are inclined to submission, both by a natural mildness of disposition, by which they are distinguished OUGHT SLAVERY TO BE IMMEDIATELY ABOLISHED? 103 from many other portions of the human family, and by long subjection to slave-holders. (3.) The abolition of slavery would remove the great obsta- cles to their improvement, and open wide to them the door of instruction in common and sabbath schools ; and at the same time it would bring into lively exercise many of those affections favorable to the prosperity and happiness of society, which are yet undeveloped, or developed only in a few cases, and in a slight degree. On the whole, therefore, we have ample ground to conclude that the slaves are capable of civil government ; and that the immediate abolition of slavery is not rendered impracticable by any deficiency in this respect. 3. The immediate abolition of slavery is declared to be im- practicable on the ground that it would produce intolerable pe- cuniary embarrassment among slave-holders, and throughout the country. This objection is a very serious one. It is that on which multitudes chiefly rest in believing that the immediate abolition of slavery is entirely impracticable. The other objections no- ticed, are perhaps most frequently on the tongue, but this is in the heart. The great obstacle to the emancipation of slaves at any time, and in any mode, is the difficulty of reconciling it with the pecuniary interests of their masters. The system of slavery was founded at first, not only in motives of interest, but of self- ishness ; and in them it is strongly intrenched. If slavery is never abolished till every demand of supreme selfishness can be satisfied in its abolition, that event will proba- bly be deferred to a remote period, and be attained by a process sufficiently gradual to satisfy the most moderate reformers. Selfishness demanded the organization of this institution, and now demands its continuance. The same principle makes a great many other demands, contrary to justice and humanity ; but none more so than these. A little consideration, however, will show that the pecuniary embarrassment to be expected from the immediate abolition of slavery, would be fiir less than is sometimes imagined. Slaves are not articles of consumption, either as (bod, clothing, or dwell- ings. Neither are they an exclusive source whence either of these clcisses of useful products are derived. Tiiey constitute only a part of the productive capital, from the improvement of which, the food, clothuig, and other ai'ticles of human consumption in the slave- 104 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. holding districts, are derived ; a portion of wealth, which is use- ful only as a means of producing other kinds of property adapted to supply human wants. The slaves are a principal class of agents in the production of property. They are also, to some extent, consumers, though they are supposed to consume far less than they produce. Their emancipation will not remove them from the districts in which they reside. It will not destroy their powers of pro- duction, considered in relation to the creation of wealth. They will have all the capacity for producing articles of utility after their emancipation, which they have in a state of slavery. There is good reason to believe that their capacities for the production of wealth will be greatly increased by emancipation, rather than diminished. The only difference between their present condi- tion and a state of freedom, so far as the pecuniary interests of their masters can be unfavorably affected, is this ; their labor can now be obtained by their proprietors for less than the market price, its true value ; whereas, if they are liberated, they will become entitled to receive for it the price which it will command in the market. Slave labor costs the proprietors something now. But if emancipation should take place, it would cost them what it is worth. The question under discussion then is this : Can the slave-holding classes afford to pay a fair price to the laborer for his service? Is it impossible for them to take care of them- selves and families without robbing the laborer of his just due ? For all that will be required of them, after the emancipation of their slaves, will be to pay them equitably for their services. The abolition of slavery will not destroy any kind of property but that which consists in slaves. It will not destroy, but in- crease the capacities of producing wealth, which are possessed by slaves. If slavery is abolished, the slave-holders will still have their farms, plantations, shops, dwelling-houses, implements of labor, machinery, &c. They will also have a market well supplied with servants, to be obtained on reasonable terms, for what then- labor is worth. Multitudes could emancipate their slaves, and have enough property left on which to Hve in com- fort, and even in affluence. One consequence of emancipation would be, an increase of the value of most kinds of property. Lands would rise ; various articles of merchandize would meet an enlarged and increased demand. And the greater value of this property would go far to compensate the slave-holding class of the community for their loss by emancipation. In many OUGHT SLAVERY TO BE IMMEDIATELY ABOLISHED ? 105 cases it would compensate them fully. So that the pecuniary- loss from emancipation would be partly, and perhaps to a very great extent made up, by the rise in the value of real estate which would follow that event. A similar result has been recently developed in the West Indies. The idea that society would not be able to survive the catas- trophe of emancipation, on account of the loss of property which would be involved in that event, is absurd and ridiculous. Slaves are not among the necessaries of life. Neither are slave-holders so poor and impotent, and so disqualified for all lucrative pur- suits of every kind, that the loss of what they unrighteously hold £is property, would involve them in irretrievable ruin, and reduce them to inevitable and hopeless distress. Much alarm is undoubtedly felt on this ground. The loss of property which is anticipated from the abolition of slavery, is regarded as a tremendous evil. Dismal forebodings and appall- ing fears are indulged, which a sober estimate of the case will not justify. The man that is panic-struck, or that is laboring under any other enthusiastic excitement, is not the man either to estimate danger properly, or to make wise and judicious ar- rangements with reference to it. But suppose property should be lost ; multitudes in some de- gree impoverished ; and some, a few in comparison with the great mass of slave-holders, reduced to extreme poverty. What then ? Is nothing to be done which involves a loss of property ? Might not the country survive such a shock and recover from it ? Might not many of those persons most injured, retrieve their fortunes, and live in comfort notwithstanding '/ What is the loss of property in a good cause ? Christ who was rich, for our sakes became poor, that we, through his im- poverishment, might be rich. Thousands have taken cheerfully the spoiling of their goods in the service of God. Thousands have been willing to impov- erish themselves in order that they might confer signal benefits on their fellow men. Are there not among slave-holders thou- sands, and tens of thousands, who would be willing to subordi- nate their own pecuniary interests entirely to those of justice and humanity? I cannot think so meanly of that class of men, as not to suppose there are. If our liberties were invaded, no sacrifice of property which might Ix) requisite ibr asserting and defending them, would be considered too great to be made for that purpose. What is still more valuable than property, life 10 106 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. itself, the life of thousands and tens of thousands of patriots, would be freely and promptly sacrificed in such a worthy cause. If we would expend so much for our own liberties and those of our fellow-citizens, shall we begrudge the loss of that property which consists in slaves, as far as it is requisite for their imme- diate emancipation? Shall their emancipation be indefinitely postponed for want of that generous surrender ? Such may be the fact. Persons may be unwilling to suffer the loss of pro- perty by the emancipation of slaves, and on that ground may oppose and prevent their emancipation. But such conduct need not, ought not to be. Generosity, benevolence, and justice, forbid it. When we think of the sacrifice or consumption of property, by doing right and by promoting human happiness, we ought to remember, that these are the very purposes for which property is useful. When property has satisfied rational wants, it has answered its legitimate purpose. Such are the wants to be satisfied by the abohtion of slavery, and by the restoration of men to the possession of themselves. We ought also to remem- ber, that the race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor riches to men of worldly wisdom. Riches are the gift of God. He is able in various ways to resume them. If we refuse to impoverish ourselves when called to do it in the discharge of our duty, God may impoverish us in our sins. Every demand for the surrender of property, which is made by the law and providence of God, he is able to enforce, by blessing and prospering the obedient, and by cursing and rendering unprosperous the disobedient. As far as we practice obedience in respect to duties of this kind, we may expect a greater degree of prosperity than other- wise, in the use of our remaining property ; and as far as we refuse to surrender property at the call of God, we may expect to have it in some way taken from us. Men are seldom the poorer for doing justice ; but often so for committing injustice, with a view to enrich themselves to a greater extent than they can do by honest means. Living under the providence of God, with our fortunes as a nation and as individuals in his hand, and entirely at his disposal ; no man can know that the slave-holding districts of this country, or even the slave-holders, would be the poorer for the immediate emancipation of their slaves. It would be easy for God to di- minish their prosperity while slavery continues, to such a degree OUGHT SLAVERY TO BE IMMEDIATELY ABOLISHED ? 107 that they will be losers by liolding on to their slaves ; and to in- crease it, if slavery should be abolished, to such a degree, that they would loose nothing by that event. In our calculations on this subject, we ought to remember, that God is the God of the oppressed, and that it will not be a new thing, should lie espouse their cause, and tread down their oppressors with indignation ; or should he bestow unusual benefits on those oppressors made penitent, in consequence of their repentance and reformation. Besides, in estimating the effect of the immediate abolition of slavery on the pecuniary interests of the great mass of slave- holders, we ought to consider chiefly their permanent interests ; not those of a year, but of a series of years, and even of gener- ations to come. Not our temporary, but our permanent inter- ests, are the great interests about which we ought to be chiefly concerned. Those which are merely temporary, ought, in all cases, to be subordinated to those which are })ermanent. The object of the accumulation of wealth is future use, not im- mediate consumption. A large proportion of the acquisitions of the present generation, are designed for that to come, and for still more remote posterity. What then would be the elfect of the immediate abolition of slavery, on the pecuniary interests of slave- holders, and of the present slave-holding communities, consider- ed in relation to the next fifty or a hundred years ? If it should produce a temporary reduction of their property, and temporary embarrassment, would it not also be attended with an ultimate and permanent reaction in their favor, which would more than compensate them for this temporary injury ? No man can know that it would not ; and there are important reasons lor believing that it would. As a general rule, honesty is the best policy. Though a man may be a gainer by single acts of dishonesty, yet the habit of being dishonest, considered in relation to a series of years, and to the period of human life, is almost universally un- profitable and disastrous. So it may be in regard to slavery. In partiular cases, and to a certain extent, a man may be a gainer by holding his fellow men in slavery. But like other species of dishonesty, this is decidedly unprofitable, considered in relation to the whole period of life, and to the whole pecuniary interests of society. As a general rule, the slave-holding dis- tricts are less wealthy and prosperous, in proportion to the nat- ural advantages which they possess for the ac(]uisition of wealth, than those which adopt the other and e([uitable modes of servitude. The dilTerencc in this respect, in favor of those which arc without 108 DISSERTATION ON SERVITUDE. slavery, is manifest and striking ; and ought to be taken into the ^ present account. If, however, the immediate abolition of slavery should be found by experiment too expensive an enterprise to be carried through by the slave-holding districts unassisted, a sympathizing world would be ready to afford them whatever assistance they should need. I have now argued in favor of this enterprize on the ground, that it would not prove so expensive as is generally feared, and that the expense of it would be easily borne by the slave- holding communities themselves. Again, on the supposition that the expense were ever so great, and the temporary embarrass- ment occasioned by this procedure ever so considerable, I have still argued, and I hope maintained, that the work ought to be done, on the same principle that we would barter both our lives and property for our own liberties, and those of our children. Lastly, I have placed the cause on a different and broader ground, as one that ought to be attempted at every hazard, and that will command the benevolent assistance of the civilized world to carry it forward to a happy result, rather than that it should fail for want of the pecuniary means of effecting it. On the whole, it appears that the objections now considered, do not at all invalidate the conclusion to which they are opposed, and that the position, that slavery ought to be immediately abol- ished, receives additional strength i'rom the consideration of these objections. Divine Redeemer, Thou who desirest truth and honesty in the soul, and who art the only source of wisdom, shine forth ; and let the writer and every reader of these pages, enjoy the blessedness of doing justice, loving mercy, and walking humbly with our God. 4-1950 ^LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 'lllfliififM 1 '' iH/iiliJIil 011 899 702 5 1 I i i i ill ii 1 m