E 446 .D88 1840 Copy TREATISE ON SLAVERY. IN WHICH IS SHOWN FORTH THE EVIL OF SLAVEHOLDING FROM THE LIGHT OF NATUREIAND DIVINE REVELATION. BY JAMES DUNGAN. Columbia, speak ; let slavery's dirge be sung Wide o'er the world, the joyful sound begun : Shall bid the age of crime and suffering cease, And hail the dawn of freedom and of peace. Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them ; for this is the law and the prophets."— Matt. \ii. 12. . VEVAY: PRINTED AT THE 'INDIANA REGISTER' OFFICE. 1824. NEW. YORK : RE-PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY, 143 NASSAU STREET. 1840. i ■1* ix^ 5 1 Copy |. /i--- INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW-YORK EDITION. The author of this work was the Rev. James Duncan, a learn- ed and faithful minister of the Gospel in Indiana, and father of the Hon. Alexander Duncan, now member of Congress from Cin. cinnati. It is a matter of regret, that a letter from the West, con- taining some further particulars respecting the author and his la- bors, has been mislaid and cannot be found. However, the work will speak for itself, wherever it shall be read, and will show its author to have been a man of uncommon powers of reasoning, and of uncommon clearness of vision, for his day, on the subject of slavery and abolition. The work was first published, as the title imports, at Vevay, in the state of Indiana, in the year 1824, and was accompanied by the following RECOMMExMDATION : This treatise has been highly recommended by several gentle- men of Kentucky and Indiana — the publisher selects, for the pre- sent, the following letter from Jesse L. Holman, Esq. one of the judges of the supreme court of Indiana, a gentleman well known to the citizens of this and the neighboring States. " I have been favored, for a few hours, with the manuscript of a ' Treatise on Slavery,' by the Rev. James Duncan, and from a hasty perusal of the greater part of its contents, and the well known abilities of the author, I conceive it to be executed with a depth of thought and force of argument, that well deserves the attention of all inquirers after moral truth, and justly merits the patronage of the public." (Signed) Jesse L. Holman. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION. Of the moral law. ..*...... 7 Of the law of nature 8 CHAPTER I. 1. Slavery defined. 13 Appendages of Slavery, 14. CHAPTER II. 2. History of servitude. . . . . ... 15 The Antediluvians, 15— Nimrod, 16— Abraham, ib.— Egypt, 17 — Jewish, 18— The Golden Rule, 21— The Gibeonites, 23. CHAPTER III. 3. Slaveholding a heinous sin. 25 The Moral Law, 25— Moral Law Contradictory, 27— God's Great End, ib. — Requires Sin to Sustain it, 28 — Obstructs the Means of Grace, 29 — Against Natural Rights, 30 — Against Relative Duties, 31 — The First Commandment, 32 — The Second Com- raandment, 33 — The Third Commandment, 35 — The Fourth Commandment, 36 — The Fifth Commandment, 37 — The Sixth Commandment, 39 — The Seventh Commandment, 41 — The Eighth Commandment, 42 — The Ninth Commandment, 47 — The Tenth Commandment, 48 — The Right of all Men to the World, 49 — Against Mercy to the Poor, 51 — Opposed to Repub- licanism, 53 — Hurtful to Masters and Slaves, 54 — Brings Na- tional Judgments, 59 — At War with the Church, 60 — Makes God a Slave, 63 — Unjust towards God, 65 — Against Infant Bap. tism, 66 — Against all Laws, Divine and Human, 67 — Produces 1* vi CONTENTS. Partiality in Trials, 68— Violates the Rights of Conscience, 69— Will not admit of Prayer, 73— The Slaveholder's Prayer, 76— Hinders the Success of the Gospel, 78. CHAPTER IV. Arguments in favor of slavery 79 CHAPTER V. The arguments from Scripture. . . . '. .87 CHAPTER VI. The example of Christ 94 CHAPTER VH. Of the duty of a slave to his master. . ... 97 CHAPTER IX. Arguments in favor of slavery 103 CHAPTER X. Of the real condition of slaveholers in relation to the JUSTICE OF God. l05 CHAPTER XI. Of the duty of Christians relative to slavery. . , 107 Soliloquy for a Dying Slaveholder, 115. CHAPTER XII. Practical improvement 118 Gradualism, 123— Conclusion, 124~The Negro, 126. APPENDIX. Laws of Kentucky and Virginia relative to Slavery, 128 — Reply to Mr. Harris, 133 — A Method Proposed to prevent any Dangerous Consequences from a General Emancipation of the Slaves, 135 —Note, 136, PREFACE The object of the present work, is not so much to render ob- noxious the cruel treatment of slaves, as to discuss the principle of slaveholding, and to show forth the iniquity of the practice. The cruel treatment of slaves has been often exposed to public view, by many able hands, who have also by judicious argu- ments refuted the most specious apologies that have been ad- vanced in favor of the principle. Yet, that the principle or mo- ral ground upon which slavery is practiced in the world, has been too lightly touched by modern writers, is manifest from two concessions, which most of them appear to admit. The first is, that slavery was authorized by the judicial law under the Old Testament. The second is, that the emancipation of slaves need not to be sudden, but gradual, lest the possessors of them should be too much impoverished, and lest the free inhabitants might be exposed to danger, if the blacks were all liberated at once. If the first of these concessions is admitted as just, namely, that if slavery in its present form was allowed of under the Old Testament, the practice may be defended under the New, be- cause every precept of the judicial law, must have liad the mo- ral law for its basis, so as in no respect to contradict it. If then slavery in its present form was morally just under the Old Tes- tament, it must be just under the New, for the moral law is as unchangeable as God himself. If the second of these concessions is just, to wit : the emanci- pation of slaves ought not to be sudden, but gradual, to prevent the penal evils of°poverty and other distresses which might accrue to the inhabitants in general ; it will go to justify the practice of slaveholding, because the only motive that men can have to practice slavery, is that itmay be a means of preventing poverty and other penal 'evils. If the fear of poverty or any penal sufferings will exculpate the possessors of slaves from blame, for a few months or years, it will do it for life ; and if some may be lawfully held to labor without wages, all may be Vlll PREFACE. held the same way ; and if the principle of slavery is morally wrong, it ought not to be practiced to avoid any penal evil, but if just, even the cruel treatment of slaves would not condemn the practice. The subject then which at this time calls forth the utmost exertions of the friends of humanity, is the great crimi- nality of slaveholding, or to shew the extreme guilt of that man who occupies the office and station of a slaveholder although he should treat his slaves with the utmost humanity as slaves. Agreeable to these remarks, the following treatise will be intro- duced with an inquiry concerning the moral law, considered as the law of nature, which binds all men to act conformably to its precepts, and condemns every practice or habit, that is not in every respect agreeable to its dictates. Then, in order to pre- pare the subject for an impartial examination, will be given a definition of slavery, with a delineation of the office and power of a slaveholder. If any reader should feel disposed to call in question the correctness of those definitions, let him suspend his judgment till he turns over to the appendix at the close of this work, where he will find some extracts from the laws of Ken- tucky and Virginia relative to slaves, which will prove those definitions to be perfectly correct. This attempt to overthrow the principle of slavery will consist of some abstract demonstrations, and some plain scriptural argu- ments. Those of the abstract kind will be twenty-nine in num- ber, every one of which, it is hoped, if carefully examined, will be found to be conclusive. One argument, if fair and just, is sufficient to establish a position, with an enlightened and unpre- judiced mind ; but when we consider that many readers are the opposite of both, a subject may be of that importance, as to re- quire all the collective force of argumentation that can be mus- tered to lead such to conviction. As the subject of slavery is of the highest importance, and deeply concerns the temporal and eternal states of men, it merits the greatest attention, and will call for a proportional degree of demonstration, both from scrip- ture and abstract principles, to convince the guilty of its crimi- nality. The design of this work is to persuade all that are engaged in the business of holding their fellow creatures in a state of unme- rited involuntary slavery, that they are guilty of a crime, not only of the highest aggravation, but one, that if persisted in, will ine- vitably lead them to perdition. INTRODUCTION In attempting to justify or condemn any act or practice, it cannot be amiss, in tlie first instance, to ascertain whether the matter of the thing required or forbidden, is moral or indifferent. If it is moral, it cannot be optional with us either to do it or not. For example : speaking' truth is moral and not indifferent, therefore it cannot be optional with us to either speak truth or falsehood ; but the moral law binds us to speak truth, every man to his neighbor. If the matter of the thing be indifferent, as that of eating certain kinds of food, it may be either right or wrong, according to the circumstances. If the practice of slaveholding is of a moral nature, and not indifferent, the rule by which we are to judge of it must be the moral law, and not either human laws, cu'stoms, habits, temporal ease, peace or safety. That slaveholding, whether right or wrong, is moral and not indifferent, there can be no dispute ; every person, then, who is seriously disposed to know his duty relative to the prac- tice, will compare it with the moral law, and form his judgment by that unerring rule ; and any one attempting to investigate the subject, with a design to either justify or condemn it, must take the moral law for his chief guide. This method we shall adopt ; that is, to open up the nature of the moral law% and lay it down as the foundation or rock upon which we purpose the following scheme of argumentation shall rest. OF THE MORAL LAW. The great end for which God made man was, that he should glorify God and enjoy him forever. By God's end in making man, we are to understand the proper motive to which he di- rected him by his law, and made it his indispensable duty and great privilege to attain. The rule which God gave to man when he created him, and which still binds him to glorify and enjoy him forever, is called the moral law. The moral law is a transcript of the divine cha- racter ; it forbids all sin, as being contrary to the holy nature of God, and binds all men to the performance of every duty relat- ing to God, and every duty relating to men. INTRODUCTION. OF THE LAW OF NATURE. The moral law is called the law of nature, because it origin- ated in the will of God, was made known to man in his primi- tive state by a divine impression of it on his soul, and revealed in the great book of nature, which book of nature is no other than God's works of creation and providence, representing to the minds of mankind the relations in which they stand to God as his dependent creatures, and the various relations in which they stand to one another ; all w^hich show forth the will of God as a rule that binds mankind to perform all relative duties vrhich they owe to God, and all relative duties which they owe to one another. For example — God's creating us, his preserving us, and giving us rain and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness, are moral reasons why we should glorify his name. And the relations of husbands and wives, parents and children, show the reciprocal obligations such persons are under to perform relative duties ; and the necessary dependence of mankind upon one another as equals, for mutual protection, lays them under obliga- tions to aiford mutual protection to one another. The moral law made known to man in the book of nature, and more perfectly in the volume of Divine revelation, corres- ponds exactly with the relations which God has established be- tween himself and his creatures, and with all the relations which he has established among his creatures ; yea, these relations are so essential to the existence of moral obligations, that they are the very foundation of it ; so that God's word as a written rule, when it requires duties that are purely moral, binds mankind only to the performance of such duties as arise out of these re- lations. Neither would it be consistent with the Divine charac- ter to require any acts of obedience from his creatures, which would contradict these relations that he has established. God has a sovereign right to form new relations, which might occa- sion new obligations to duty ; — but no new relations made to ex- ist, and authorised by God, will ever be allowed to destroy or counteract the natural relations which he has already establish- ed,''or to prevent the duties which arise from them. If the re- lations which God has made to exist between himself and his creatures were to cease, and all those which he has made to ex. ist among his creatures were dissolved, all moral obligation would be at an end. Every sin or criminal act of any subject of the moral law, is an attempt to destroy some one or more of these relations ; to prevent which, civil penalties have been ap- pointed, and although such penalties do in some instances dis- solve natural relations, yet the ultimate end of such penalties is to protect the innocent in the peaceable enjoyment of them. ^^^ INTEODUCTION. XI The fall of man occasioned a new relation to exist among mankind, which is that between civil rulers and their subjects. The ultimate end of civil government is the suppression of vice and the protection of the innocent, or in other words, to estab- lish and defend these relations which subsist between God and his creatures, and the natural relations which exist among his creatures, but in no respect to change or dissolve them. So sure as God has established these immutable relations, and has obliged his creatures to act agreeable to his will in their several relations, he must have granted inalienable rights to them, corresponding with their several relations and reciprocal obliga. tions to duty ; as the right to worship and serve God without being hindered by man, or any human authority, and the right of all conjugal, parental, and fihal duties. Therefore, every law of man that contravenes those relations, and intercepts the right of doing any of those duties which naturally arise out of these relations, must be at war with the rights of man, and in open rebellion against the law of God. Civil power in the hands of civil rulers, v/hcre they are not usurpers, is delegated to them from the people, who are the pro- per constituents of civil government. The people, prior to that delegation, have a right as individuals, and unorganised, to sup- press crimes by punishing the guilty and protecting the inno- cent ; but those duties, which would be very inconvenient for them to do in an unorganised state, or in their individual capaci- ty, they, in constituting a civil government, delegate to repre- sentatives to perform in their name. But in this delegation they do not relinquish their rights, but only employ agents to do for them what would be inconvenient to do themselves. The general rights of men may be distinguished into two classes. 1. Such as are capable of delegation. 2. Such as are incapable. Those rights which are capable of delegation, are the rights of protecting the innocent and punishing the guilty. These rights which are incapable of delegation are these private rights which have been defined, the defence and protection of which is the proper end of civil government ; such as the right to serve God agreeable to his will, and according to the relations in which they stand to hira, and the rights of private rela- tive duties which they owe to one another, as the duties of husbands to wives, and wives to husbands, parents to children, and children to parents. Mankind cannot deleofate to representa- tives or to others their own rights of duty to God, nor their own right to perform those private relative dutier, that they owe to one another, which have been described. If mankind, then, have no power to delegate to others their private rights, it would be still more unreasonable to attempt to delegate from their children the same rights, and equally unreasonable to attempt it with others that are not their children or descendants. There- fore, all mankind have an inalienable right to serve God accord- Xll INTEODUCTION. ing to the relation in which they stand to him, and an inaliena- ble right to do all relative duties lo one another, without being hindered by any human authority, which rights imply all the characteristics ot freemen, considered as subjects of civil gov- ernment. In contending for freedom, in opposition to slavery, we design to plead for no more than those rights of duty to God, and rights of relative duties which mankind owe to one another. These views of the rights of man, are by no means at vari- ance with a man's right to transfer to another his personal free- dom, as regpects his labor, for a time, or for life, which any man may sell as well as his other propertjr, but it will condemn any attempt to sell his right of duty to God, or any private relative duties which he owes to mankind, both of Vw'hich are inalien- able. Query.— Whether the civil law of any government can be the supreme rule of duty 1 Answer 'The supreme rule of duty must be the moral law, but not the civil law, neither ought civil requisitions to be re- garded, if found to be contrary to the moral law. If the civil law was the supreme i-ule, it would not admit the moral law to iiave any authority, further than it might be made subservient to the civil law. 2. It would suppose a people prior to their political constitu- tion, or to the existence of civil law among them, tp be without law ; and that the representatives of a nation, while framing a constitution, and making laws to be above and out of the reach of all law, both divine and human, so as to have no moral rule to bind them, to make the constitution and laws good and just. 3. It would suppose the people to be obliged to adopt that constitution, and submit to the laws, however cruel and tyrannical. 4. It would suppose every constitution and laws, made by re. presentatives, to be perfectly just, and the representatives them- selves to be infallible men, for as sure as we admit a civil rule to be wrong, it supposes a law of higher authority which de- nounces it wrong. Or if we admit that representatives are fal- lible men, it supposes a law that they are liable to transgress in instituting civil laws, which can be none other than the moral Jaw. Therefore the civil law cannot be the supreme rule of duty to any people, but the supreme rule of duty is the moral law, which is before every law, and is that eternal and un- changeable rule, which is binding upon all men, to which every human law ought to be conformed, or else it is sinful. Says Cicero — " There is not one moral law for Rome, another for Athens, and another for Sparta, but one moral law is equally binding on all nations." These fundamental principles being laid down, we shall at* tempt an investigation of the subject proposed. SLAVERY In discussing this subject it will be proper, I. To define slavery. II. To give a brief history of servitude in general. III. Show, by a course of argumentation, that slave- holding is condemned by the word of God, and contrary to the law of nature ; and, IV. Try to point out the duty of both emancipators and others in relation to the practice. CHAPTER L I. SLAVERY DEFINED. By slavery we do not intend such servants as might voluntarily bind or indenture themselves for any term, or for life, nor the subjects of kings or princes, who are fre- quently called servants, nor such servants as might bind themselves for any term ; nor do we intend soldiers, who are often called servants, nor those who may have been or may be condemned for certain crimes and sold for servants, nor those who might have agreed to have been sold for a term of years, to pay their passage from one country to another, nor such as were taken prisoners in war and sold for slaves during life, which it appears was customary in ancient eastern countries, and among the 14 SLAVERY DEFINED. Greeks were called, servants under the 5^oke. But by slavery, we mean that of involuntary, unmerited, perpetual, hereditary slavery, without any conditions or limitations, or supposed crimes to be a legal cause for that involun- tary slavery. By slaves we mean such beings of the human race as are, with their offspring, to perpetual gen= erations, considered as PROPERTY; compelled by superior force, unconditionally to obey their owners, liable to be given and received ; to go and to come ; to marry or forbear ; to be separated when married ; to eat, drink, sleep, labor, and be beaten at the discretion of their mas- ters ; this is slavery. With slaveholders we do not class all that have the persons of slaves in their power, for some have them that are making conscience of educating them, and are dis- posed at some future time to set them at liberty. Others may not have come to a full discovery of the sin of hold- ing slaves, yet are laying their minds open to conviction, and are striving, by reading, meditation, and prayer, to know their duty relative to the business of slavery. A real slaveholder is one who not only has the persons of slaves in his power, but has a full determination to retain them in bondage, and to bequeath them and their poster, ity to his succeeding heirs. By a slaveholder we mean one who has a power, without any control of man, to con- travene all the preceptive obligations of the divine law relative to the slave, to intercept and prevent all the rela- tive duties which he owes to God and to his relations and neighbors. In short, it is a power over all those private inalienable rights and relative duties, which no civil au- thority upon earth has either a right to tolerate or prevent. It is no just objection to this definition of a slaveholder's power, that the laws of some slave states will punish the man who kills his slave, because the same law admits him to exercise all that unlimited power which has been de- scribed, while the slave is alive, but takes no cognizance of his case till after he is killed. APPENDAGES OF SLAVERY. There are three things which are not in every possible case essential to the being of slavery, yet are essential to HISTORY OF SERVITUDE. 15 its permanent existence, and to the stability of that gov- ernment which authorises slavery. The first is, thai the slaves must be kept in a state of ignorance of every spe- cies or branch of literature, to prevent them from being able to plead their right to freedom, and to prevent them from contriving any successful methods to escape from bondage. The second is, the necessity of all slaves being out- lawed, or excluded from the privilege of bearing testimony in any court, for or against any free man. This lays them open to all possible abuses which human depravity might suggest, and in particular subjects the female slaves to the lawless will of the master, to become his prostitutes at discretion. The third thing is, that in the economy of slavery, no respect can, in ordinary cases, be had to any relation, nor to private relative duties ; but the authority of the master comes in prior to any relative obligation. Though some masters may permit their slaves to live with their relations, and allow them the exercise of some relative duties, yet all these rights and privileges are liable to be suspended at the discretion of the master. CHAPTER II. HISTORY OF SERVITUDE. II. A brief history of servitude. THE ANTEDILUVIANS. The first intimation of slavery is in Genesis vi. 11. " The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence." The business of slavery is not here mentioned, but it seems to be implied in the general expression. The earth was filled with violence, which is again repeated in the 18th verse. Violence signifies a forcible usurpation of power over the rights of others, which may imply either the right of property, or liberty, or both. As slavery is the highest degree of usurpation, and violence was the crying sin of that age, we have good 16 HISTORY OF SERVITUDE. reason to believe that it was one capital ingredient of that enormous guilt which brought upon them the greatest stroke of divine vengeance that ever befel the human race since the fall of Adam. NIMROD. The next intimation is in Gen. x. 8. " And Cush begat Nimrod : he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord ; vvdierefore it is said, even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord : and the beginning of his kingdom was Babel," &;c. Nimrod is not here literally termed a slaveholder ; but he is represented as a cruel tyrant, whose business was that of hunting and enslaving mankind, even as slave traders do the Africans. ^ ABRAHAM. In the history of Abraham, we have accounts or ser- vants, but no account of slaves. Gen. xiv. 14. " He armed his trained servants, born in his house, three hun- dred and eighteen." That these were not slaves, but only common servants, is evident from their being trained to the use of arms, which was quite inconsistent with the condition of slavery. Secondly. The age of Abraham was so recent a period from the universal deluge, that mankind were not all or- ganized into political governments ; so that patriarchal government was then necessary, which was no other than that of the great arid wealthy presiding over, governing and defending such of the poorer class as were disposed to put themselves under their protection, to be their safe- guard against lawless bands which might be disposed to live by plunder. That Abraham was one of those patri- archal rulers is evident from ch. xxiii. 6. " Hear us, my lord, thou art a mighty prince among us ; in the choice of thy sepulchres bury thy dead." This may be compared with the history of Job, as another example of patriarchal government, chapter xvii. Abraham was commanded to circumcise all born in his house, or bought with his money : but this command, instead of recognizing the kwfuhiess of slaveholding, is pointedly against it. It first HISTORY OF SERVITUDE. 17 supposes it lawful to purchase men for servants, which under peculiar circumstances is always lawful. 2d. In- stead of riveting the chains of involuntary, unmerited, hereditary slavery upon them, they were to be circum- cised, and thereby made members of the same church with their masters, and so made to have a right to the same privileges, both civil and ecclesiastical, which be- longed to the Jews ; one of which was exemption from a state of slavery ; and this covenant obligation upon Abraham and his posterity to perpetual generations, ab- solutely precluded perpetual hereditary slavery from ever existing in the Jewish nations. EGYPT. The next account we have in scripture of servitude was that of Israel's bondage in Egypt, which was notconriplete slavery, neither was it to be compared to that which is practised in these United States, or in the West Indies. The Israelites were subject to cruel oppression in Egypt, but they had the privilege of residing on their own premises in the land of Goshen ; and of domestic comfort with their own families, without being sold and scattered far away from each other. They also had their own individual property, as flocks and herds, and meat and drink in abun- dance, as appeared from their murmurings and expressions of regret for leaving the land of Egypt. Exodus xvi. 3. "And the children of Israel said unto them, would to God that we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the flesh pots, and where we had bread to the full." This was said on the fifteenth day of the second month, after they left Egypt, so that it was a matter fresh in their memories. Their bondage did not consist in being the private property of individuals through- out the nation, but in being subject to the arbitrary power of a tyrant, who had dominion over their bodies and lives at his pleasure ; and although he did not hold them all at once in a state of actual servitude, yet he had carried on a constant practice of levying a tribute of laborers from among them, to be employed in mortar and brick, and in building store cities for Pharaoh, and were liable to be beaten and abused while employed in the service of the 2* i 18 HISTORY OF SERVITUDE. public. These, together with the murder of their male children for a time, were the principal ingredients of that bondage which Israel suffered in Egypt, which all taken together were less intolerable than that complete slavery which is now practised in the United States. JEV\riSH. The next account of servitude is in Leviticus xxv. 44-46. " Both thy bondmen and bondmaids which thou shalt have shall be of the heathen that are round about you, of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover, of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you which they begat in your land, and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession ; they shall be your bondmen forever." From this citation it is evident that servitude was admitted among the Jews, but it was materially different from modern slavery. As first — They were to be purchased from the heathens round about them, and neither stolen or taken by force. 2d — They were liable to be emancipated as soon as they com- plied with the ordinances of circumcision, and if they did not comply with that rite, their children must of necessity have been free at the ordinary time of native Jews, because all the Jews were bound to circumcise all that were born in their houses, or bought with their money, in consequence of which they became Jews, who could not be retained in bondage more than six years. 3d — If such as were pur- chased in an adult age, refused to comply with the ordi- nance of circumcision, they were only subject to servitude until the year of jubilee ; but in that case their bondage did not entail the same to their posterity. That all servants among the Jews in every age were initiated into the Jew- ish church by circumcision, is as clearly revealed in the word of God, as any one truth it contains. Gen. xvii. 10. " This is my covenant which ye shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee. Every man child among you shall be circumcised — verse 12 ; and he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house or bought HISTORY OF SERVITUDE. 19 with money of any stranger which is not of thy seed — verse 13. He that is born in the house or he that is bought with thy money must needs be circumcised, and my covenant s'^hall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant." Secondly. — Circumcision entitled every subject of that ordinance to eat the passover, which supposes his initiation into the Jewish church and nation to be indisputable — Exo- dus, xii, 23. "And the Lord said unto Moses and Aaron, this is the ordinance of the passover ; there shall no stran- ger eat thereof, but every man servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof; a foreigner and an hired servant shall not eat thereof." Thirdly.— 'No Hebrew could be in servitude longer than six years. Exodus, xxi. 2,—" If thou buy an Hebrew ser- vant six years shall he serve, and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing." Compared with Deut. xv, 12. If then circumcision made every servant bought with mo- ney a Jew, and no Jew would be retained in servitude more than six years, the unavoidable consequence must be, that there could be no perpetual involuntary servants among the Jews. The whole argument runs thus : All Jews were bound to circumcise all born in their houses, or bought with money ; circumcision made every one who was a subject of circumcision a Jew. No Jew could be a servant longer than six years, except he was so of choice. Therefore there could be no perpetual servants under the Jewish dispensation. The expression, "ye shall take them for an inheritance for your children after you," means that the same persons thus purchased of the heathen around them were not to be made free at the death of the purchaser, but were bound to serve their children. The last words, they shall be your bondmen forever, can only mean until the year of jubilee, which may be evinced from two reasons, al- though the phrase forever, and the word ever (in scripture) most certainly signifies an endless duration ; yet it is sometimes used in a limited sense, as to the time of the Old Testament. Leviticus xviii. 1 5. To the year of jubi- lee, Deut. XV. 17, to man's life time, 1st Samuel i. 22. 20 HISTORY OF SERVITUDE. It signifies a long indefinite time, Joshua ii. 7, The sense of the word ever, or forever, may be known by the particular duration of that thing to which the expression is applied. Thus it signifies an endless duration, when it is used to express the duration of the saint's happiness in heaven, because the saints will eternally exist,, and to express the duration of hell's torments, because the wicked will eter- nally exist. When it means only a temporary duration, it has a relation to some period which will necessarily have an end, and signifies that entire period. Thus it is sometimes used to express the duration of some blessing or privilege, properly restricted to the old testament dispensation, when it signifies the whole time of that dispensation, so a man's state of servitude was said to be forever, when it meant that it should continue until the year of jubilee, though it must of necessity have terminated with the period, in which case the temporary duration of that period deter- mines the sense of the expression forever, shews it to be temporary and not eternal. That the expression (bondservant forever) means only a temporary duration will further appear from God's aim in appointing the ordinance of jubilee, which was to give lib- erty to all that were in bondage. Lev. xsv. 10. " And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof, it shall be a jubilee unto you, and ye shall return every man unto his own famil3^" Josephus, who had a better right to know the latitude to which the jubilee extended than any other ancient writer of which we have any knowledge, expressly says that it exten'ded to slaves. — =■ (See his Antiquities, page 73, quarto.) Secondly. That the expression forever, was limited by^the jubilee, is evident from the application of the phrase in other places. Lev. xxv.39 — 40. " And if thy broth* er that dvvelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee, thou shall not compel him to serve thee as a bond servant, but as an hired servant, as a sojourner ; he shall be with thee and serve thee until the year of jubilee." But the person that is here said to serve until the year of jubilee is called a servant forever. Exodus XXI. 2. 7 — Deut. xv. 12, 17. Objection. If no servant HISTORY OF SERVITUDE. 21 could be compelled to serve more than six years after be- ing circumcised, what classes of servants were bound to serve until the year of jubilee? Ans. Such Jewish ser- vants as refused freedom at the expiration of six years' ser- vice, and such of the heathen as refused to be received into the Jewish church by circumcision, and such as were convicted of crimes, which last is attested by Josephus. THE GOLDEN RULE. Among the Jews, agreeable to the nature and circum- stances of servitude, as it has now been defined, the golden rule laid down by Jesus Christ, might have been applied in its fullest latitude by both masters and servants. '* In all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." This will appear from the peculiar circumstances of their condition. 1st. Servants bought of the heathen were most apt to be captives taken in war, or persons convicted of crimes ] but none were kidnapped, because the man-thief and the receiver were both condemned to suffer death by the law of Moses. 2d. The heathen nations around the Jews were all ci- vilized, and existed under organized governments, and- could have no temptations to kidnap and sell their own people, except such as were legally convicted of crimes, or captives taken in war. 3d. Though servants from among the heathen were liable to be some captives, some convicts, others debtors, their condition was made better by becoming servants to the Jews, because they were ad- mitted to all the .privileges of the Jewish church as soon as they were prepared for it. 4th. If they did not com- ply with the rite of circumcision, yet their children were made free by circumcision, while they, viz. their parents, were to be made free at the jubilee. But that which rendered their servitude quite tolerable, was the law of God which regulated the government of servants. Ex. xxi. 26. <• If a man smite the eye of his servant or the eye of his maid, that it perish, he shall let him go for his eye's sake. And if he smite out his man servant's tooth or his maid servant's tooth he shall let him go for his tooth's sake." The rule which obliged a master to lib- erate his servant for sake of an eye or a tooth, would do 22 HISTOEY OF SERVITUDE. equally the same in any case of maiming or dismember- ing of the body, verse 20. " And if a man smite his ser- vant or his maid with a rod, and he die under his hand he shall surely be punished." That this punishment was death is manifest from Lev. v. 22. *' Notwithstanding if he continue a day or two he shall not be punished, for he is his money." Wilful murder was only punishable by death according to the divine law. Therefore if the Servant corrected with the rod was to continue a day or two, it would shew that his master in correcting him had no design to kill him, more especially as the servant was his money, he could have no motive to take his life. 2dly. To prevent severe treatment, and secure a com- fortable living to bond servants, the law of God absolute- ly prohibited all persons from taking up a servant mere- ly for running away from his master. Deut. xxiii. 15. *'Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant who is escaped from his master unto thee ; he shall dwell with thee, even among you in that place which he shall choose — in one of thy gates where it liketh him best : thou shalt not oppress him." 3dly. All bond servants, hirelings and sojourners amongst the Jews, had all the profits arising from their lands every seventh year which would be very consider- able, Lev. XXV. 1, 7, which taken in connection with all other circumstances of alleviation prevented their servi- tude from meriting the name of slavery. From the view now taken of servitude amongst the Jews, it is evident that although they had bondmen and bond maids, there were no slaves allowed among them. And it may be added that the small degree of bondage which was authorized, was in virtue of a positive revela- tion of God's will, and was peculiar to the Jewish econo- my, and not morally binding on all nations ; should any inquire why it was suited to the Old Testament, and not to the New, it may be answered there were necessary duties, to be performed by the members of that church, which could not be done without subjecting them to ceremonial uncleanness, and many laborious exercises about the al- tar and the temple services, which would have occupied loo much of the time and attention of the true worshipers HISTORY OF SERVITUDE. 33 of Jehovah, without marring and interrupting their wor- ship, which rendered servants from among the heathen necessary. THE GIBEONITES. This was completely exemplified in the case of the Gibeonites, who on account of the oath which the princes of the congregation had made to them, to preserve their lives, were spared, but on account of their gross decep- tion and falsehood to obtain that oath, were condemned to a state'* of servitude — Joshua ix. 22. And Joshua called for them, and he spake unto them saying, wherefore have ye beguiled us, saying we are very far from you, when you dwelt among us. Now therefore ye are cursed, and there shall none of you be freed from being bondmen, and hewers of wood and drawers of water for the house of my God, verse 27. '* And Joshua made them that day hew- ers of wood and drawers of water for the congregation!, and for the altar of the Lord, even unto this day in the place which the Lord should choose." The Gibeonites were condemned to be hev/ers of wood and drawers of water to the congregation and to the altar of the Lord; that is to the nation in their public assem- blies ; and to serve at the altar and the temple in preparing wood and water, and in such services as were subservi- ent to the public ordinances of the Lord, about which his people were to be engaged; all which supposed them to be the public property of the nation, but not the private property of any individuals, and were only liable to be called out to the service of public assemblies, and to the service of the sanctuary when their service was required, which must have been done by levying a tribute of as ma- ny persons as might be useful at such times. The same persons might be allowed to retire to their own homes, and others called forth to succeed them in their turn, while we have a good reason to believe they were allow- ed a due compensation for their labors. That the Gibeonites were public servants to the nation, and not private slaves to individuals, is evident from the form of expression used by Joshua in passing the sen- tence upon them, and also from their actual condition in 24 HISTORY OF SERVITTTDE. after times, particularly in the days of Saul. Saul thought to slay them in his zeal for the children of Israel. 2 Sam^ XXI. 2-5. " He consumed them and devised against them, that he might destroy them from remaining in any of the coasts of Israel." From which it is manifest that they could not be the private property of individuals dis- persed throughout the nation. Had they been private property, Saul could net have shewn his zeal for the child- ren of Israel by destroy i. ' g them. It is further evident from their serving in the armies of Israel, which is an em- ployment ill adapted to the condition of slaves ; also from their return with the Jews from their captivity in Babylon, which could hardiy have been expected had they been slaves. From the history of servitude now given, and from the nature and different forms of it as recorded in scriptures, it appears that there never was such a thing as slavery amongst the Jews before the Babylonish cap- tivity, and it would be a difficuh task to prove that it ever had a being in its present form in any nation, from the deluge to the times of the Greeks and Romans, who both were in the habit of enslaving their captives taken in war. It is certain that the king of Assyria did not make slaves of the ten tribes of Israel ; but placed them in different parts of his empire, to live by their industry, allowed to be incorporated with his own subjects. It is also evident from the scriptures that the king of Babylon did not make slaves of the Jews, but gave them the privilege of building houses, and planting vineyards, and living by their own industry, and made a selection of the most learned and active to take part in the government of the empire. Having now given a history of servitude from the scrip- tures, down to the time of the Jews' captivity in Babylon, in order to come at the main subject intended by this trea- tise, we shall not detain the reader with a further detail of the history of slavery, but refer him to Clarkson's Es- says on Slavery, which containabrief account of slavery among the Greeks and Romans, with a correct history of African slavery. THE MORAL LAW. 25 CHAPTER III. SLAVEIIOLDING A HEINOUS SIN. III. We are now to prove thai slavery, according to the common acceptation of the term, is a heinous sin, con- demned by the word of God, and repugnant to the law of nature. THE MORAL LAW. The first argument may be taken from the nature of the moral law, and its universal obligation upon mankind. In our introduction it has been shewn that the moral law is a transcript of the divine character. That it is call- ed the law of nature, because it is discoverable in the book of nature, which exhibits to the view of mankind the va- rious relations in which they stand to God and to one an- other, and as a law binds them to act agreeable to these relations, and we may now add, that the word of God is only the same law more perfectly revealed, together with a display of the economy of redemption. The moral law as a written revelation, and the law of nature as it is revealed in the book of nature, being the same as to mor- al obligation, it is impossible that the one can contradict or oppose the other. To apply these principles to the business of slave-hold- ing, it may be safely admitted, that if the practice has nothing to justify it but the civil law, while it stands op- posed to the moral law, it must be criminal. Slavehold- ing cannot be defended in virtue of an inherent power pos- sessed by man, antecedent to the existence of civil govern- ment, because in that state of society mankind are all equally entitled to enjoy freedom, and are all in duty bound to defend their own personal rights, and the natural rights of others, as far as is competent to them in that ca- pacity : therefore, mankind in that unorganized condition which necessarily precedes'^all organized states, can have no right to enslave one another, but on the contrary are bound to protect each other against any attempts which might be made to deprive them of either life, liberty, or 3 26 THE MORAL LAW= property, and are bound by the moral law to adopt the best method which may give strength and energy to their lawful efforts to secure their natural rights ; but the wis- est and best method which has yet been found to secure the natural rights of man, is for all the members of a com- munity to concentrate by delegations their legal right of defending their private privileges into the hands of repre- sentatives, that by their agency they may better perform those duties to themselves and others which they were bound in a private capacity to have done, as far as was competent to them. If the members of a community can and do transfer from themselves to representatives their right to freedom^ that is, their natural rights to serve God according to the relations in which they stand to him, and their right to perform all relative duties to one another, slavery may be justified, if not, it must be condemned. But none are dis- posed to plead for a transfer of their personal freedom ; therefore it is retained still in the hands of the people. The point is perfectly obvious, for if the members of a com- munity have no right in an unorganized state to deprive one another of life, liberty or property, they cannot trans- fer a right to others which they never possessed themselves^ If, then, no such right was or ever could be transferred from the people to their representatives, the representatives themselves can have no moral right to deprive any of the community of life, liberty, or property, except they forfeit their right by crimes, for civil rulers cannot exercise a pow- er which they never either had or could have. But it is self-evident, that if a people or nation can have no right to enslave one another within the hmits of their own ju- risdiction or territories, they can have still less without their own boundaries^ or in other parts of the world, be- cause neither political divisions of lands, nor natural divi- sions by rivers, chains ©f mountains or seas, can make void the moral law. Therefore, wherever a people dele- gate a power to representatives to enslave any of the hu- man race, it cannot be a moral power, but it is mere physical power, which is the power of force, and when physical force, striptof moral obligation, is exercised to de- prive mankind of their natural rights to freedom, it is only god's great end. 27 another name for the most cruel tyranny ; so that slave- holding is contrary to the law of nature, is downright tyran- ny, and an usurpation of power over the rights of man. MORAL LAW CONTRADICTORY. Secondly — Every practice must be sinful v,'hich tends to set the moral law at war with itself; but slaveholding is of that nature. Therefore, If slaveholding is just, it must be the master's duty to retain the slave in his service, and to prevent him from deserting it. But it is the slave's duty to desert his ser- vice if he can have a fair opportunity to escape ; yea, most of slaveholders will acknowledge that were they in the slave's place, they would try to escape from their servitude ; which represents the moral law to be at war with itself; first making it to be the master's duty to retain the slave in servitude, and at the same instantmakingitthe slave's duty to desert his service ; in that case moral right would be contending with moral right. If slaveholding is lawful in the sight of God, it must be the indispensable duty of the slaves' master to pray to God that the slaves and their posterity may be kept in bondage forever. But the moral law makes it the indis- pensable duty of slaves to pray to God that they and their posterity may be delivered from bondage, agreeable to Paul's direction, be ye not servants of men. But when two prayers contradict one another, one of them must be wrong, because the moral law cannot contradict itself in its obligations upon men, neither does the gospel contain contradictory promises adapted to contradictory prayers. god's great END. Thirdly — Every practice must be wrong that is at variance with God's great end in making man, which was that he should glorify God and enjoy him forever; but slaveholding is of that description. For men to be in a state of slavery is to be under the complete dominion of their masters, so as not to be at liberty to dispose of their time for the service of God or the enjoyment of him, but are liable to be prevented from reading, meditation and prayer. God commands all 28 REQUIRES SIN TO SUSTAIN IT. men to *' seek first the kingdom of God and his righteous- ness," and has promised that all other things shall be added. But the slave is bound first to submit to his mas- ter's authority, come what will of the command of God, or the moral end of his creation. The slaveholder's power over the slave is an authority which he possesses over the private relative duties of the slave, without being controlled by the laws of government. It is the usurpation of that power in which tl o sin of slaveholding consists. The cruel administratii.. of that power, is only an ag-gravation of the crime ; but the grand radical point in which the most deadly criminaliiy lies, is the usurped office or station which he occupies. Thus the grand reason why a tyrant's throat ought to be cut, is not so much because his adm'nistration is cruel, but be- cause he has usurpt that office or station which admits of neither bounds nor restraints to his cruelty ; and such is the station of a slaveholder, that without control he can prevent the slave from answering the great end of his creation, which was to gJorify God and enjoy him for* ever. REQUIRES SIN TO SUSTAIN IT. Fourthhj — That practice must be criminal which of necessity requires sin to support it; but slaveiiolding is of that nature. Therefore it is itself sinful. The practice of slaveholding can have no permanent existence in state, kingdom, or commonwealth, without restraining ihe slaves from learning; for if slaves should once be universally taught to read, write, and nllowed to make proficiency in other branches of literature, it would be impossible to retain them in bondage, for they would then be able to plead their own cause against their anti- christian masters, and keep their consciences in perpetual torment; so also liable by reading, and the use of maps, to understand the geography of the country where they reside, so as to know the most eligible route to ti;ke in at- tempting to escape. But to prevent by force any of man- kind from the improvement of their intellectual faculties, is to invertthe order of nature, is a contradiction of God's great end in giving mankind those faculties, by reducing OBTRTJCTS THE MEANS OF GRACE. 29 them down to the level of brute creatures, which is a crime so directly at war with the very light of nature and con. science, that it appears almost an insult to the human understanding to attempt its further demonstration. OBSTRUCTS THE MEANS OF GRACE. Fifthly — Every practice must be criminal that neces- sarily obstructs the means of grace, and tends to prevent the salvation of sinners. Butslaveholding is of that nature. To restrain the slaves from learning, has been shewn to be a nece&sary appendage of slavery. But to learn to read the word ot God is an important means of knowing the will of God, revealed to mankind for their salvation ; therefore to restrain any of the human race from the knowledge of God's written word, is in the first instance a high insult upon the God of heaven whose end in giv- ing mankind a written revelation, was that they should read it, and thereby acquire a knowledge of his method of salvation, and escape from the wrath to come, and be made faithful subjects of his kingdom and government. Sup- pose some great earthly potentate was to promulgate a code of laws for the good government of his subjects, ac- companied with a positive injunction upon all people un- der his dominion to read it and live conformable to it as rules of civil duty. If a certain class of his subjects were to exert their utmost influence to hinder as many of the community as they could have under their power from reading ii, merely to answer their own wordly interest, they could not be reputed better than traitors to his gov- ernment. How much more criminal then must be the conduct of those who restrain the subjects of the great potentate of heaven and enrth, who is king of kings and lord of lords from reading that revelation of his will which he has given to his subjects, to teach them to glorify and enjoy him forever. Again, to prevent any of mankind from reading the word of God, is to do that which tends to prevent their salvation, because it prevents the means leading to the end. It prevents them from the knowledge of God's written law his gospel doctrines and promises, and from the hope of eternal life, and implies a sacrificing the sin- 3* 30 AGAINST NATURAL RIGHTS. ner's salvation lo the slaveholder's worldly gains, or a violent attempt to shut up the way to eternal life, to pre- vent their entering, and depriving the slaves of all that consolation which is apt to be enjoyed in reading the word of God, together with that spiritual profit and advantage which Christians are apt to experience in hearing the gos- pel preached, so that slaveholders are neither entering the kingdom of heaven themselves, nor will they sufler others to enter in. AGAINST NATURAL RIGHTS. Sixthly — That practice must be unlawful which de- prives any part of the community, of the natural rights of citizens; but slaveholding is of that description. All men have a natural right to be citizens, and to en- joy civil protection in that nation or government where they have a permanent residence, except somelegril cause should prevent it, in which case such as may be exempt- ed, have a right of removal to some other part of the world ; bul in the case of slavery the slaves are deprived of both the rights of citizens, and a removal ^to any other part ofthe world, without anyjust reason forthelr prevention. All men, both citizens and foreigners, have a right to the protection of law in that nation where, in the course of providence their lot is cast, but the slaves have not the protection of law in slave slates, but are placed under the arbitrary power of their masters, and have no more pro- tection from the laws than horses or cattle, except so far as will serve the worldly interest of slaveholders. Hence it is, that in some slave states killing a slave is not in law murder of the first degree, whereas stealing one is a capi- tal crime. These unjust measures of necessity belong to the business of slaveholding, because no man can be ad- mitted to the protection of the civil law, without being ad- mitted to his oath or affirmation, but slaves cannot be ad- mitted to make oath for or against any person bt fore a court of justice without most dangerous consequences. As, 1st. They cannot be admitted to accuse their masters, as they might readily be suspected of prejudice and false accusation, for there is apt to subsist a deep rooted enmity in slaves against their masters. 2. The danger of being AGAINST RELATIVE DUTIES. 3l influenced by fear, in many instances, would justly deter them from being witnesses in behalf of their musters. 3. Their