.0 4P^ • '^o A"' ^oV^ ^tt^v.o'^ ^^/*Tr;-* .-i?-' >^ ., f' V o -^^/-^ « v-^;^ ^ov^ :' ^ov^^ 4* ;". -^^^^ : ^^0^ . • 4 O^ • ^:;^>. ,♦ ,.. -r*. '^V '^o'' A Voice from the South. D180U.SS1NG, AMONG O'l'iiKK ^SUBJECTS, (7^ !auery,;uiclil!jltniie(b, i'l'K'Trt'LLY IM- lUr'ATKD TO ROBERT J. BKEi^KlNRlDGE, D. D, (J F " K E N 'r U K Y , nV Ll]NNUX BIROKHEAD, M. D. ••And mau wliose heaven erected face, Tlie smiles of love adorn, Man'? inhumanity to man, Makes countless thonsauds mourn !'" BALTIMORE: JOHN W. WOODS, PRINTER. 1861. Rev. Robert J. Breckinridge, Kejitucky. Dear Sir, ^ The object in connecting y»»ur name with this little produc- ^ ^tion is not merel}^ to attract pnblic interest nor to express the .-> ^ author's high regard ; but to more particularly invite your '^ ^earnest attention and aid in forwanhng the great results it con- templates, particularly as regards slavery. Our revolutionary fathers, fresh from a bloody content for the inalienable rights of man, spurning all outside influences, regarding African slavery in its simplicity and unsophisticated truth, undei the prompt- ing of an instinctive sense of justice, the spirit of Christianity, the dictates of reason and humanity, naturally lamented the mural and political inconsistency of perpetuating the institution of slavery. Most of the wise and good men of that day, ac- knowledged slavery "a great moral, social and political evil." Whilst bearing tlieir solemn testimony against it they felt con- strained to leave the serious rpiestions it involved to be solved l)y posterity and the sad consequences which loomed up so i impressively before the imagination of l^atrick Henry, to whose prophetic vision ''coming events cast their sliadows be- fore," are now upon us in all their sad reality. According to men's hjcality and training, opposite views are taken of the morality and wisdom of the institution. No matter on which side the truth lies, all must agree that it is necessarily a great progressive national evil, which has already attained an ap- paling importance. Unhappily whenever man's feelings and interest must be affected by his avowed opinions human nature will create a difficulty in reaching the truth. If our people could be induced, under a due sense of responsibility to God, laying aside all anger, malice and evil speaking, honestly to examine this subject, this momcnttjus question would be ration- ally and amicably settled, fur the decision vests upon jjropositions susceptible of settlement by the plainest understanding. The North and the South are both right, yet they are de- cidedly both wrong. The North, regarding the subject in the abstract, is right ; regarding it politically, wrgng. The South, regarding it in the abstract, is wrong ; but regarding it politi- cally, in a certain sense, is right ; and both are wrong, not having taken wise measuios to palliate or remove so great an evil. I have ventured to suggest a reined}' both palli:uive aud radical, but it will require far m(.»re force and intiuenee thaii 1 possess even to initiate such a work. In looking through our broad land, T know of no one so peculiarly suited, practically, to patronize so patriotic and philanthropic an enterprise. A Southern gentleman by biilh, feehngs and habit, standing before the connnunity a calm, upright, fearless, public spirited man, free from all uudidy controling, political or sectional, feel- jug, pledged to truth and virtue only ; by your vocatioji a ser- vant of Christ and a friend to mankind. Will you then hold in your strong hand the entering wedge ? Depend upon it there will come many an unlooked for sturdy blow, now idle for want of an aim, to (h-ive honu^ the we'lge. History assures us wliere a great poUtical evil exists, mankind only want the proper leader to make the assault. When Luthei' stepped forth to war against Papist abuses thousands were ready to respond. How many at this moment, North and South, mdy wait such another intrepid leader. lles}ject fully, LENNOX BIKCKHEAD. APPEN'DIX, So much pcrplexily clouds every aspect of American Slavery, it involves such serious questiinis affecting us in our moral, social and political relations, that there is naturally a morbid sensibility in the national mind which shrinks from all moral, philosophical or political examination ; but as all the great and best men of the South unbiased by the lust fur wealth, or the lust for power or pride of party, have ever united with the general sentiment of mankind in its condemnation as a "great moral, social and political evil," surely as patriots, as reason- able men responsible to a great future tribunal, we are called upon to honestly and bravely look the momentous question in the face. Indeed the question has become so mixed up with pecuniary, party, political, and religious considerations, so long viewed through a contracted theology, or an undiscriminating false philanthropy, that we should not wonder to find the public mind confused, disgusted and disinclined patiently, calm- ly, and candidly to examine the matter, neither in its abstract simplicity nor in the complications of its modified character as a political institution ; yet, to reconcile difficulties, relieve con- science, reach just conclusions, a proper sense of duty and act wisely, this is essential, for there is all the difference of light and darkness between abstract slavery and slavery as a politi- cal institution. Injustice and oppression constitute the one, upon the other rests the protection and safety of the African ; upon the one the gross assumption, teeming with injustice, abuses and immorality, that the slave is a mere transferable chattel and also the authority, irrespective of all social neces- sity, to perpetuate the institution ; upon the other the only hope for a bettered condition of the negro. If tlie abolitionist in his blind impulsive course, regardless of the spirit and scope of Holy Writ, or the suggestions of reason, has done mischief in their virtuous zeal to counteract the mad- 208 ness aii(i wickeiLiess of abolitionirsni, good men have been car- ried beyond the necessities of the case, beyond the legitin:iate grounds of defence, have passed throiigli the enemy to a friend- ly province, have brought into conflict divine precepts and di- vine teachings, have boldly assailed the inalienable rights of man, fraternized with wrong and oppression, have overlooked the origin of human and confounded natural and i)olitical rights, given man a positive, absolute and inlierent right of pro])erty in his fellow; thus, in their turn, have they become vulnerable to the shafts of truth and virtue, and call upon us to fall back upon first principles to counteract error. Tlie full, thorough examination of tb.e question, in all its im- portant bearings, requires it to be made primarily a question of morality, otherwise we will find great difficulty in arriving at our duty, in reaching or correcting abuses and appljdng radical remedies, for, entrenched beliind even a false tlicology and an assumed or conventional morality, men will not care to change tlieir long cherished opinions or liabits, however ques- tionable their character. God in Ilis precepts has given a standard of right and wrong, in our moral sense the ability to distinguisli right from wrong, and in His tciichings lie has tauglitthe application of His pre- cei'ts under all the varying circumstances of life ; man is a pro- bationer personally I'esponsible to his Creator, or he is not ; he is a free agent, or he is not. Sla\'ery is either morally wrong or it IS not, the aftirmative of these questions is declaratory of a distinction between right and wrong and of a divinely given standard to test the character of human conduct. God is the original sole proprietor of man, and unless dele- gated by Him no human right can ever exist in one man over another without a voluntary surrender. A human right is the authority to act, directly or mediately coming from God, the only source, it is either natural or social ; slavery is either prac- tically the abnegation or abrogation of human rights, and is either personal or political. God, by the nature given to man, instituted society, wliich necessarily implies the authority to preserve and perpetuate. Tlie worst bearable government is better tlian no government. No institution which is not in itself, or general consequences, in harmony with the spirit and teach- ings of the Saviour, can of itself bo morally right or politically wise. Upon these assumptions we propose to construct our argument. 20i) The vindication of hluvery conimeuces witb the interence that it must have been divinel}' instituted, because coeval with the history of man, but as we can never know wliy, how, or when it originated, the original condition of society and its social needs, nor what scheme and purposes ul' Providence its sufferance may liave been designed to answer, we cannot legiti- mately infer the divine approval of our institution from the fact of its existence in a remote ago. Personal strife and offen- sive wariare have existed from the time of Cain, but we cannot infer divine approval. Whilst it is perfectly consistent with God's revealed design of human probation, that the evil which men do as free agents may be over-ruled for good, it is essen- tial to the divine plan that man has the liberty to do wrong, and to infer from the existence of an institution or usage, the divine approval would be to deny man's probationary charac- ter, to make the slave trade, and the forcing of opium on the Chinese, virtuous acts. God allowed the lust for power and wealth to take this par- ticular direction, no doubt He will overrule them for the exten- sion of Christianity ; but it is by no means a logical conclusion that He approved of the motive power, in itself wicked. Had the apostolic successors, instead of engaging men in angry con- troversy, or arraying them on the battle field with regard to idle dogmas, with which the happiness of mankind had abso- lutely no concerij, simply obeyed the divine injunction "go and teach all nations," would not Christianity have progressed as far under the mild inlluence of Missionary effort, as it has through the intermediate agency of the sword, the slave and opium trade ? What virtue and reverence for God's commands refused to do, by His eternally fixed laws, he has made the evil passions of men effect. The prophetic curse of Noah has been strongly relied upon to justify tlie institution, but with as much propriety would the cruelties of the Roman army in ful- filling the predicted destruction of Jerusalem be justified, for the}^ were equally a prophetic curse. Anyhow we think the curse of servitude was directed against the descendant nations of Ham and not to the personal bondage of his descendants, because if intended to aT)p!y to individual bondage, by far too few have been slaves to the posterity of the brothers to fulfill the prophesy, and in the present temper of the world it is not likely to be ever fulfilled. If designed as a special curse upon the posterity of Ham. as the argunient supposes, the descend- 210 auts of the brothers must have been exchided, l)ut the fact is more of their descendants have been in personal bondage, and therefore slavery could not have been designed as a special dis- criminative curse upon Ham, without which as well as a gen- eral fulfiUmeut. the argument is worthless. Moreover, the prophesy has been fulfilled in the subjugation of Ham's posteri- ty by that of hiis brothers ; decide this matter as we may is un- important, because we as christian moralists have no more con- cern in this prophetic curse than in the peculiar usages of the Jews under their iiistitutions, nnless you make Christianity un- necessary aud superrogatory, for it now is our rule of conduct. Polygamy was allowed, the Israelites were ordered to overrun idolatrous nations, where does Christianity license abstract slavery ? Where polygamy ? Vv' here to overrun the idola- trous nations of Africa with fire and sword ? The biblical argument most triumphantly urged is the omission of St. Paul to condemn Roman and Grecian slavery, and it is attempted to draw odium upon the objection to this negative argument by charging that it casts an imputation of fear and dishonesty up- on the virtuous and heroic Paul ; but if we destroy the argu- ment, this damaging charge is repelled. In his probationary state man is at liberty to create the circumstances or conditions which suits particular forms of government, accordingly we find such to be the fact, and that the kind of government is ever the result of the intellectual and moral condition of the people. At the advent the Roman government was tyrannical and oppressive, but under ex- isting circumstances it was the best to be had, as tlie most intolerable national calamity is no government, the Roman government, bad as it was, was allowed to stand unrebuked, though surely in itself disa})proved by the Saviour. When Paul entered upon his mission he found Rome a nation of sol- diers and slaves. . Slavery an incorporated political institution, part aud parcel of a vicious body politic, the result of war which created the necessity for agricultural labor and furnished in its prisoners, whom it saved from butchery on the battle field, the necessary subjects, and could not have been suddenly and coercively abolished without the worst political evil — an- archy ; hence, Paul wisely meddled with neither, he was satis- fied with planting such principles the adoption of which must make any form of government answer the ends of government, and take from slavery all the virulence of injustice and op})res- 8ion. 211 We must keep in view that Paul was the apostle of him who declared that his "'Kingdom was not of this world," that he came not a political but religious reformer to preach peace on eartli and good will to men, to plant in Christianity the great corrective of all moral evil ; was another Paul to appear in the South now, a christian missionary as wise and good a man as he, can it be imagined that he would commence the work in criminating the masters, or preaclung down an insti- tution, greatly valued and cherished, in the Soufhei'n mind no wrong identified with their prosperity and essential to their habits of social life ? No, he would perceive that it would be worse than useless, that he would not be listened to, that ab«.)li- tion would do incalculable mischief, derange the whole social structure, seriously injure masters and slaves. Why should Paul have meddled with a pohtical institution which his pre- cepts could not reach until the evil heart of Rome became sub- ject to Christianity? Why talk of honor and injustice to a man who has no sense of either ? Why do that which must defeat the object of his high mission, and aggravate the evils of the time? Did Paul sympathize with Rcmian l);irljarity exhibited in the treatment of slaves, in gladiatiiig. wild beast fights, or the triumphant processions in which the unhappy victims of war were exposed to the most unnecessary cruel distress ? Was Nero's government to his taste ? Yet he meddled not specifically with them. Because Paul did not con- demn despotism, must we on such authority advocate tyranny ? But was there not another cause for Paul's silence, in the truth, that there, as with us now, the sin of slavery was not in the fact of its existence, but in its abuses, and refraining from all effort to remove the condition the result of human conduct, which made the institution a social necessity ? Paul displayed his political sagacity when he told his disciples to give their slaves ''that which was just ami equal," for without exciting political jealousy, or alarm for slave property, he aimed the deadliest blow at the institution, actually initiated its downfall, for the services of bondsmen have no advantages over freemen if there was a fair remuneration and no unreasonable exactions, this is the revelation of experience in our country. Let the principles of Christianity furnish the basis for a servile code and servile treatment, and slavery must die out for the simple reason that there v%'ould be no advantage in cheapness of labor nor any convenience to counterbalance the inherent evils, 19* 212 anxieties and vexations of slavery. Like despotism, slavery was only tolerated because of the wickedness of men. Did Christianity prevail universally, tyranny, war and slavery would be impossibilities. Now it is easy to perceive that the same reasons may have operated on Paul without his omission to denounce slavery, implicating in the slightest degree his wis- dom, honesty or courage. Had he like some of our clergy turned aside from his true vocation, turned abolitionist, Chris- tianity would have been poorly advanced. But with his fear- less nature, untiring zeal, simple but powerful eloquence, would have excited servile war, given to fanaticism a very carnival, opened the flood-gates of misery upon Rome. No, he knew the source of all moral evil and its remedy. Accordingly, be- fore the sway of Christianity, slavery disappeared without social disorganization. The virtuous and wise course of Paul in the case of Onesi- mus has been pressed into the service to sustain a bad cause, when in truth it was impossible f(jr a man of his high grade of virtue and wisdom, no matter how much he deprecated the Roman institution, to have acted differently. The highest duty of christian citizenship is to obey the laws of your country, for disobedience strikes directly at the heart of social organization, tends to anarchy, the most deplorable of all hu- man conditions. Paul had nothing to do in instituting and had no controling power over it, but by violating the laws in regard to it no one could estimate the damage he would do his high mission and to the community, his influence over Phile- mon and other slave owners must have gone. What would the enemies of Christianity have desired more than to be en- abled to cast the odium of a violator of the laws upon its great apostle ? Bad laws must be endured till they can be removed wdthout disorganizing society, the greatest of all pos- sible evils, the laws must remain until they can safely be re- moved. Slavery was a legalized institution, slaves were pri- vate property held under the same title as Paul held his house, under the law of the land, and the same principle, breaking down the law, carried out, defrauding Philemon, would have taken away Paul's house. The individual beneflt to Onesimus would have been far more than counterbalanced by the injury to his mission and to the community at large, showing that obedience to the law, even if founded in wrong, is virtuous and wise, and Paul will stand forever upon the sacred page the 213 brightest model of a consistent christian citizen. When a benevolent Pennsylvanian assists his Maryland neighbor in recovering his fugitive arc we to infer his advocacy of slavery ? Certainly not, only that he is a good citizen and obeys the laws of his country, not allowing his individual feelings to turn him from his sacred duty to his Government. Had Paul been instrumental in removing Onesimus beyond the reach of his master, in the sight of man and God, he would have been vir- tually a thief, false to his friend a social disorganizer, an enemy to mankind. Had Paul's example been followed, slavery would have been much nearer its end. Had benevolent men simply obeyed the laws and interceded for lenity, the kindest neighborly feelings would have been cultivated, a far greater influence exerted over Southern sentiment ; silently, quietly, inoffensively doing its work. Such conduct would have exhibited the same results now seen in Maryland, once thoroughly a slave state, now probably verging to a free state. The subject, without gendering bitterness, would have been freelj' discussed, the master secure in his property would have had no occasion for severe stringency of discipline, the slave, un- seduced, seeing no chance of escape, would have been cheerful and contented, far happier than now, a freezing outcast in Canada. Nor would we now have the sorrow and mortifica- tion to see demagogueism making slavery a pretext as the best cloak for ambition, preying upon the vitals of the Repubhc. Can the advocate for abstract slavery consistently contend for the inalienable rights of man, for human freedom ? Unless he can prove the negro alien from the human family, or can show some specific divine precept justifying African bondage, the conclusion is palpable that wherever a community, white or black, possessing the power, it may with equal authority morally reduce to personal bondage white or colored members of the human family. If the ground of social necessity is assumed, are we not bound to prove that we may rightfully create the circumstances which make the social necessity, or are not called upon to ^use every means for their correction ? Do we not virtually create these circumstances when we per- petuate them by failing to use means for their removal ? If Paul's authority will justify abstract slavery, then it must apply throughout all mankind, for the Roman and Grecian slaves were white. It must be right and proper for Russia to reduce all her prisoners of war to personal bondage, sell them, 2U generals and all, with their children's children, to the highest bidder. Is South Carolina in her wildest iiltraism prepared for such a doctrine ? We contend, therefore, that there is no scripture authority for abstract slavery. Let us test the validity of its claims by the light of reason, based on an instinctive sense of justice and of right and wrong. It is an incontrovertible proposition, a self-evident truth, that there can be but one source, the Al- mighty, of human rights, and that all men enjoy naturally an equality of right, and as justice is simply a due regard to the rights of others, we further deduce the conclusion that abstract slavery is morally wrong. Much time and learned labor by the clergy have been devoted, occasioned by jjarty objects, the perils of the country, or lust for gain, to estabHsh for the in- stitution the authority of Holy Writ, and men, anxious to escape from duties which result from an opposite view, have greedily availed of the effort. But whoever undertakes to prove a divine right for abstract slavery is involved in the hopeless task of proving that slavery, per se, is in its tendencies, influences and general consequences promotive of the peace, prosperity and happiness of mankind, for such is the plain de- sign of Christianity. To assert that any institution at variance with this design, can be approved of by its great founder, im- plicates divine consistency. But undeniable facts, and the general sentiment of mankind, declare slavery evil and only evil, without one redeeming feature. In discussing this subject, reason requires us to regard it not as slavery would be in rigid subjection to christian principle, but as it actually exists, an admitted wrong to the black, hurt- ful to the white man and to national prosperity. Christianity was designed to preside over all the practical details of life, to rule our natural propensities and sweeten human intercourse. Is it conceivable, by an unbiassed mind, that the benevolent Redeemer, or an inspired man of God, who taught so impres- sively the great lessons of justice and kindness, could approve of a Roman institution so teeming with injustice, abuse and cruelty ? American slavery being an unnatural condition, grating to our natural feelings of benevolence, revolting to our moral sense of right and wrong, necessarily liable to the great- est abuse, involving the violation of human rights, only tole- rated because a necessity presupposes something wrong in the social structure, vicious, damaging to individuals and society, 215 therefore the business of Christianity to correct. We think the clergy would have been far more appropriately employed in pointing out this something wrong and its corrective, than in fortifying men in their assumed right to oppress their fellow-man and perpetuate a "great social, moral and political evil," For a christian to be conservative is well, but to be consistent is surely far better. With political institutions, conceding to them every privilege common to citizens, v/e contend that professionally the clergy have nothing to do, for their business is not to distract and embitter. But with the purity of public sentiment they have every thing to do. Yet where conventions, presbyteries and conferences yearly meet, we see, in the daily journals, notices shocking virtuous and noble sentiment. We see a noble state once renowned for good and great men, throughout whose ever}'' valley and from whose every hill-top freedom pitched her highest note of remonstrance, most earn- estly plead for the inalienable rights of man, degenerate into a great slave mart. Slaves having become a regular staple, yielding millions to her people, who, reposing upon an assumed abstract right, pursue with marvelously unruffled equanimity the business of perpetuating their country's curse ! In the bewilderment caused by contending minds, Pilate sarcastically asked the Saviour, ''what is truth ?" In the perplexity upon this subject, produced by contending divines, the gross per- version of christian precept, and the palpable inconsistency be- tween profession and practice, some minion of despotism might well sneeringly ask a boastful American citizen, what are '•'the inalienable rights of man," what justice, what is duty ? If in itself a wise and virtuous institution, why has every com- munity where African slavery ever existed, opposing a resistless barrier to even wealth — wont to ride triumphantly over every other obstacle to social position — affixed an indelible stigma upon professional slave dealing? Why, in the convention called to frame the Constitution, did the southern orators, io a man, exhaust opprobrious epithets in denouncing it a great moral and political wrong ? Do moral principles, as eternal as God from whom they came, authontative in one age, lose all authority in another ? Why did Virginia, when deeding away her North-western territory stipulate that there slavery should never exist? Why did Kentucky's great statesman so vehemently oppose its territorial extension ? Why did Presidents Washington, Jefferson and Madison so 216 strongly reprobate it? Madison, with a sensitiveness truly remarkable and expressive of his abhorrence, protesting against the term "slaves" being even named in the Constitution, sub- stituting for slaves the words "held to bondage," because he would not have recognized in an instrument so sacred to free- dom and designed to be as enduring as time, the right of prop- erty in man. Jefferson declaring that "there was not one at- tribute of God in sympathy with negro slavery." Why, throughout all mankind, save where king cotton sways, has it the unqualified reprobation of the wise and good ? May hu- man sentiment restrain and must God's eternal precepts truckle to mammon ? Yet men, assuming to represent the great Ke- deemer, teach us from the pulpit, that African slavery is a heaven ai^pointed institution, eternally basking in the ever vivifying smiles of Christianity ? An essay purporting to develop the virtue and beauties of slavery would be an original idea, truly a curiosity, and we challenge its production. If the institution in itself is a good one, so promotive of mutual prosperity, upon the principle that we are bound to do good to all men, it is sinful to restrict slavery to the South. We should rivet the shackles upon the slave the world over, prohibit all emancipation, re-open the slave trade, and let all of our people, rich and poor, enjoy all the blessings of this universally beneficient institution ! But before coming to a practical decision, ask Maryland and Virginia why their fields are worn out, neglected wastes, the farms depreciated, and why it is reasonable to suppose — slavery extinct — that comparing with adjoining states, in a few years real estate would be quadrupled. Although we deny abstract slavery all support from the light of reason and holy writ, we distinctly assert, apart from its abuses and neglect, to abate and remove it — in which the sin consists — American slavery is negatively a wise, benevo- lent institution, because it temporarily prevents incalculable greater mischief and misery. The abolitionist who denies slavery justifiable under all cir- cumstances, to be consistent, should clamor for the conversion of every Monarchy into a llepublic, for as all human rights proceed from the one great source and are equally imperative, political can only ditfer from personal slavery in the degree of infringement, and if the one is morally wrong, under all circumstances, so must the other be. Surely he must be a 211 wild, fanatical republican who would make Russia a Republic ! A conscientious man, unaccustomed to analyze the character of acts with regard to motives, circumstances and consequences, habituated implicitly to obey precept in the letter, regardless of its spirit, object, or practical bearings, may easily and inno- cently carry out his principles mischievously. The character and extent of the authority of moral pre- cepts to be justly estimated, must be viewed in reference to their object and reasonable limitation. Though moral princi- ciples are fixed in character, and absolute in authority, the character of the acts to Avhich they apply, under circumstan- ces, so change, as to entirely evade their jurisdiction. A lie is always an untruth, but an untruth is not always a lie. Stealing is taking the property of another, but taking the property of another is not always stealing, for both these acts may occur under circumstances where the criminal intent, es- sential to make the acts, lying and stealing, were not present. We cannot conceive of God commanding the observance of truth, and also privileging falsehood ; therefore, consistency must be a divine attribute. As all divine commands come from the same source, they must be equally imperative, of course no precept can take precedence of another, they mu- tually limit each other's range. Where the authority of one precept conflicts with the authority of another, there its power must end, for this is the requirement of divine consistency, otherwise, obedience to the one would be disobedience to the other, and there must be inextricable ethical confusion. Parental obedience is exacted, but when a son is ordered to steal, the authority of the precept requiring parental obedi- ence, must cease, because it conflicts with the command "Thou shall not steal." An infuriated man pursues a parent with murderous intent to a son's house, who denies his pres- ence, yet without the sin of a lie, for tlie son, if he betrayed his father's retreat to an assassin, would not obey the command to "honor his father," nor would he be loving his neighbor as himself if he facilitated an enraged man in becoming a mur- derer. By aiding the man, he would practically ami virtually hecome, parliceps ciimiuis, a violator of the law. So, disre- garding this principle, would lead to complicated disobedience. We are directed to honor the king, to obey rulers, but surely we are not required to obey the wicked laws of corrupt rulers, when avoidable, for that would be to violate other precepts, un- 1^18 resistiijgly to yieM to the iviost griiuling 0}>pvess.»r, ami the ohjcct of the government, the htncfited of the governed, he defeated. We are told to give to liim tliat asheth, but whenever an nn worth}' object, upon tlie plea of such precept, makes a de- ma!;d, vve may innocently refu.se, otherwise, a man would be encouraging indolence and vice, reduce his family to extreme povert}'', and become obnoxious to the charge of being "worse than an infidel." You may deceive, innocently, for their own good, a child, an insane, sick, or drunken man, wdiich shows that the moral wrong of an untruth, is not in the act but in the criminal intent. Hence. G od in giving a probationary exist- ence, has given us a discretion and an understanding to dis- criminate circumstances, and determine the true character of acts. Now let us apply the principle here developed, to American slavery, imposed upon us by the reckless cupidity of a former generation, grown into a social necessity, existing under circumstances limiting the range of precepts which otherwise make slavery morally wrong. If abstract slavery is wrong simply because it violates certain moral precepts, then, if circumstances exist, suspending, through divine con- sistenc}^ such precepts, their object is defeated, the sin of slavery is destroyed, and the condemnatory precepts cannot apply, because it is a condition removed beyond their jurisdic- tion by the conflicting range of other precepts ecpially authori- tative, That American slavery does exist under circumstances which will not admit of the applicati(;n of the precepts con- demnatory of abstiact slavery, is perfectly plain, for immediate general emancipation would ruin master and slave, disorgan- ize society, embarrass the commercial prosperity of the world, and produce widespread misery. In fact, the abolitionist who has a correct view of this subject, and persists in his mad course from political or other motives, is guilty of divine diso- bedience and unmitigated cruelty. But from false views of the true relations of master and slave, men have extended a right from its very^ nature, co-ex- tensive only W'ith necessity over the whole man, soul and body, made him personal property, well nigh practicall}' confounded him with his brute. It would seem important then, that the conduct of masters be regulated by sound moral and political principles, there exist a clear, precise idea of the nature and full extent of the right, under which a man is held in bondage. Whence comes the right of luiman bondage? If not derived 219 from revelation, nor the light of nature ; if it exists, it must come from social necessity. But the power to give, implies the actual possession of the gift. The law cannot impart that which it has not. Now has any community morally the right in possession, which it may inipart to individuals of un- limited, unconditional bondage ? Unquestionably man was designed for social life, this ne- cessarily implies the right to construct and perpetuate, from this inherent right is derived the discretionary power of com- munities to restrict privileges, control human conduct when- ever required by human weal, hence the authority to punish crime, confine the lunatic, and hold man in personal or politi- cal bondage ; whilst society holds this authority b}^ divine right it is plainly a limited authority ; divine consistency requires it to be exercised in subordination to the great moral precepts designed for the government of all mankind, and of course cannot be extended beyond the social necessity, can give no right of personal property, implying exclusive unlimited control, as a possessor's right in his horse. We can only know God's will through his absolute commands and the voice of his institutions. Having instituted scciety wherever its social needs make it necessary, he instituted political or social slavery, but no where has he commanded us, nor can the social exigen- cy requiring it exist, to make chattels of our negroes, and we deny all right of such property in man as allowed a Roman irresponsibly to throw his living chattels into his fish pond. Men should be made to realize by squaring the subject be- fore the mind's eye, bringing it hom.e to their sense of what is due between man and man, to their own hearts, and testing it by the divine standard of right and wrong, that an absolute unrestricted right of property in man as in a mule, can con- sistently, neither morally nor politically exist, because man has a far higher clearly discriminated rank in the divine economy, is divinely placed upon an equality of natural right with his fellow man — an equality which cannot be even disturbed but by a paramount social necessity, because man has rights to which the brute has no claim, and over which the law of necessity, subordinate to divine precept, the only authority abrogating human rights, can have, in its necessarily limited authority, no jurisdiction. God the creator, original and sole proprietor, has only given away man's natural rights as far as essential to sat- isfy the law of social necessity. Nor has the slave, like the 20 220 soldier or sailor, contracted to surrender his natural and legal rights. Therefore to take possession of his body and rights, beyond this law of necessity, is simply usurpation. So long as a slave continues in a country where the social necessity ex- ists, the slave cannot rightfullj^ complain of his position, and should he in personal difficulty kill his master, he may be rightfully hanged, because the good of the community as well as the happiness of the slave exacts it, but should it occur in a for- eign country, the same man stands upon an equality of right, and the crime is preciseh^ of the same grade as if occurring between two masters in Maryland,, and social necessity does not require his execution. Every ciUze7i is bound by an implied contract to obey the laws of his country, but the slave is no citizen, tliere was no implied contract between him and the govisrn- ment which required him to be hanged for the murder of his master in self defence ; therefore, apart from social necessity, to hang him for manslaughter, would be simply murder. If this proposition is sound, there can be no iiiherent natural right of man in man ; therefore it is purely the creature of circum- stances, a political or social right for the mutual benefit of master and slave, coeval with, and limited by this law. In moralit}^ the slave is entitled to every right and privilege of mankind — not rightfully restricted by this law of neces- sity. All the obligations which masters recognize as due to each other are, with this qualification, in full force as regards the slave, and the commands to do justly, show mercy, and others, with all their solemn sanctions, preside over the relations of master and slave. Does this great imperi is a problem, the solution of which must be left to the good providence of God. To say nothing (though svu-ely a most serious consideration) of the hazards to domestic secinity, peace and happiness, the concentration of a large slave population on our Suuthern border must be unwise. The strength of a country is its yeonianry, and surely no state will be willing to trust its defences tv» a yeomanry of slaves. In case of a foreign invasion a dcn;.e slave population must evei' present a most inviting weak point, as we know it did in the late war witli England, when it was contemplated to march black regiments into Greorgia. On an estate remote from a large city, with five hundred negroes it would be only reasonable to suppose that there would be many ready to meet any overtures from a wicked fanatic or military spy. We should reflect that this is a progressive evil and that it is the tendency, by a universal law for every wrong unchecked by human wisdom, indirectly and violently to cure itself, as illustrated in the French revolution. In every well balanced community from the diversity and degree of talent, energy, form of character or other circumstances, there must naturally exist three strata or classes, the lower occupied by the indigent and laborious, the second by the more thrifty and better provi- ded tradesmen and mechanics, the third by the more highly cul- tivated and opulent, placed above the drudgery of life. In the laws which thus regulate social hfe lies tlie foundation of a great self-adjusting conservative principle. When wealth and its concomitants, indolence and luxurious indulgence, long exist, the class deteriorates, individuals cannot hold their position from loss of power and aggressive competition from below, the middle class gradually works up, because its condition is more favorable to the development of moral and physical ex- cellence, the more energetic from the class below them supplies their places. Without this law of class no prosperous commu- nity can last, because there will be no classes from below to refresh and invigorate the effete U2)per stratum, in which up- per stratum, the governing power must reside, for ''those who think must govern those who toil." Now, under the institution of slavery this great law is broken up, there is a very meagre, inadequate middle stratum, and under the operation of natural causes, the upper stratum of masters will lose its numerical force, its moral and pliysical ability to govern will cease to be in that healthy proportion to the lower stratum required by subordinutioa and pros- perity. Hence it would seem t(j be the true pohcy to cul- tivate a middle class, keep down all unsafe excess iu the lower class or stratum. Colonization, aided by the wisest means of diffusion and tiie most decided prohibition of further iin- porlatiou, will naturally promote the one, introducing every variety of manufacture, worked by white operatives, and pro- hibitmg by law negro mechanics, would advance the other. Let the African be confined to agricultural labor, let him become the property of the state, introduce a species of serl- dom, uuder which the negro will enjoy a comparatively health- ful, safe freedom, an ameliorated slavery, consistent with jus- tice, mercy and the prosperity of all. Surely no thoughtful man who has the courage to look the evil in the face, no man who will not wilfully reject conviction, can deny the dreadful tendency, nay, the inevitable result of slavery cherished as it is. In fifty years there will be sixteen millions of slaves in the S.)Uth. Will not the anticipation of servile troubles cause men to emigrate, and the same cause prevent them from being re- placed by new settlers ? Will not an increasing difficulty to control, produce increased severity of police ? Natural causes enfeebling the master's moral and physical power, till at last a point is reached beyond which endurance and the capacity to govern must cease ? And what then ? The Sonth should be stimulated to move in this matter by every noble motive, as well as by tlie consideration established by statistical facts, daily observation and the opinions of some of her wisest men, that viewed in the double light or aspect of injustice and injury to the black race and of its deteriorating influences, morally and physically, on the masters and their descendants, with all its prospective perils, that slavery is no blessing. Indeed it can- not be too strongly impressed on the Southern mind, that to be politically wise, an institution must be morally right. Fellow citizens of the South, I pray you listen to the voice of reason and experience, to all of your truly great and good men from the date of our Union. Facts may be carelessly blinked or recklessly disregarded, but their consequences must be met. Be not stupidly passive under the delusion that because great gains may be pouring into your laps, that you are growing rich and powerful in all the essential elements of political prosper- ity. Reflect that from vast unequal wealth and luxurious liv- ing in one class, ignorance, poverty and degradation in the other, for they are equally unfavorable to the growth of moral 234 vvortli. rertui]! (Iqijoijille consequeiices are inseparable. True, scatt<'rfJ vvcr wiile. districts, palatial residences, as in Cuba, may arise, looking with lordly pride over thousands of acres untenanted by a free, cidiphjetied peaj^antry ; true to your de- ii^l;tt-(! i'\ I ,, iiii y v\;ivr 11, li hixuriancc, but unless nature's hiws c'i;i-f tr, iiM rii'ii- u>iiai results, your children's children, d(;ni()ralized and enieebled by inordinate wealth, extravagance and luxury must reap another harvest, a harvest of trouble and sorrow from the mad ])oiir-y of cherishing witiiin your bosom a great and growing donicstic cnt-my. Alas, "III fares the iaiul to !iasti-iiiiit< \\\'< a prey. Win-re wealth accumulates and where men decay."' Youl- ppr-uliar institution, to give security and peace of mind, will require an extensive standing army. Jt is the teach- ings of cx|)erience, that neighboring nations constantly find occasion for political broils. What is to give immunity to the two Confederacies from such evils? Will you not have also, exciting causes of bitter party strife? May not the peo- ple in the madness, recklessness and wick('dness of party spirit, place in the seat of power some ambitions military man, some Julius Ca3sar or some "Little Corporal." What then will save yonr free institutions? Will not the same causes which have produced the late unhappy division t)f our country exist so long as slavery exists as a cherished institution ? Is it possible that in two nati(tns so decidedly opposed upon the subject of vslavery, that fanatics and denjagogues will be idle? Will not fugitives from the South be still seciuced away and protected in the North ? Will n(jt this cause the bitterest strife and in- evitably lead to war ? No man can doubt that widespread misery will result to both sections, but to reason's eye one re- sult sooner or later, is inevitable ; with such vast odds of numerical strength, force and wealth against her. A fearful, slumbering, domestic enemy, within her borders, the general sympathy of mankind against her. under a strong sense of the scowl of freedom, justit'e. mercy and divine displeasure, all the desperation and boasted chivalry ot the South cannot save her. Like Na])oleon's guard she may bravely resolve never to sur- render, but like that gallant band, she nuist V)e overwhelmed. And truthful history will record her epitaph, died inglorious- ly, slain by freedom's sword, fighting against the inalienable rights of man. 54 W y o"JL-'»- ■^ °o ^> ''v„.-*''^ .' r' /?. =4 x>*. %y ^- -^^/^-if.^ ./ e^^ %^-N^. o •» >>^ .O* .."*. *0. A* 0°"*. ^ .( • "-e^o^ ' v^* .iilr. *c ^ ♦*«sil&»'. tf. .** /aVa\ -e^ A* .»* V^\.ii^'. ♦" ; 'bV • " * <* 'i^* ^0^ *^. *?Tr;-' .*-«■' -ov*^ ; • .0 '. _jp^* ^<^ -.^sa^S <&^^\. %^^^^/ . '^^ '^ 'o.^ •'o,*^ A <. ♦*TVT^ v*;^ ,*^^\.