J •~“ > … *ſ* -


TTTTTTTTWaiº Y;
|||||||||||
ſº §
TU
ſ JNTUIII/IIIIIll
Fº º º: -
|US
PO
º
É
|
TE
É
-
C.
#S
[A2E.
ñºz
É
ES
E;
Ew
Eº
tº-ſº
E;
Eº
Fº
E
Eº
E.
É
É
|
É
tº ºr eºnec esº as e º cºlº e ºs e see ameº sººººº C is
ºriº
f

ENGLAND OPPOSED TO SLAVERY,
S O M E. R. E M A. R. K. S
{J P ON
“AN EXAMINATION INTO THE REAL CAUSES OF THE WAR
AGAINST THE UNITED STATES, AND AN APPEAL TO
THE OTHER POWERS OF EUROPE AGAINST
THE PURPOSES OF ENGLAND.”
B O S T O N :
B E N J A M I N H. G. R. E E N E .
1842.
C A. M. B R ID G. E. P. R. E S S :
LYMAN THURST ON AND WILLIAM TORRY.
The “Examination,” upon which I am to
make some remarks, appeared in the “Boston
Morning Post” of April 19, 1842, and occupied
a large portion of that day's paper. Its unim-
portance, perhaps, obtained for it a silent at-
tention, and l have been induced to notice it at
this late day, from a conviction which I then
had, and still have, that it contains the views
and feelings of too large a portion of our peo-
ple. It breathes forth a spirit, which is scorch-
ing and withering to every sense of humanity,
and beneath which no sympathy for injured man
can grow. Thinking, as I do, that every man is
bound to raise his voice, however feeble it may
be, against Slavery, against its defenders, against
Such communications as the Post has seen fit to
offer us, I venture to address my Fellow-citizens,
begging them to judge for themselves what is
right.
Boston, July 1, 1842.
ENGLAND OPPOSED TO SLAVERY.
THAT a relic of ancient barbarism should be the cause
of the greatest civil commotion of modern times, is a
fact as humiliating to those who look for the dawning
of Christianity, and the perfecting of the rights of men,
as it is terribly degrading to those rights, and subver-
sive of the principles of that religion. We have in
slavery the connecting link, which binds us in our
follies to the delusions of all those early nations, whose
histories and monuments show us, that they held their
fellow-men in bondage, and made them absolute trans-
ferable property. The Jews, the Egyptians, the
Greeks, Achilles’ wrath, the markets of Babylon and
Tyre, the luxury of the Romans, the traffic of the pi-
rates and kidnappers of all the Mediterranean, have
lent their aid in this wicked work; and still later, Eng-
land, Germany, France, Sicily, Venice, each converted
its neighboring seas into highways, upon which it
might transport its brethren, whom the chances of
war had cursed with bondage. Even the garment of
Christianity, which clothed the early settlers of this
country, appeared to lose its sanctity before the ques-
tion of slavery, and has now become, one would think,
1%
6
a perfect Nessus-shirt upon our backs, burning our very
vitals; its light has revealed the enormity of the insti-
tution, while it seems to have, in the same proportion,
refined its cruelties. The track of that ship, in which
Sir John Hawkins brought the first cargo of slaves to
Hispaniola, appears a dark, polluted line across the
hitherto unsullied bosom of our western waters; the
unholy highway, which has been followed by so many
fiends, and darkened by so many scenes of guilt ; the
iron chain, which unites the slavery of our Christian
country with the barbarous servitude of the early na-
tions of the East. Would God the indignant waves
had destroyed that ship !
Here then we are, — just as guilty, just as mercenary
in this point, as were the heathen nations of olden
times. And we have men among us, who are willing
to transport the whole spirit of their lives so far back,
as to become, on this question of slavery, no whit better
than the pirates and despots of ancient Greece and
Rome. *T is sad that it should be so ; but he who has
eyes to see and ears to hear must know that it is.
We hear the policy of every nation, the sentiments of
every defender of man’s inalienable rights, the efforts
of all honest patriots and philanthropists, questioned
by the suspicious disciples of the doctrines of slavery,
as undermining their institutions, destroying their
peace and property, exposing their lives, absolutely
laying the axe at the root of their liberties. Is it not
so 2 The Quintuple Treaty, the question of the
Çreole, the heart-felt, honest indignation of the North,
the word spoken in truth by every sincere man from
7
the dying cry of Lovejoy at Alton, to the manly voice
of Channing at the other extreme of the Union, —
have not all these been looked upon by slaveholders,
as aiming at their destruction ? Not a question comes
before our legislators, that is not instantly turned over
and over by the South, to see where it bears upon
their great institution. So intimately is it interwoven
with all their commerce, policy, laws, that it has be-
come as it were the warp, upon which their whole ex-
istence is woven. That they defend it with all the
pertinacity of most deluded men, is freely granted to
them. They are consistent in their error, to say the
least. No doubt, some among them are honest in their
convictions, – and really look upon slavery as an evil,
but a necessary evil, which has no remedy. That such
as these should be jealous of any infringement upon
their rights, is not a matter of astonishment. Hence
it is, that we daily see men anxious to convince
the world, that the blows avowedly aimed at slavery,
are in fact wielded by selfishness, and love of power.
Hence it is, that the whole United States come under
the call to defend their institutions, against the grasp-
ing of England. Hence it is, that France is applauded
for her vigilance and foresight, in refusing to unite in
the Treaty of the Five Powers. Sympathy with sla-
very, either direct or indirect, either honest or dishon-
est; sympathy with it as an institution tending to
preserve, in absolute existence and power, the southern
portion of our country, - a blind sympathy, which sees
not enormities mountain-high, and feels not how
miserably a portion of our fellow-men exist in the land,
8
undoubtedly brings men to the beliefs and suspicions, I
have mentioned. This sympathy, I doubt not, induced
“a Kentuckian,” to publish from Paris to the world,
the paper I now have in consideration.
In these days of turmoil and confusion, when the
multiplicity of questions before the community, and
their intimate connexion, tend to confound men, when
a restless spirit for war seems to ſill the heads of too
many in our land, when all the strength of the mighty
is needed, to preserve our land in peace, and our insti-
tutions in purity, the appearance of a paper like this
is a subject of deepest regret. It is cunningly devised,
presenting an aspect of affairs so plausible, that at first
sight one feels almost disposed to believe that men
care nothing for the horrors of slavery, provided they
can make its continuance or destruction a means of
aggrandizing themselves. Its spirit is bad, radically
defective ; and, clothed as it is with innumerable fal-
lacies, seems to call for a minute and careful investi-
gation. Humanity cries out for help, when thus
wronged and tortured. I call to my aid, in defend-
ing her, the words of Dr. Channing, when speaking of
another document. He says, “I cannot but express
my sorrow at the tone of inhumanity, which pervades
it. * * The Document bears witness, not to individual
hardness of heart, but to the callousness, the cruel
insensibility, which has seized the community at large.
Our contact with slavery has seared in a measure al-
most all our hearts. Were there a healthy tone of
feeling among us, certain passages in this document
would call forth a burst of displeasure.” There is a
9
cold and heartless manner exhibited, when the condi-
tion of the slave is spoken of, which must make men
of common sensibility shudder, — men, who have not
learned to think on these things, with the apathy the
very institution of slavery tends to generate. This has
induced me to notice some of what I believe to be
the false positions, and feel to be unsound and danger-
ous doctrines in this paper, believing them of course to
be the honest convictions of the writer, as truly as my
own, which stand apart from them heaven-wide, are of
myself.
The right of search England would establish may
evidently be carried to an extent, so harassing to our
commerce and so dangerous in its results, that vigi-
lance on the part of our own government, as well as
of foreign nations, who have an interest in the preser-
vation of pure and safe international law, is loudly
called for. Those waters, within which the limits of
the Treaty extend, are covered with fleets of American
vessels, pursuing a legal and profitable traffic. That
slavers are to be found also, can no longer be a matter
of doubt. Their atrocities are too well know to need
repetition. Every Englishman, every Frenchman,
every American knows the sad story by heart. How
then, under these circumstances, can it be said, as we
find it in this document, that the purpose of Eng-
land “is not the abolition of slavery, nor yet of
the slave-trade, which are but means subordinate to it.
It is to increase her manufactures, and extend her
commerce, and, as indispensable to this, to substitute
the raw products of India, for the products of Cuba,
10
Brazil, and the United States.” Can any man be so
full of credulity, as to believe England to be so pre-
sumptuous : Her folly, in thus interdicting the raw
products of these specified countries, must be evident
to every man, who will look at the state of exports
through these channels. Restrictions upon colonial
produce, or any interferences with colonial com-
merce, are the most delicate matters a nation has to
deal with. 'The loss to home consumers, in those
countries where colonists are made, per force, the chief
providers, is immense; for they (home consumers)
are the ones, who are to support the superfluous
charges of raising the colonial produce, and also aid
in making the fortunes of colonial planters and mer-
chants, – without the smallest benefit to themselves.
Thus a great tax is drawn from the people, to be
poured into the pockets of the few. The rule works
both ways, and colonies suffer equally, by being con-
fined in their consumption to the articles of the mother
country. Does not every man see, that the twenty
millions of dollars drawn from India annually by Eng-
land, and which is making her “miserably poor,” will
be drawn from broken cisterns yielding no water, un-
less the commercial relations of India are made inde-
pendent of the restrictions of England. England her-
self must see this, and it is preposterous to talk of her
laying plans to shut her markets against the raw pro-
ducts of the world, India excepted. That England,
in her policy towards India, has made egregious blun-
ders, is evident enough, as is shown us in the duties of
“six shillings a gallon on rum, one pound one shilling
11
on shrub, ten shillings on cordials made in the East
Indies,” whereby “the East Indian could not compete
with the West Indian,” and Cuba and Brazil governed
the market; and all this too, as a protection for British-
made spirits, which would be driven from the market.
That she should be slow in repealing the protecting
duty on East India sugar, under these circumstances,
flows as naturally from all this course of policy, as
streams run down from mountain tops. Still she says
this will be done, unless the slave trade is abolished,
and the products of slave labor no longer furnished
from Cuba, Brazil, and the United States, we will thus
shut the market against slave labor products. Shall
we substitute for this course of reasoning, that given us
by “a Kentuckian,” who has it for one of his funda-
mental principles, that of slave labor and free labor,
the former is the cheaper, a position I will hereafter
show to be untrue : Hear his ideas on this matter.
Having spoken of the relation of India with England,
the poverty of the former, and the state of her com-
merce, and her attempts to pronounce slave trade
piracy, with the concurrence of the United States, and
France, he says, “here is a precious mixture | If
France and the United States will not declare the
the slave trade to be piracy, then the American planter
cannot be undersold, unless the duty on East India
sugar be repealed ; and the duty on this East India
sugar cannot be repealed, because then the East India
spirits will supersede British-made spirits, and malt
spirits, and although America has not imported a sin-
gle African slave for more than thirty years, and al-
12
though she has declared the slave trade to be piracy,
and has kept her armed ships on the African coast for
its suppression, (as she will not permit American ves-
sels to be boarded and captured by British cruisers,
and confiscated by a British court,) if we are to be-
lieve the London Times, Great Britain is about to
declare war against her, under pretence of love for
the poor Africans. How much truth there is in this
pretence, will presently be seen, when we come to
speak of her love and sympathy for the poor Irish-
men.” All this “precious mixture,” written with an
admirable spirit of scorn, and drawn before us with
keenest irony, seems to me not far from being worthy
of being considered a true and candid exposition of
facts, as far as regards England. As I have said, and
here repeat, England desires to crush the slave trade.
She unites, or attempts to, with five allied Powers in
the glorious work. She pronounces it piracy. She
threatens to shut her ports and market against the pro-
ducts of slave labor, by underselling these products
with her own from India. If, by these means, she can
subserve the cause of humanity, and bring to a crisis.
the enormities of slavery, God bless her for it ! The
sins already on her head of oppression and misery, she
has brought upon her poor, will grow lighter in the
scale, when weighed down by the result of such a
glorious effort. The blessings and prayers of millions
will be borne to heaven for her, and over her enormi-
ties, for this one act of philanthropy, will the record-
ing angel drop a blotting tear.
To her, Channing has written this glorious tribute.
13
“ Slaves cannot breathe in England.’ I learned this
line when I was a boy, and in imagination I took flight
to the soil, which could never be tainted by slaves.
Through the spirit, which spoke in that line, England
has decreed that slaves cannot breathe in her islands.
Ought we not to rejoice in this new conquest of hu-
manity ? Ought not the tidings of it to have been
received with beaming eyes and beating hearts : In-
stead of this, we demand that Humanity shall retrace her
steps and Liberty resign her trophies. We call on a
great nation to abandon its solemnly pronounced con-
viction of duty, its solemnly pledged respect for human
rights, and to do what it believes to be unjust, in-
human, and base, Is there nothing of insult in such a
demand 2 This case (Creole case) is no common one.
It is no question of policy, not an ordinary diplomatic
concern. A whole people, from no thought of policy,
but, planting itself on the ground of justice and Chris-
tianity, sweeps slavery from its soil, and declares that
no slave shall tread there. This profound religious
conviction, in which all Christian nations are joining
her, we come in conflict with openly and without
shame. Is this an enviable position for a country,
which would respect itself or be respected by the
world It is idle, and worse than idle, to say, as is
sometimes said, that England has no motive but policy
in her movements about slavery. He, who says so,
talks ignorantly or recklessly. I have studied aboli-
tionism in England enough to assure those who have
neglected it, that it was the act not of the politician,
but the people. In this respect it stands alone in
2
14
history. It was a disinterested movement of a Chris-
tian nation in behalf of oppressed strangers, beginning
with Christians, carried through by Christians. The
government resisted it for years. The government was
compelled to yield to the voice of the people. No act
of the English nation was ever so national, so truly the
people's act, as this. And can we hope to conquer the
conscience, as well as the solemnly adopted policy of
this great nation ? Were England to concede this
point, she would prove herself false to known, ac-
knowledged truth and duty. Her freshest, proudest
laurel would wither. The toils and prayers of her
Wilberforces, Clarksons, and a host of holy men, which
now invoke blessings on her, would be turned to re-
proach and shame, and call down the vengeance of
Heaven.” -
Thus speaks this great and good man of the policy
of England, and the spirit of the English people.
From the clear mountain air, which is breathed so pure
and fresh, while communing with him, strengthening,
reviving, giving us faith in man, trust in God and our-
selves, let us turn to the close, narrow, suspicious spirit
of the opposite view, - stifling and murky with the
dust of the world, like the bewildering street of a
crowded city. “A Kentuckian’” says, – “Here is a
solution of the whole matter; British capital was flow-
ing into the United States, not in the shape of gold
and silver, for the large loans contracted in England
were taken in the manufactures of England, which
were again exchanged for labor on the several works
of internal improvement; the effect upon the prosper-
15
ity of England was felt in every department of her
industry. There were then no starving poor; the
manufacturers were compelled to appoint agents, and
offer high wages to obtain laborers; but apprehensions
were excited ; America was too prosperous; her
wealth and population were increasing too rapidly ; it
was foreseen that she would overshadow England. Her
boundless territory and fertile soil were contrasted
with the narrow limits of Great Britain ; a blow was .
aimed at her through her credit, and systematic efforts
made to supersede her great staple, by substituting for
it in the English market the cotton of India ; and all
this was done under a pretence of a horror for slave-
trade, and compassion for the poor negroes. We can-
not believe that this was the motive ; and we refer to
the condition of the poor Irishmen to prove that it
was not.”
Thus is England forced to bear the charge of hypoc-
risy, because forsooth slavery is an institution of the
United States, against which she, and all humanity feel
called upon to contend. We are told, if she could,
“consistently with the rights of her East India sub-
jects, and with what is due to other independent powers,
extend her commerce beyond the utmost limits of her
wishes, no one would have cause to complain. If she
could do this by reducing the cost of productions in
India, or in England, it would be right; but when,
instead of reducing the cost of productions in her own
dominions, she attempts to accomplish it by increasing
it in Cuba, Brazil, and the United States, and adds in-
sult to injury by calumniating the institutions, and at-
16
tempting to trample on the rights of America, her ca-
lumnies will be refuted, her purposes exposed, and her
aggressions resisted by force.”
To do all this, a wonderful combination of circumstan-
ces exists; namely, all communication between Europe
and America is carried on through the British press, on
account of the same language being used in England
and the United States, and everything is thus tinctured
to suit the state of affairs existing ; — let the English
be divided among themselves, as much as may be, they
unite to uphold their country against the world; — the
public opinion of the English goes abroad through
their periodicals, and guides their government, and
points out their way to the world;—in a word England
stands like a beacon, to point to Europe the ways of
the Americans, – to America the ways of the Euro-
peans. And thus her people, her language, her inter-
course with nations, her policy, all combine to help
along the intricate plot she is laying to crush the United
States, and aggrandize herself, and her colonies; — and
everything under the pretence of a desire to abolish
slavery. Here is her Trojan horse, under cover of
whose capacious sides an armed force is to be pushed,
into the very heart of our country, to work out our
rapid destruction. Will we listen to this sagacious
warning, — this word of a prophet, who like
“Laocoön ardens summâ decurrit ab arce P”
Let no Thymoetes induce us to drag it within our
walls. * -
And so the Boundary question, the case of the Caro-
line, the capture of American vessels on the coast of
17
Africa, the right of search, the case of the Creole, all
by a strange combination, have united to crush our
devoted heads, - being but “the apparent questions at
issue,” the outer coating of the horse, beneath which
lie the armed men, the true and real question. This
we are to have pointed out to us in the course of the
following heads. -
“I. Of the United States, their form of government,
and the relation to slavery and the slave-trade.
“2. Of the slave-trade, and the exaggerations in re-
lation to it.
“3. Of the commercial necessities which control
the policy of England, and her revival of the slave-
trade.
“4. Of India, and her relations as a colony of Eng-
land.
“5. Of the condition of the laboring poor of Ire-
land.”
Of some of these I shall not speak, my object being
chiefly to point out the misstatements and fallacies of
the document before me with regard to the slave-trade,
and what relates to it; — having already shown, what
I believe to be the policy of Great Britain in this mat-
ter. Many of the remarks upon India, and the state
of the Irish, have no bearing upon the subject, — being
merely useful as a means of exciting an idea of the
comforts of the wretched in our land, - by placing be-
fore us those still more miserable in foreign countries.
“Of the United States, their form of government
and their relation to Slavery and the Slave-Trade.”
While the United States were still colonies of Great
2 %
18
Britain, and when the feebleness of infancy forbade
even the thought of manly independence, the introduc-
tion of the slave-trade commenced. I have already
spoken of the “ odious distinction '' attached to Sir
John Hawkins and his vessel of having first attracted
the notice of England to the trade, and referred to it
as an opening of a traffic, which had heretofore been
confined to the kidnappers of natives on our shores,
a delicate attention to the aborigines which began with
Columbus himself. The ship of Thomas Keyser and
James Smith, who were members of the Massachusetts
Colony, never accomplished its object, which was to bring
a cargo of Africans to America, on account of the in-
dignation of the people who reprimanded the iniquity,
and forced the proprietors of the abominable plan to
restore the injured people to their native shores. The
efforts of Gorton and Roger Williams, in 1652, did
much towards ameliorating the condition of the slaves
at that time in their colonies, and left the spirit of their
teachings so firmly planted among the people, that to
this very day we see its fruits in the glorious stand
they have taken against this inhuman oppression. But
in Virginia the feeling was totally different. The trade
began before the fortunate discovery was made, that a
whole race of men existed, whose mental and physical
organization peculiarly adapted them to servitude, be-
fore a black skin became equivalent to the collar of the
slave. “White servants came to be an usual article
of traffic.” And the Scots of Dunbar, the Irish Cath-
olics, followers of Penruddoc, became saleable property,
as a reward for their belief and endeavors. In 1620,
19
before the Plymouth Colony arrived, a Dutch man of
war came into James River, with 20 negroes for sale.
The Dutch, for many years, held the trade, supplying
the planters, whom cupidity blinded to the evils of
slavery, with laborers of this sort. From this day the
traffic became general, and grew up, and became in-
corporated with our southern colonies, strengthening
with their strength, as much a part of their institutions,
as their laws and their chartered immunities. That
they were involuntarily forced into this by England,
and that one great universal ground of complaint
(some of the colonies did complain) against the mother
country was, that she “compelled them to receive
African slaves,” are historical facts brought before us
by this document, now for the first time. Our country
entered upon the Revolution, without distinction of
state or colony. The struggle was a universal one, for
freedom from oppression ; — or rather the time of mi-
nority was over, and the youth was free in the order of
nature. Of course, an institution like slavery became
an important question with the rising government. A
degree of latitude seemed to divide the slaveholding
from the non-slaveholding states, and soil and climate
became, as it were, the index of universal freedom, or
partial bondage. Here was a delicate point, and the
necessity of some degree of compromise appeared evi-
dent to every one. In achieving their liberty, the col-
onies were not purged in consequence of all foul dis-
tempers, which had gathered during their colonial con-
ditions; — they had been slaveholding colonies, and
were now slaveholding independent states.
20
We are told here, that “the black man was not
equal to the white, and legislation could not make him
so'; — that “to emancipate the slave, without giving
him equal political rights, would have created a de-
graded caste ’’; — that “to have given them equal
political rights, constituting them a part of the govern-
ment, would have inoculated the government with a
mortal disease, which would have caused its premature
decay”; that “they had no alternative, but to recog-
nise and continue the preexisting system of slavery.”
And then comes the announcement of how much they
did to “meliorate the condition of the slave,” how
strictly his interest and that of his master were identi-
fied, and a delightful comparison drawn between the
state of the slave and his “ three suits of clothes a
year,” with comfortable food and lodging, and the poor
of Ireland starving and freezing, in filthy mud hovels,
with mere rags to protect them from the cold, damp,
piercing winds of their island. As if you might feed
a man into abject servitude As if a warm shed, and
clean blanket could heal the wounds of a crushed soul |
As if the spirit of man knew nothing beyond the
morsel of bread between his teeth, and was to be held
halter-broken to a crib, for mere animal warmth, and
beastly fatness | Is this what nature, and the efforts
of man from the creation of the world until now, teach
us? Have privations, and sufferings, and keen agony
been endured for mere bodily comfort? Do the deck
of the Mayflower, the icy rocks of Plymouth, the fro-
zen graves of that little band of martyrs for the soul's
freedom, teach us this Men have not lived lives of
21
distress, and died deaths of torture, that their race
might live, and die like animals, fattened at the stall.
Freedom, in the squalid hut of the Esquimaux, stands
mountain high, with sun-illumined top, and bracing
air, when placed beside this bondage of even the
sleekest jewelled slave, that ever lazily fanned an East-
ern despot. “ The American slave nursed in Sick-
ness, and comfortably provided for in old age " '
God knows he has a sickness, which knows no comfort,
an old age for whose trembling, tottering limbs, and
earnest longings for death, earth has no provision ;
the infirmities and sicknesses of his soul! What
medicines avail, unless freedom be made their vehicle
of administering 2
Notwithstanding the dilemma into which the states
were thrown, by being thus burthened with a popula-
tion, which held neither the ground of human beings,
nor that of animals, a provision was evidently intended
to be made for them, by Art. I, sec. 9, p. 1, of the
Constitution, which says: — The migration or impor-
tation of such persons, as any of the states now ex-
isting shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibit-
ed by the congress, prior to the year one thousand
eight hundred and eight, but a tax may be imposed on
such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each
person.” This moderate and safe provision was all
the times would bear ; and a postponement for twenty
years of all agitation of the subject seemed called for,
by the loose, unsettled state of the country, whose
growth and union needed every encouragement, and a
careful abstinence from all unnecessary shocks. To
22
the men of those times all credit is due for having
done what lay in their power towards benefitting the
condition of the slave. “It is to the honor of America,
that she should have set the first example of interdict-
ing and abolishing the slave-trade, in modern times.
She stood forth alone, uncheered and unaided, in
stamping ignominy upon this traffic, on the very face
of her constitution of government, although there were
strong temptations of interest to draw her aside from
the performance of this great moral duty.” Twenty
years of rest were allowed, in which the public might
prepare itself for further agitation of the question ; —
for agitated it must and would be, where a whole na-
tion stood forth avowedly, to defend the rights of man.
And agitated it was, with what savor to the South is
known to every body. An interference on the part of
the general government has been pronounced uncon-
stitutional, men who have mooted the question, traitors,
and even martyrs have sanctified the cause of anti-
slavery with their blood. We find “a Kentuckian’”
contending that the “American government, so far from
having any authority to abolish slavery, are bound by
the federal compact to resist any attempt on the part
of any foreign power, to interfere with the rights of
the master as established.” We are brought by him
to this conclusion in the following manner.
The colonies, which in 1776 declared themselves
independent, became “separate sovereign states,” each
independent of any other, and recognising its own in-
stitutions. For the sake of more firm union, they
chose delegates, who met and adopted the present
23
constitution, binding upon any nine states, who chose
to enter into a compact. - -
He says, “It will thus be seen, that the federal
constitution is a compact between sovereign and inde-
pendent states. These states carried into convention,
great diversity of opinion. Some of the delegates were
in favor of a monarchy, some preferred a president and
senate for life; many desired to create a strong central
government; but the conflict between the colonies and
the mother country had begotten a repugnance to mon-
archy; and an apprehension that a strong central gov-
ernment would end in the despotism of an absolute
monarchy, in which the interests of the weaker sec-
tions would be sacrificed by the combinations of the
stronger, induced the weaker states to insist upon re-
serving an equal voice in the senate, and to resist every
attempt to give the federal government any further do-
mestic control, than was indispensable to union among
themselves, and to the successful administration of their
foreign relations. The federal constitution, therefore,
while it constitutes them one distinct nation, as to all
the rest of the world, is but a compact between sover-
eign states, regulating their intercourse with each oth-
er, which compact was not intended to interfere with
the constitution, or form of government prečxisting in
the several states, who in adopting it considered and
treated each other as separate governments.”
In some portions of the country slavery existed, and
it was thought that the relation, which the “British
government had forced upon them, could not be chang-
ed,” consistently with their own safety, or the happiness
24
of the blacks themselves. In forming the compact, the
Question of slavery had no weight or influence. The
non-slaveholding states “had no right to demand that
the slaveholding states should abolish slavery, and make
that a condition of their becoming parties of the federal
government.” The question was not slavery, but
whether “they should become parties to the federal
constitution.” “In doing so, the several states became
members of the federal government, reserving to them-
selves the exclusive control over their domestic in-
stitutions, and hence, as domestic slavery was a domes-
tic institution, and under the exclusive jurisdiction of
the respective states, the federal government being
charged with the foreign relations of all these states, is
alike bound to protect the interest and property of all,
— and hence so long as any state shall recognise the
property of the master in his slave, the federal govern-
ment is as much bound to protect that right of prop-
erty, as it is to protect the right of property of the
merchant in his ship.” Here comes in the case of the
Creole, the restitution of which, and compensation for
the loss of which, is defended on the ground here
taken. With regard to this individual case the ad-
mirably clear and forcible arguments of Dr. Channing,
in his “ Duty of the Free States,” are sufficient to
convince any one, who is not either wedded to the in-
stitutions of the South, or delicately careful of all
state-interests, be they state-rights or not.
Passing by, therefore, this individual question, let us
come to the general one of the right of interference
with slavery, on the part of the general government.
25
We have seen in the paper before us, that it is to be
held sacred, unmolested as the right of citizenship.
The states in which it is tolerated came into the Union,
supporting it as one of their rights, and in this same
light they are to continue their existence in it. The
non-slaveholding States have no voice in the matter.
Can anything be more palpably wrong than such rea-
soning as this? Looking back to the article of the
Constitution already quoted, we find there a direct in-
terference with a traffic, which belonged to separate in-
dependent States in the days of its adoption. By for-
bidding all prohibition prior to 1808, we are led to in-
fer that after this date some attention might be paid to
the suppression of this traffic. It is true, as the writer
before us says, “it did not escape the attention of those
who passed upon the Federal Constitution, that the sen-
timent of the age was setting against slavery.” They
did indeed see, that “poets and philanthropists would
decry it,” and undoubtedly, in their own patriotic hearts,
they looked forward to the time, when the voices of
these “poets and philanthropists” might be heard.
Undoubtedly their design was to leave it open to
action at some future day, when the age of the repub-
lic had rendered action safe, and the indignation of
men pronounced it absolutely necessary. That time
has come. In designating a special tax on the impor-
tation of slaves, they went as far as they could, but
left a principle behind them, which, carried out, would
do much toward ridding us and the world of the curse
of slavery. A power was reserved of taking a part
and interest in a great national calamity. “All powers
3
26
not delegated by the Constitution to the United States,
nor inhibited by it to the States, were reserved to the
States respectively, or to the people.” Power was given
to act upon the slave-trade. Acting to a certain extent
implied the right to go further. And, were it a matter
interesting individual States alone, (which it is not),
such is its nature, that, as part of the great family of
man, a Christian government is called on to raise its
voice against it. That an act might pass Congress that,
at any specified time, all people within the limits of the
United States should be free, and receive the sanction
of the Federal Court, is a fact which every citizen
should understand. Congress, as a body of delegates
from all the States in the Union, should feel this right.
The question becomes, as it were, international between
the States; and as the piracy of a State would be pun-
ishable by the general government under which the
State was bound, and to which it looked for protection,
so should slavery, as worse than piracy, be a matter of
Federal interest.
Let us carry out this principle of the right of each
independent State, and suppose Massachusetts were to
repeal its laws with regard to slavery, and commence
even at this late hour the establishment of a new insti-
tution within its territory. Would the vote of the le-
gislature of Massachusetts render any freeman a slave :
Would a cargo of Africans, brought into one of her
ports, become, as soon as they set foot on her soil, pro-
perty and mere chattels Would the act of one little
corner of the earth make the very air a breath of bond-
age Wherein would differ the seizure of an English
27
citizen, and of a Mendi citizen 2 And even suppose a
drove of Virginian slaves were purchased to supply her
wants, would the fact of their birth subject them to be
slaves wherever they might be, merely on a vote of the
government of the land of their adoption ? Would here
be no question for the Federal Government 2 Would not
here be a question, which would go to the people For
there are those questions according to the words of the
document before us, which are “reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people,” which are “not delegat-
ed by the Constitution to the United States.” And
the people would bare their shoulders in an instant, to
carry it before the Federal Government.
And here I come to another point, which is, that the
question of slavery does not interest one State alone, but
the Union, the people of the United States, the inhabi-
tants of the world ; and can no more be confined in its
influences to a few States south of a certain degree of
latitude, than the waters of the Atlantic can confine
their blessings to the shores of the little Island of Great
Britain, or serve only to waft fishing vessels for the in-
habitants of Cape Cod. We would be made to believe
that the slaveholding States are alone concerned in this
affair. But when we look at the movements of our na-
tional government, the votes of Congress, the style of
debate there adopted, the tone of sectional feeling, the
jealous, watchful pertinacity with which every point,
that ever threatens to press hard upon slavery, is attack-
ed, we cannot even deceive ourselves so much as to
think we have no concern with slavery, even in a self-
ish point of view. The bold, reckless bearing of the
28
South towards their brethren of the North has rarely
met with that dignified and determined opposition,
which was so much needed; and the control, in all im-
portant questions, of the southern interests has been al-
ways shamefully evident. The votes of the southern
planters, who number with their own those of three
fifths of their slaves, certainly have their bearing upon
the acts of our Federal Government. Shall we be told,
we have nothing to do with those people, whose votes
are as influential as our own ; and who exert their in-
fluence upon the same legislative bodies : Have we no
interest in an institution, which we are told has a salu-
tary influence, in the order of Providence, towards
checking the majority-influence of our land
And this idea deserves particular notice. We are told
that “De Tocqueville, in his able work on America, ap-
prehends that the influence of an absolute majority may
prejudice American institutions.” The checks of the
different parts of our Federal Government, the legisla-
tive, executive, and judicial, each upon the other, and
that of the House and Senate reciprocally, are given as
evidence that ours is a government of concurring major-
ities, rather than of an absolute majority. So far so
good. But when in the same breath we are told, that
“a popular ascendency, even under these checks, is
still further restricted by the slaveholding States, where
slaves are excluded from the polls, which is equivalent
to a limitation upon the right of suffrage,” the spirit of
our Constitution writhes before us in agony at such an
unholy trampling. As far as in them lies the slaves are
part of the majority or minority, as their masters may
29
happen to be themselves. Three fifths of them are
citizens, inasmuch as voting constitutes a citizen, and
the remaining two fifths have no more influence, count
no more among the actual inhabitants of the country,
than so many"animals, or trees, or acres of land. The
fact of their existing here under the same sky with us
gives them no more part and lot in our government,
than they would have, roaming the sands of Africa.
Why not tell us, a great mass of our population con-
sists of women and children, and these hold a check
upon the majority ? The idiots and paupers in our land
have just as much to do with majorities and minorities,
as these unfortunate beings, whose negative existence
renders them mere convenient tools for any argument
however fallacious, objects of any policy however ini-
quitous.
And then suppose there were a shadow of truth in
the assertion, that they hold such a check, that the vi-
tality of our government is nourished and preserved by
the system of slavery, had it not better fall, than stand
supported by such a foul, unholy pillar I know not
what must be the spirit of that man, who would sup-
pose for a moment the work of the mighty fathers of
our land, men who attested with their lives, and estab-
lished by their deaths the principle, that “all men are
born free and equal,” could be built upon such a foun-
dation. The ignominy of slavery rests weightily enough
upon us now, without incorporating it with our institu-
tions, and rendering it the balance-wheel of all our fed-
eral machinery. An indignant sun would refuse to
shine upon such a land. In all the annals of time, We
3 %
30
find no such preposterous institution as that, whose ex-
istence in perfection depended upon the bondage of a
portion of the human race. It cannot be, that we are
necessarily, as well as by the most unfortunate accident
that ever happened in the course of man's short-sighted
plans, cursed with the evils of slavery. If sincere and
holy men framed our Constitution, God grant the sins
of slaveholders, and the bloody anguish of a whole de-
graded race may not be required to support their hon-
est work.
No man can listen to such unfounded assertions, and
the odium of believing them must rest upon him who
utters them; the silent man by his silence demands that
we say to him, “Thou art clean.” And he who will
thus speak out must receive the charitable sentence,
“Thou art mad.”
With regard to the writer’s reference to the doctrine
of De Tocqueville, that “an absolute majority may pre-
judice American institutions,” I will say a word. The
doctrine appears to be, as far as it can be drawn from
two of the most unintelligible chapters ever written,
and which occupy considerable space in “Democracy
of America,” that the monarchy of a majority is just as
bad as the monarchy of an absolute sovereign. There
is nothing to choose between the despotism of “ King
George and King People.” The minority is silenced
into a quiet submission by the sceptre of the ballot-box,
and must be “yoked to the triumphant car of the major-
ity,” whether they will or not. The tide cannot be
resisted. It is well known how highly he was ap-
plauded, for the advancement of this opinion, by all
31
Englishmen of the Conservative class, how the London
Quarterly culled these chapters as the cream of the
whole work, how Sir Robert Peel, in his inaugural
speech at Glasgow, eulogized them, and how every
Englishman exclaimed against such oppression, and
pronounced his own liberty infinitely more perfect. Is
the following sentiment true 2 “In our day, the most
absolute sovereigns in Europe cannot prevent certain
opinions, hostile to their power, from circulating secret-
ly among their subjects, and even at their courts.
While the majority is doubtful, the discussion pro-
ceeds; but no sooner is the decision pronounced, than
all is silent. Enemies and friends yoke themselves
alike to the triumphant car of the majority.” Do our
newspapers, do our caucuses, do our public debates, do
Our private communings, do our orators, do the
walls of every workshop, inn, church, dwelling in
the country, do our elections, and the mighty
changes which have been wrought in our political
affairs within the last eighteen months, bear wit-
ness to the truth of this assumption ? I doubt if
De Tocqueville or “a Kentuckian '' ever saw an Amer-
ican, who felt himself silenced by the proceedings of a
majority. “Debating the point ’’ is his inalienable
right. The work of an American minority is to be-
come a majority by all means in its power; — would
that it were confined to all fair and honorable means.
What the checks, therefore, found in our form of gov-
ernment have to do with the phantasms of De Tocque-
ville, I cannot see ; and I doubt if he would see these
visions himself, did he know what a barbarous remedy
our friend, “a Kentuckian,” had offered him for them.
32
Before leaving this part of the document, I wish to
quote one paragraph, which is brought in to sum up
the whole matter, and at which every man, be he
English or American, should blush.
“Thus, in the working of this complex system, the
institution of slavery counteracts the influence of uni-
versal suffrage, and prevents the ascendency of that
absolute majority, of the evils of which Mr. De Tocque-
ville was apprehensive ; and, therefore, the Ameri-
can statesman places a much higher estimate upon it,
than the mere right of property ; — and the intelligent
European will see, that it constitutes a distinct element
in American society, acting upon the machinery of
government, which is not applicable to the States of
Europe. Hence any opinions in relation to democ-
racy in the United States, predicated upon universal
suffrage in a European State, would be entirely falla-
cious.”
I would have every American read and reread this
paragraph, until he has seen the spirit of every line,
and ask himself, if he can be proud of a country thus
conditioned, of a citizen thus deluded. A “complex
system,” indeed ; —better denominate it an unholy
system. Where is the “American statesman,” who
places a much higher estimate upon slavery, “than the
mere right of property " ? Will any man, who has
pledged himself to defend the Constitution, dare to
stand up and avow this as one of his principles Will
any man in a free State desire to ? Beside the falsity
of such a position, which falsity I have already pointed
out, the hard-hearted iniquity of it comes before every
33
one, who has a spark of humanity, as the most awful
feature in the whole dark matter. The total blindness
to the moral nature of man, to the nobility of the hu-
man soul, an embodiment of which is in every man even
the most degraded, to the rights and responsibilities of
every being, to the great distinction there is between a
man and a brute, to the great sympathetic chain exist-
ing between man and man, the blindness to, and igno-
rance of all these great truths evinced in this single
idea are humiliating. The want of love for the human
race, without which a man is unfit to live and deserves
not the name of man, here shown, is sickening to the
Soul.
When the “intelligent European * does “see that
slavery constitutes a distinct element in American
Society, acting upon the machinery of government,
which is not applicable to the States of Europe,” he
may well bless God that it is so ; that he lives in a
land owning no such element; that in the machinery of
his government, no such foul wheel is to be found;
that his country knows no such sin. And he may
well blush for free America, whose freedom is such a
shadow, for institutions thus unchristian, for an Ameri-
can citizen, who can thus boldly come forth and tell
him, “here is the keystone of our great political arch,
and I call upon you to respect it, as the supporter of
the most glorious fabric in the civilized world.” No
such temple can stand. Converted literally into a
“den of thieves,” its mercenary indwellers shall flee
forth before the first “whip of small cords,” which the
hand of some great reformer shall apply to them. The
34
“tables of the money-changers ” shall be overthrown,
some conquering Titus shall come with Roman legions,
and the polluted temple, with its gilded domes and
golden pillars, shall be destroyed, a derision, a byword
among men. -
We cannot allow the institutions of our country to
be thus libelled, without speaking out a feeble word
for their defence. When our citizens in foreign lands
will publish such calumnies to the world, we, who are
left behind, should with honest indignation repel the
charge. A word like this, uttered by “a Kentuckianſ”
from Paris, should come across the water but to be
denied and refuted ; it should knock in vain for ad-
mission into any American heart; it should go through
the land beggared, reviled, repulsed, without even a
whisper of charity.
And what are we to understand by the statement,
that “any opinions in relation to democracy in the
United States, predicated upon universal suffrage in a
European State, would be entirely fallacious : " Are
we to believe that universal suffrage does not exist
among us, in a degree of perfection as great as can
ever be hoped for With the exception of minors,
women, paupers, and slaves, and those under guardian-
ship, where is the citizen who has not his right at the
polls? Hordes of foreigners, it is true, are not entitled
to this right; but every man, who can call himself a
citizen, can exercise the right; and what more can be
desired or expected 2 We might include every living
being, who could prove his blood to be human, and
thus satisfy the most hypercritical upon the word uni-
35
versal. Every animal might be made to count, or per-
haps in conformity with the concessions made the South,
every man might include three fifths of his live stock
under his own title. And why not ? According to
the institutions of the South, slaves are no better than
animals; and yet in the exercise of that great right of
the freeman, suffrage, each planter includes three fifths
of these very beings, who constitute part of his live
stock, part of his goods and chattels. Under these
circumstances, have the North no voice in this matter
of slavery Have they no right to contend, that every
voter is a citizen, and as such, claims the rights of an
American citizen : Is not the meeting of hands in the
ballot-box a mutual pledge of citizenship, and a call
upon each other to defend the rights of citizenship 7
If, between the toes of my dog I found a legal vote,
and in the statute books found also his right to de-
posite it, I should be called on to respect him as a
fellow citizen; how much more then him, who differs
from me merely in complexion.
These are the inconsistencies of the South. Hu-
manity aside, the whole Union has an interest in, a
right to have a voice in any institution, any set of men,
who have an influence upon the ballot-box. To this
peculiar institution of slavery we are called on to make
all concessions, grant all protection, carefully abstain
from all interference with its privileges, no matter how
exceptionable they may be to the consistency of the
Union, no matter how powerfully we feel [their influ-
ence upon our own selves. We are to see humani-
ty outraged, our feelings of benevolence tortured, our
* 36
right of speech almost questioned, and sit in patient
silence. Our legislators have been too listless upon
this point. With a few honorable exceptions, they
have suffered themselves to be muzzled by the South,
they have allowed the question of slavery, infused into
every act that has come before them, to have unob-
structed sway. In the Tariff Bill, in the Bank Ques-
tion, in the Appropriation Bill, in our admission of
new States, in many of our foreign relations, this
hundred-headed hydra has managed to get some one
of its many eyes into the windows of our hall of legis-
lation, and breathe some of its accursed spirit into the
whole atmosphere. And yet we have no interest, as
a nation, in the question.
And what gives it this control, but the too great
extent of “Universal Suffrage ** True, no State of
Europe could have such a suffrage, God be praised for
it. No State would desire to have included in this
universal right a degraded class of beings, who from
their unfortunate situation were made political tools, a
bone of political contention. It is an anomaly in all
legislation, in all voting, this relation of the slaves to
the ballot-box. It presents benefits only to dreamy
minds. Its “counteracting influence” works the
wrong way. The control it has upon majority-influ-
ence is, as I have before shown, purely visionary.
And a European has no reason to be guided, by the
fact of its existence, into any opinion whatever of our
democratic institutions. Universal suffrage in Europe
and America, and all the world over, is one and the
same thing. The exemption of two fifths of a man’s
37
chattels does not destroy its universality. But we have
in this, one distorted feature of our Constitution, at
which the spirit of true democracy stands aghast,
stricken into perfect silence with horror. With this
plague-spot upon her, how can our country flourish
“Our relations to slavery, and the slave-trade,” are
thus unfortunate. They bear no palliation; their evils
cannot be extenuated. These evils bear us down, with
the terrible fury of an avalanche. No one point in them
is bright, smooth them over as we will. It is pain-
ful to see any citizen disposed to gloss them ; more
than painful, to see any one pointing out their absolute
good. I would question the sincerity of no man, no
nation of men, who adopted a policy in opposition to
them. I would never doubt the humanity of England,
in her strivings against the slave-trade. She does not
open her ports to mutineers and murderers, and offer
them protection beneath her flag; but she says to the
oppressed — “Go free,” — and gives assistance to
those, who, in establishing their freedom, know no such
names as mutiny and murder. Her purposes need not
the suspicious eye of the slaveholder to unmask them;
— in her opposition to the slave-trade and its horrors,
the broad light of the noonday sun will reveal her de-
signs and smile upon her efforts.
And I come now to
“The slave-trade and the eacaggerations in relation
to it.” -
I doubt not, the iniquity of this traffic has led many
zealous minds into a degree of exaggeration, with re-
gard to its extent; though the most vivid imagination
4
; : * ~ āş;
38
of the most enthusiastic could not increase the horrors,
which are attendant upon it. I am not disposed to be-
lieve with the Edinburgh Review, that the increase of
slaves in Brazil is owing to importation alone; neither
do I see any reason for assuming in the case of this
country, Cuba, or the United States of America, the
position, that the importation has ceased. Why, amid
the hardships of their existence in a state of bondage,
in some of the Spanish slaveholding states, may we
not believe the deaths to exceed the births, as well as
the contrary 2 Slavery in Brazil may be very different
from slavery in the United States of America, and,
with regard to Cuba, I believe this is actually the case.
Numerical calculations avail little in a question of this
character, as may be seen by examining the document
before us. Thus the Edinburgh Review says, “The
slave population of Brazil in 1792 was 600,000, − and
the annual decrease by excess of deaths over births is
5 per cent, which in ten years would have reduced the
numbers to a little more than 360,000, − and in 1835
it is easy to show, that they would have been reduced
to about 68,000. Now instead of that the census in
1835 gave 2,100,000 as the number of slaves.”
During twenty years, allowing for the losses of those
imported, the calculation gives the number brought
into the country as “2,600,000, or 130,000 annually.”
In Cuba also similar calculations are made, upon an
excess of 83 per cent of deaths over births. And yet
the increase is such as to warrant the conclusion, that
in Brazil and Cuba together 245,000 slaves are annu-
ally imported.
g fe *
• * * - - ," t $ *
... • * * * . g 4
• * . * * * *
. &
39
In opposition to this the paper before us says,
“Now if it be not true that five per cent more die than
are born, the assertion is not proved. All that we have
to do is to reverse the statement, and assume that five
per cent more are born than die, and we can prove
that 1,000,000 have been exported from, instead of
2,600,000 imported into Brazil.” -
Strange as it may appear, the reversion of any as-
sumption or calculation is apt to lead to a different
conclusion ; and the absurdity of the reversion being
as great as the assumption itself, and its result as pre-
posterous, I leave it to the reader to choose of the
tWO.
The parallel drawn between Brazil and the United
States amounts to nothing. We are told the “num-
ber of slaves, in 1790, in the United States was 697,
897.” “Not a single African slave has been imported
into the United States for more than 30 years, and
many of the natural increase have been emancipated;
yet in 1840 there were 2,487,113. By the same parity
of reasoning,” used with regard to Brazil, “we could
prove that more than 4,600,000 have been imported
into the United States, within the last thirty years,
when we know not a single African slave has been
imported. Now as by the increase of slaves in Brazil,
and the United States, we find that it has been about
the same in both, and as we know, that there has not
been a single slave imported into the United States,
we must be excused, if we do not believe the statement
in relation to Brazil.”
Comparing too the price of a slave at Havana
40
given by Sir Thomas Buxton, which is about $420,
with the assertion that 113,000 slaves are imported
annually into Cuba, and we see that the expense of
this importation would be 48,300,000 dollars, a sum
which the writer in the Post, and every body else, may
well wonder at ; for it places the expenditure for
slaves at 27,300,000 more than all the export of the
Island. -
Now what have we proved to us by all this? Why,
merely that people will make extravagant calculations,
when heated by zeal. The fact, that Brazil has kept
somewhat in a line with the United States in the in-
crease of her slaves, gives no strength to the argument,
that no importation is carried on in the former, be-
cause none is in the latter. The condition of Brazilian
slaves differs from that of those in the United States,
and we may safely assume their mortality to be greater,
and their importation greater, to supply the deficiency.
If the slaves in Brazil increase as fast as those in the
United States, and the excess of deaths over births is
at the same time 5 per cent, we must believe in a vast
importation. The whole affair is involved in supposi-
tions. The expense of slaves in Cuba militates with
the calculated importation, but confirms the fact of
importation itself, and this is sufficient. In Brazil and
Cuba the trade is not restricted ; in the United States
it is ; and, although in the last a lawless trade does not
exist to sustain a vile institution, in the first two the
traffic is still excessive. Its exact extent of course
cannot be determined. That it does exist, every
merchantman trading thither can bear witness; the
41
“ long, low, rakish schooners” in those waters can
attest ; and the voice of those indignant sufferers who
freed themselves on board the Amistad can firmly
prove. And this of itself is sufficient. A single slave-
ship crossing the Atlantic is enough to call forth a fleet
against her. There is more wrong, more sin, more
sorrow and bitterness on board that single ship, than
would serve to curse a nation. All the holiest ties of
kindred, all the tenderest affections, all the divine
rights of man, are there ruthlessly trampled on. And
there are men there, whose national feebleness, whose
unfortunately weak condition in moral and intellectual
life, call with the agony of a dying man upon the na-
tions of the earth to redress their injuries. Their own
people are unable to assist them. In the hands of the
whole world God has placed their cause ; it is a busi-
ness concerning the whole race of civilized man, to
see that the wrongs of that little band of sufferers are
prevented and punished. We need no numbers to
prove to us this. The fact is as true with regard to
one, as one million. If the flag of America is made a
protector for such a traffic, the United States themselves
are called upon to unite in a league to suppress such a
violation.
Every sober man may safely disbelieve the extrava-
gant calculations of zealots, and the exaggerations
which the most simple-minded may see; but the soul
of that man will find in the slave-trade a sickening
sore. No statements are necessary to rouse the “be-
nevolent people of England and of the world '' to a
discussion of these awful principles. “To engraft a
4 %
42
new principle upon the law of nations, to enable Great
Britain to suppress the slave-trade,” is an effort called
forth by no deceitful tales, no art, no exaggeration of
the truth; but the bare fact of an iniquitous traffic
existing calls at the same time for its remedy. Indig-
nation and sorrow over the whole earth are roused by
the cries of a whole agonized class of men. This is no
attack upon windmills; the Crusade commenced is no
Quixotic burlesque. The evil may be magnified.
Enthusiasm always enlarges the objects under its eye.
This is one great means of its subsistence. But it is
in a righteous cause the spirit of God, breathing life
into the soul of man. It is the burning bush. We
may not curse it for its extravagances, but bless it for
its endeavors. In the question of the slave-trade, it
despises numbers; it attacks principles; and it will
succeed.
“Of the commercial necessities which control the
policy of England, and her revival of the slave-trade,”
I shall have but few words to say. The necessities
referred to are clearly pointed out by the correspondent
of the Post, and their bearing upon English policy.
The deplorable state of the laboring population in
England, arising out of their corn laws, their protec-
tion of colonial produce, and consequent restrictions
upon free trade, are well known to the world. The
earnest meetings of hosts of chartists, crying not for
liberty but for bread, and their appeals against the
trampling, crushing tyranny under which they are
writhing, make one’s blood boil. It is not in the
power of man to put down these heartfelt appeals.
43
The winds of heaven bear the sound from the Smoky
walls of Manchester to the farthest freeman on the
earth. There must be a remedy for these evils, or
England will be blotted from among the list of nations.
Her redemption lies in her efforts against slavery.
I will not enter into a detail of the difficulties, under
which England is now laboring internally ; but I do
not see what relief she is to find from them, by haras-
sing the commerce of the United States. A certain
class of politicians would have us believe, she saw her
remedy in this, and masked her intentions under a
pretended desire to discontinue the slave-trade. The
most delicately suspicious eye must be needed to see
this. The evil is internal; the remedy affects herself
alone. The changes must apply to the protection
duties laid on her colonial produce, to the taxation
necessary to keep in motion the expensive machinery
of her government, to the extravagant restrictions upon
such foreign produce, as comes within the list of the
absolute necessaries of life. Her wildly grasping ambi-
tion must be checked. There is nothing to choose be-
tween the motives of her army cut off in Afghanistan,
and that of Nicholas routed by the Circassians with
such retributive justice. The intention of such outfits
as these indicates a tone of design, which must be
changed. A selfish ambition is the sin of England;
but it is a sin which will never be nurtured by any
attempts to abolish the slave-trade. In this thing she
has been instigated by men of the purest principles,
whose noble hearts beat as quick at any exhibitions of
misery in their own land, as in the remotest corners of
44
the earth. They looked not over the hills around
them to the mountains beyond, but included all in the
glance of their quick eye.
In competing with slaveholding countries in her
commerce, she may be allowed to pass what restric-
tions and repeals she chooses upon the existing laws
of trade. By repealing the duty on East India sugar,
she is taking one step against the produce of slave
labor; and were she to do this, wherein consists the
enormity of the act? Deeply involved as she is in an
intricate maze of troubles, starvation at home, disputes
and colonial tempests abroad, whatever efforts she may
make against slavery will stand as beacon lights to
cheer her way over the stormy waters. We may be
told with a conscious nod of wisdom, that simultane-
ously arose her fear of being second to the United
States in the scale of nations, and her opposition to
slavery. By opposing the latter, as an American insti-
tution, in which the vitality of American commerce
and her absolute existence were involved, England
hopes to aggrandize herself and crush her aspiring
rival. For this she enters into an involved train of
proceedings, by means of which her wretched poor at
home are reduced to a state infinitely worse than the
lowest slave under the lash of a Brazilian master. Much
is said to us about free labor, and the iniquitous man-
ner in which England has reduced it below the price
of slave labor; much about the “dead weight” of
slavery, the maintenance of the old, the infirm, the sick,
&c., and an ingenious comparison, brought in between
the perishing aged and sick poor of England, and the
45
comfortable grey-haired slave, basking in the Sun, under
the eaves of his master’s cottage, making the former
one of the blessings of England's free labor ; much
about declaring slave-trade to be piracy, and subject-
ing the culprit to be tried in this, (Great Britain,) and -
not in his own country; as if it were not worse than
piracy; much about the power of search between Africa
and Cuba, giving England a control of all the carrying
trade beyond the Cape of Good Hope ; and much that is
awful, very awful, about all England’s distresses, and her
anxious lookings here and there to rid herself of them.
And are we not indignant at all these wrongs : How
beautiful stands in comparison our own institution of sla-
very, firm, strong, a corner stone well polished, the
delight of the builders. No — no ; — it sounds out
absurdity — absurdity, in the whole air, when so
strange a medley is told us. England appears no
Mephistopheles yet.
More than all, we are told she has revived the
slave-trade.
Where and how has she done this It is said, by
the following act; — “No emigrant arriving from India
at Mauritius shall, in Mauritius, be capable of entering
into any contract for service, except for the period, in
the manner, and under the superintendence, which by
a law in force there is required, in case of contracts
for service, by other laborers in agriculture or manu-
factures, within the said island.” If emigrants choose
therefore to exchange their home in India for one in
Mauritius, they are subject to this regulation. Analogi-
cal with it is the power resting in the landholder over
46
free blacks, who reside on his plantation, to compel
them to work, and to control their wages. In our
small manufacturing villages, the tenant lives in some-
what the same light, with regard to the owner of his
dwelling and his employer. If he chooses to occupy
the tenement provided by his employer, he submits to
the control of his wages assumed by the latter, and is
compelled by him to work, as part of the agreement
whereby he is allowed to occupy the dwelling provided
for him. In any one of these three instances is there
to be found a single feature of slavery : Does it show
in any one point the cloven foot, so peculiarly slavery’s
own 2 A slave is such involuntarily. He has no voice
in the matter ; and his departure from his native land,
to that which is to be his home in sorrow and misery,
bears no more resemblance to the emigration of those
people referred to, from India to Mauritius, than the
passage of the free and happy British sailor does to
that of his miserable companion, transported for life
on account of his crimes. A regulation of any nature
upon emigrants cannot make them slaves. Their
own land is still before them with its laws, the land of
their adoption with its, and they alone make the
choice. We cannot bring the charge of slave-dealing
against any nation, whose institutions are voluntarily
adopted by any people. It is a foul, iniquitous asper-
sion, when such a charge is brought, clothed as we
find it in the paper before us with plausible statements,
worked into a long list of real indignities, it at first
view takes on the character of its companions. But
its position is false ; it has been pushed into wrong
47
company. Its spirit is misrepresented ; its innocent
nature vilified. The diseased vision of a slaveholder
alone would find in it so foul a spot as is here put
upon it. ,
With regard to the two remaining questions “of
India and her relations as a colony of England,” and
“of the condition of the laboring poor of Ireland,” I
shall, considering their want of relation to the great
point I am concerned with, Slavery, pass them by.
They are ably and distinctly treated; their enormities
vividly displayed; but when they are brought into a
comparison with slavery, their whole object fails.
They cannot place it in an enticing attitude; they can-
not throw over it a softening light. The comparison
cannot be made. The physical condition of any race
of men, however poor, is in no degree like moral,
spiritual bondage. A want of proper sympathy, and
regard for humanity, belongs to him who can place the
former above the latter, in height of misery. Cold,
hard, calculationg men, making all things property, -
the soul secondary to all, feel not the pangs of a
stricken slave. Shylock says,
“You have among you many a purchased slave,
Which, like your asses, and your dogs, and mules,
You use in abject and in slavish parts,
Because you bought them; shall I say to you,
Let them be free, marry them to your heirs?
Why sweat they under burthens? Let their beds
Be made as soft as yours, and let their palates
Be seasoned with such viands P. You will answer
The slaves are ours. — ”
And Shylocks of this day respond to the bloodthirsty
48
“Merchant of Venice,” with a spirit no whit better than
his, – “the slaves are ours.” No desire for abolish-
ing the “abominable thing ” is evinced by those, in
whose hands it rests. Their great men defend it with
suspicious interest; their whole community rises against
the man who would speak of its wickedness ; the
blackness of the enormity is quietly submitted to by
their neighbors, who are forced to sit under its
shadow.
Men compromise in this matter ; and south of the
33° of latitude men are to be held in bondage. As if
they had a right to sit in judgment on their brother’s
freedom, because forsooth he knows no blood like their
own. Can man and his conscience find a compromise
in this matter P Can man and his God -
I hesitate not to say, men of the non-slaveholding
States have been cowed and crushed, in their words
against the existence of slavery in the Union. They
have shrunk before a tide of passionate invective,
which has been heaped upon them, with the timidity
of scared children. Few have dared to stand forth
boldly, and defend the rights of humanity against the
arrogance of oppression and vilest wickedness. There
has been one among us, who even shocked the sense
of justice of a slaveholder himself, (John Randolph,)
by impiously bringing his clerical knowledge of holy
writ forward in defence of the enormous sin. Are
fear, and subserviency, and a truckling disposition the
cause of this? Is moral courage to be completely
crushed and destroyed by the bold, defying, inflammable
spirit of iniquity ? Thank God we are not all cowards,
49
we have not all a low ambition, which would make
men shades, poenumbrae of their fellows. A grey-
haired man stands there still, on the floor of that
house, filled with the blood and spirit of his heroic
fathers, on whose frosty head abuse and flaming insult
have been poured harmlessly for years. Like a rock
he stands, immovable. The echo of his voice has
hardly passed away; the sound of these words is
scarcely even now stilled. “We cannot touch that
subject, without raising throughout the whole South a
mass of violence and passion, with which one might as
well reason as with a hurricane. That I know is the
fact in the South, and that is the fact in this House.
And it is the reason why members, coming from a free
State, are silenced as soon as they rise on this floor;
why they are pronounced out of order; made to sit
down ; and if they proceed are censured and expelled.
But, in behalf of the South and of southern institutions,
a man may get up in this House and expatiate for
weeks together.”
All this is too true. We are cursed with the foul
weight about our necks, and are bound lest we should
throw it off. The dead body of a fellow is fastened to
us, and we are chained lest we should remove it.
United as we are to the South with all its wickedness,
have we no voice to be heard in the matter We
have seen what control it and its institutions have upon
all our interests, and are they no concern of ours?
These things must not be. Efforts now being made
may not move them, but a true and a just God will.
The people will listen to the voice of woe, if their ears
5
50
are only turned towards it, and the people, under God,
will cause the wrongs to cease. So vile an institution
cannot exist forever ; it must crumble, and the super-
structure, be it ever so fair, will fall with it, a notable
ruin. -
Of itself, it is eating out the heart of the very com-
munity in which it exists. It is sapping every nice
moral principle, destroying every true manly tone of
feeling. Its abominable, degrading customs have
placed woman on a level with the beasts that perish.
The holy relations of wife and daughter stand not in
the way of the most inhuman excesses. This is no
fiction. The fair skin of many a slave will show you
this. The resemblance between that lovely girl, and
her servant but a few shades darker, will point out to
you their common father. When woman is thrown
out of her beauteous light, and deprived of the soft
majesty with which she is invested, when that chastity
which is her strong tower, and the indispensable means
of her influence upon man, is looked upon lightly and
sneeringly by him, sad, sad is the condition of the peo-
ple, where such a state exists.
When tables are placed before us to show us how
much more rapidly the slave population increases than
the free blacks, and proof drawn from them, that the
condition of the former is much better than the latter,
my mind involuntarily turns to the sin to which I have
just referred. The slaves are indeed well fed and
clothed, - so are our animals. All pains are taken to
have them firm, muscular, well proportioned creatures.
Strong fathers and healthly mothers are considered essen-
51
tial. Their increase is promoted in the most unwarranta-
ble, shameless manner, as if they were incapable of hu-
man affections, unworthy the respect due to human be-,
ings. The amount of sin on this point is incredible, hor-
rid. And yet we are told that the excess of the increase
of slaves over that of free blacks, and even whites, is
proof “that the institution of slavery, as it exists in the
United States, has been so modified, as to secure the
personal comfort of the slave,” and render his situation
almost enviable. A modification indeed. The very
heavens grow black above such villainy. Are men dis-
posed to listen to such things : The perfect despisa-
bleness of official documents on such questions cannot
be expressed. The comfort of the slave knows no
place in the “sickly sentiment and impertinent theories
of a misguided philanthropy,” as the philosophic cor-
respondent of the Post is pleased to call that spirit,
which would have respect for all men. The most dis-
gusting wickedness is involved in this question, wicked-
ness, which needs a sense of decency alone, without a
spark of philanthropy, to make it evident. This in-
crease of slaves presents nothing peculiarly enticing to
the advocates of the institution itself; the more of
silence they preserve on this point, the better. What
I have said are facts; they are not poetry. And they
are among the foulest features of one of the foulest
institutions on the face of the whole earth.
Thus do men blind themselves, when their apparent
interests are before them. They overlook their moral
obligations — they overlook their actual interests. Be-
sides the comfort of the slave, we are told his labor is
52
cheaper than that of the freeman. This I deny. And
it requires no ruinous policy to reduce the price of
free labor, none of that ruthless starving and freezing
of the poorer classes, which is so often and so feelingly
laid before us, - to render this free labor cheaper than
the listless, inactive working of a gang of slaves. The
sturdy, eager labor of the stout and happy freeman,
who sees his family and himself living by the sweat of
his brow, bringing in for the reward he receives as
much in return, aye more, must not be degraded, by
being compared with the miserable effects of slave
labor. The “dead weight” too, which has been
spoken of, the support of infants, aged, sick, the pro-
viding of houses, clothes, and implements, the interest
of the slaves’ first cost, all go to swell the amount to
an extent far greater than one would at first suppose.
Say says, “Stewart, Turgot, Smith, all agree in think-
ing, that the labor of the slave is dearer and less pro-
ductive than that of the freeman. Their arguments
amount to this ; a man, that neither works nor con-
Sumes on his own account, works as little, and con-
sumes as much as he can ; he has no interest in the
exertion of that degree of care, and intelligence which
alone can insure success; his life is shortened by ex-
cessive labor, and his master must replace it at great
expense ; besides, the free workman looks after his
own support; but that of the slave must be attended
to by the master; and, as it is impossible for the mas-
ter to do it so economically as the free workman, the
labor of the slave must cost him dearer.” Say at-
tempts to refute this, by some calculations inapplicable
53
to our country, and indefinite with regard to any other.
We need but compare slaveholding with non-slave-
holding countries, and ask ourselves where we find
the most public improvements, the most prosperous
state of manufactures, agriculture, arts. Where do we
find the most actual wealth P Will the South, with
all her pride, claim precedence of the North in these
things The value of slave labor becomes, when we
consider its result, its cost, its inconveniences, all its con-
comitants, perfectly chimerical. Slaves do not work
for nothing. Their wants are to be supplied; their
fallen spirits draw down their bodies with an over-
powering weight.
A word in defence of a Crusade against this Institu-
tion, of whatever nature it may be, and however con-
ducted, and I am done. In such a Crusade the world
is called on to join. The South herself is urged to look
upon the position she has taken among the nations,
and to exert herself that it may become at once more
honorable, and less at war with common decency and
humanity. An universal spirit of kindness is alone
needed, to throw down the iniquitous system at one
blow. No intestine commotion is necessary, will all
men but see the evil alike, and pray alike for its re-
moval. A sense of love for man here comes in to its
proper work. Freeing and elevating a whole race of
men, ridding a whole section of our country of a foul
curse, – these are the objects laid before the philan-
thropist, who opposes the continuance of slavery.
Here, before our eyes, lies the dark spot, which is to
be removed by strenuous, constant, direct effort; —
54
not by comparison with other existing evils, to its ad-
vantage; not by charging selfishness and ambition upon
its opponents; not by varnishing it over with an unnat-
ural gloss, to render its outside fair, while the inside is
so full of all uncleanness; not by raising questions of
right and interest; not by interweaving it with our in-
stitutions.
And with regard to the righteous attempts of other
nations, let us hail them with joy. The evils that
exist in their own bosoms coming first, this great sin
demands their interposition. The condition of the
poor of Ireland requires its remedy, but argues no rea-
son for apathy on the part of England, in the removal
of woe from others equally miserable and unfortunate.
If in the bad state of her laws, her commerce, and in
the crowded numbers of her population, with excessive
inequality of wealth, rest the almost immovable dis-
tresses of the Irish and English laboring classes, let her
see to it, that the shoulder be not spared in proper
effort for the melioration of their condition. But let no
glowing exhibition of these sufferings lead men to look
at them alone. No exposition of them can have any
bearing upon the subject of slavery. In this connexion
it is time and paper thrown away to treat of them, and
is an unjust appeal to men’s sympathies in behalf of
the oppressed in one quarter of the world, while at the
same time an attempt is made to wipe off the miseries
of the degraded and crushed in another.
With England, as engaged in the struggle against
slavery, all true-hearted men have to do ; “not,” as
Burke says, “with a sort of England detached from the
55
rest of the world, and amusing herself with the puppet-
show of naval power, (it can be no better, whilst all
the sources of that power, and of every sort of power,
are precarious,) but that sort of England, who con-
sidered herself as embodied with Europe; but with
that sort of England, who, sympathetic with the ad-
versity or the happiness of mankind, felt that nothing
in human affairs was foreign to her.” In her treaties
against slavery we wish her God-speed. Would that
every nation, and kindred, and tongue under heaven
would feel proud to unite with her. In such a righte-
ous union, constitutional fallacies and quibbles become
as the dust of the balance. Questions of ambitious
policy belong only to narrow heads and selfish, har-
dened hearts. To treaties, and searchings, and all hon-
est endeavors to rid the world of a terrible curse, and
bless mankind, may God lend his aid. -
9. MICHIGAN

~::-* * ** w （w § !
* * * * * *s*:',
• ... * 3.