446 University of California Berkeley SLAVERY INCONSISTENT WITH JUSTICE AND GOOD POLICY; PROVED BY A SPEECH DELIVERED IN TH8 CONVENTION, HELD AT DANVILLE, KENTUCKY. BY THE REV. DAVID RICE. i^ LET THE OPPRESSED CO FRI I. ISAIAH IVIII. 6, PHILADELPHIA PRINTED, 1792. REPRINTED, AND SOLD BY M. GURNJWy VtU HOLBORN KILL. M.DCC.XCJIJ. (Price Two-pence.) C 3 ]. MR. CHAIRMAN, IRISH, Sir, in fupport of the motion now before you. But my re- verence for this body, the novelty of mj present fitnation, the great importance and difficulty of the fubjecl, and the thought of being oppofcd by gentlemen of the greateft abilities, have too fenfible an impreflion on my mind. But, Sir, I know fo much of my natural timidity, which increases with my years, that I forefaw this would be the cafe ; I therefore prepared a fpeech for the occafion. Sir, I have lived free, and in many refpedl* happy for near fixty years : but my happinefs has been greatly diminished, for much of the time, by hearing a great part of the human fpecies groaning under the galling yoke of bondage. In this time I loft a venerable father, a tender mother, two affectionate fitters, and a beloved firft- born fon ; but all thefe together have not coft me half the anxiety as has been occafioned by this wretched fitaation of my fellw-mcn, whom without a blufli I call my brethren. When I confider their deplorable ftate, and who are the caufe of their mifery j the load of mifery that lies on them, and the load of guilt on us for impofmg it on them ; it fills my foul with anguifh. I view their diftrefTes, 1 read the anger ef Heaven, I believe that if I fliould not exert myfelf, when, and as far as, in my power, in order to relieve them, I fhould be partaker of the guilt. Sir, the queftion is, Whether Slavery is confident with juftice and good policy ? But before this is anfwered, it may be neceflary to en- quire, what a flave is ? A flave is a human creature made by law the property of another human creature, and reduced by mere power to an abfolute uncon- ditional fubjeclion to his will. This definition will be allowed to be juft, with only this one ex- ception, that the law does not leave the life and the limbs of the flave entirely in the matter's power : and from it may be inferred fc- veral melancholy truths, which will include a fufficient anfwer to the main queftion. In order to a right view of this fubjeft, I would obferve, that there are feme cafes where a man may juftly be made a flave by law. By vicious conduft he may forfeit his freedom; he may forfeit his life. "Where this is th cafe, and ihc fafety of the public maybe fccured At by M10299 t 4 ] fry reducing the offender to a llate of fiavery, it will be right j it may be an aft of kindnefs. In no other cafe, if my conceptions are juit, can it be vindicated on principles of jufHce or humanity. As creatures- of Goo we are, with refpeft to liberty, M equal. -If cne has ?. right to live among his fellow creatures, and enjoy his free- dom, fo 1m another: if one has aright to enjoy that property he .aoqi'u'es by an hem ft induftry, fo has another. If I by force take that from anothei, whrch lie ha,s a juft right to according to the. law. o/ na- ture, (which is a divine law) which he has never forfeited, and to xvhich hfe has never relinquished .his claim, I am certainly guilty of jnjuftice;and robbery ; and when the thing taken is the man's liberty, when it is himfelf, it is the greateft injuftice. I injure him much more, than if I robbed him of his property on the high-way. In this cafe, it does not. belong to him to.piove a negative, but to me to prove that fuch forfeiture has been made ; bccaufe, if it has net, he is certainly ftill the proprietor. Ail he has to do is to mew the jnfufficiency of my proofs. A flave claims his freedom ; he pleads that he is a man, that he was by nature free, that he has not forfeited his freedom, nor re- linquimed it. Now, unlefs his mafter can prove that he is not a man, that he was not born free, or that he has forfeited or relinquifhed his freedom, he muft be judged free j the juftice of his claim muft be acknowledged. His being long deprived of this right, by force or fraud, does not annihilate it 5 it remains ; it is ftill his right. When, I rob a man of his property, I leave him his liberty, and a capacity, of acquiring and pofferTmg more property ^ but when I deprive him of his liberty, I alfo deprive him of this capacity ; therefore I do him greater injury, when I deprive him of his liberty, than when I rob him of his property. It is in vain for me to plead, that I have the fanftion of law ; for this makes the injury the greater : it arms the community againft him, and makes -his cafe defperate, If my definition of a flave is true, he is a rational creature reduced by the power of legislation to the ftate of a brute, and thereby de- prived of.every privilege of .humanity, except as above, that he may minifter to the eafe, luxury, luft, pride, or avarice of another, no better than himfelf. We only want a law enabled that r.o owner of a brute, nor other perfon, mould kill or difmember it, and then in law the cafe of a flave and of a brute is in moft refpecls parallel j and where they differ, the ftatc of the brute is to be preferred. The brute may fteal or rob, to fupply his hunger j the law dots not condemn him to die for his offence, it only permits his death; but the flave, though in the moft ftarving condition, darts not do either, oji penalty of dtath cf forne fevere pumfbnient. J* [ 5 1 : Is there an? need of arguments to pipvr, that It Is in a high unjuft and cruel, to reduce one human creature to fuch an abjeft wretched ftate as this, that he inay minifter to the eafe,- luxury, or avarice of another ? Has not that other the fame right to have him reduced to this ftate, that he may minifter to his intereft or pleafur? ? On what is this right founded ? Whence was it derived ? Did it come from heaven, from earth, or from hell r Has the great King oF heaven, the abfohne fovereign difpofer. of all men, given this extra- ordinary right to white men over black men ? Where is the Charter In whofe hands is it lodged ? Let it be produced, and read, that we may know our privilege. Thus reducing men is an indignity, a degradation to our own na- ture. Had we not loft a true fenfe of its worth and dignity, w.; fhould blufh to fee it converted into brutes. We mould blufh to fee our houfes filled, or furrounded with cattle, in our own fhapes. We mould look upon it ta be a fouler, a blacker ftain, than that with which the vertical funs have tinged the blood of Africa. When we plead for flavery, we plead for the difgrace and ruin of our nature. If we are capable of it, we may ever after claim kindred with the brutes, and renounce our own faperior dignity. From our definition it Will appear, that a (lave is 2 creature m:>.d after the image of GOD, and accountable to him for the maintenance of innocence and purity; but by law reduced to a liablenefs to be debauched by men, without any profpecl or hope of redrefs. That a flave is made alter the image of GOD, no Chriftian will deny : that a flave is abfolutely fubjecled to be debauched by men< is fo apparent from the nature of flavery, that it needs no proof* This is evidently the unhappy cafe of female flaves ; a number of whom have been remarkable for their chaftily and inodefty. If their inafter attempts their chaftity, they dare neither refift nor complain: If another man mould make the attempt, though refiftance may not be fo dangerous, complaints are equally vain. They cannot be- heard in their own defence ; their testimony cannot be admitted. The injurious perfon has a right to be heard, may accufe the innocent fufftrer'of malicious (lander, and have her feverely chaftifed. A virtuous woman, and virtuous Africans no doubt there are, cfteems her chaftty aboye every other thing : forne have preferred it even to their live?. Then, forcibly to deprive her of this, is treating her with the greateft injuftice. 'Therefore, fince law leaves the chaftity of a female flave entirely in the power of her mafter, and greatly in the power of others, it permits this injuftice 5 it provides no remedy ; it refufes to redref. tlus infufftraSle grievance j it denies even the fmall priviiege of complaining. From our definition it will follow, that a flave is a free moral agent, legally deprived of free agency, and obliged to aft according to the A 3 will C 6 ] wiU of another free agent of the fame fpecies : and yet he is account* able to his Creator for the ufe he makes of his own free agency. When a mar, though he can exift independent of another, cannot aft independent of him, his agency muft depend upon the will of that other; and therefore he is deprived of his own free agency j and jet, as a free agent, he is accountable to his Maker for all the deeds done in the body. This comes to pafs through a great omiflion and inconfiftency in the legislature. They ought farther to have enacted, in order to have been confiftent, that the Have fhould not have been accountable for any of his actiems; but that his mafter fhould have anfwtred for him in all things, here and hereafter. That a flave has the capacities of a free moral agent, will be allowed by alJL That he is, in many instances, deprived by law of the exer cife of thefe powers, evidently appears from his iituation. That he is accountable to his Maker for his cenduct, will be allowed by thofe,. who do not believe that human legifiatures are omnipotent, and can free men from this allegiance and fubjeftion to the King of hea- ven. 1 he principles of conjugal love and fidelity in the breaft of a vir- tuous pair, of natural affedhcn in parents, and a fenfe of duty irk children, are infcnbed there by the finger of GOD ; they are the laws of heaven : but an inflaving law directly oppofes them, and virtually forbids ob.d^ence. The relations of hufband and wife, of parnt and child, are formed by divine authority, and founded on the laws of nature. But it ism the power of a cruel mafter, and often of a needy- creditor, to break thefe tender connections, and for ever to feparate thefe deareft relatives. This is ever done, in fact, at the call of in- t ere ft, or of humour. The poor furTerers may expoflulate ; they may plead j may plead with tears j their hearts may break ; but all in *ain. The Jaws of nature are violated, the tender ties are diffolved r a final feparation takes place, and the duties of thefe relations can no longer be performed, nor their comforts enjoyed. Would thefe flaves perform the duties of hufbands and wives, parents and Children j the law difables them, it puts it altogether out of their power. In thefe cafes, it is evident that the laws of nature, or the laws of man, are wrong } and which, none will be at a lofs to judge. The divine law fays, Whom God hath joined together, let no man put afunder : the law of man fays, to the mafter of the flave, Though the divine law has joined them together, you may put them afunder when you pleafe. The divine law fays, Train up your child in tlte way he fhould go: the law of man fays, You mall not train up your child, but as your mafter thinks proper. The divine law fays, Honour your father and mother, and obey them in all things : but the law of man fays, Honour and obey your mafter in all things, and your parents juft as faras he fhall direct you. Should t 7 J Should a matter corrraiaad his flave to fUal of rob, and he fhouW prcfume to difobcy, he is liable to fuffer every extremity of punifh- ment, ihort of death or amputation, from the hand of his matter 5 at the fame time he is liable to a puni foment equally fcverc, if not death itfelf, ihould he obey. He is bound by law, if his mafterpleafes, to do that for which the law condemns him to death. Another confequettce of oar definition is, That a Have, being a fret ir.oral agent, and an accountable creature, is a capable fubjeft of re* Kgion and morality ; but deprived by law of the means of inftruftion in the doftrmes and duties of morality, any fatther thaa his matter pleafes. It is in the power of the matter to deprive him of all the means of religious and moral inftruclion, either in private or in public. Some matters have actually exercifed this power, and retrained their Haves from the means of instruction, by the terror of the lafh. Slaves have not opportunity, at their own difpofal, for inftruc"ting cortverfation } it is put out ot their power to learn to read j and their matters may reftrain them from other means of information. Matters dengnedly keep their (laves in ignorance, left they fhould betome too knowing to anfwer their felfifh purpofes ; and too wife to rett eafy in their de- graded fituation. In this cafe, the law operates fo as to anfwer an end directly oppofed to the proper nd of all law. It is pointed again ft every thing dear to them j againtt the principal end of their exiftence. It fupports, in a land of religious liberty, the fevereft perfections $ and may operate fo as totally to rob multitudes of their religious pri- vileges, and the rights of confcience. If my definition is juft, a flave is one who is bound to fpend his life in the fervice of another, to whom he owes nothing, is under no obligation; who is not legally bound to find him victuals, clothes, medicine, or any ether means of preservation, fupport, or comfort. That a flave is hound to fpend his life in the fervice of his matter, no one will difpute ; and that he is not indebted to his matter, is under no obligations to him, is alfo evident. How can he poffibjy be in- dtbted to him, who deprives him of liberty, property, and almott every thing dear to a human creature ? And all he receives is the bare means of fubfiftence j and this not bettowed, until he has earned it ; and then not in proportion to his labour ; nor out of regard to him, but for felfifh purpofes. This bare fupport the matter is not bound by law to give j but is left to be guided by his own intereft or humour: and hence the poor Have often falls fhort of what is necef* fary for the comfortable fupport of the body. The matter is die enemy of the flave : he has made open war aeainft him, and is daily carrying it on in unremitted efforts. Can any one then imagine, that the flave is indebted to his matter, and bound to A 4. ferr f * 3 Whence can the obligation arife? What Is it founded Upon ? What is my duty to an enemy, that is carrying on v/ar againft me? I clo not deny, but, infomecircumftances,it is the duty of the flave to fet.vej but it is a duty he bwes himfelf, and not his mafter. The mafter may, arid often does, inflict upon him all the feverity of punifh- fflent the human- body is capable of bearing 5 and the law fupports him in it. If he does but fpare his life and his Jimbs, he dare not com- plain : -none can hear and relieve -him; he has no red re fC under Heaven* When wp duly confider all thefe things, it muft appear unjuft to -the laft deguce, to force a feilow creature, who ha.s never forfeited his freedom, into this wretched lituaticn j and confine him and his poflc- rity in this bottomlefs gulph of wretchednefs for ever. Where is th fympathy, the tender feelings of humanity ? Where is the heart that , ought not to tH> ('tJp.'d-d ,\>r its age. But the inconfiftency of flavery with good policy will fully appear t if we confider another confequenee of our definition, viz. A Uave is M member of civ.-l fociety, bound to obey the laws of the land j to which laws be never contented j which partially and feebly protect his- perfonj which allow him no property; from which he can receive no advantage j and which chiefly, as they relate to him, were made to jxinUh him. He is therefore bound to fubmit to 3 government, to which he owes no allegiance ; from which he receives great injury; and to which he is under no obligations : and to per- form fervices to a fociety, to which he owes nothing, and in whofc profperity he has no intereft. That he is under this government, and forced to fubmit to it, appears from his fuffering the penalty of its laws. That he receives no benefit by the laws and government lie is under, is evident from their depriving him of his liberty, and the means of happinefs. Though they protect his life and his limbs, they confine him in mifery, they will not fuffer him to fly from it ; the greateft favours they afford him, chiefly ferve to perpetuate his wretchednefs. He is, then, a member of fociety, who is, properly fpeaking, in a flate of war with his mafter, his civil rulers, and every free member of that fociety. They are all his declared enemies, having, in him, nade vrar upon almofl every thing; dear to a human creature. It is a perpetual I 9 1 perpetual war, with an avowed purpofe of never making pe.ice. This war, as it is unprovoked, is, on the part of the Have, properly defenfive. The injury ^done him is much greater than what is genes- rally ei^eemed a juft ground of war between different nations ; it is much greater than was the caufe of war between us and Britain. It cannot be confident with the principles of good policy to keep a numerous, a growing body of people among us, who add no ftrength to us in time of war j who are under the ftrongtft temptations tt> join an enemy, as it is fcarce poffible they can loie, and may' be great gainers, by the event 5 who will count fc many againft us in an hour of danger and d.flrefs. A people whcfe intereft it will be, whenever in their power, to fubvert the government, and throw all into confu* fion. Can it be fafe ? Can it be good policy r Can it be our intereft^ or the intereft of poftcrity, to nourifh within our own bowels fuch an injured, inveterate foe ? A foe with whom we muft he in a ftate &( eternal war ? What havock would a handful cf favage.s, in conjunc- tion with this domeftic enemy, make in our country ! Efpecially at a period when the main body of the inhabitants were fcftened byluxur^ and cafe, and quite unfitted for the hardships and dan*f rs of war. Let us tumour eyes to the Weft Indies; and there learn the melancholy eftefts of this wretched policy. We may there read them written with the blood of thoufands. There you may fee-the fable, let me lay, the brave Tons cf Africa, engaged in a noble conflict with their in- vetefate foes. There you may fee thoufands fired with a generous refentment of the greater! injuries, and bravely. facflfTcihg" their "lives on the altar of liberty. In A'merica, a flave is ?. ftanding monument of .the tyranny and in- cor.ftency of human governments. He is dechrecl by the united voice of America, to be by nature free, and intitled to tfie privilege of acquiring and enjoying property : and yet b"/ 1 :-.v, tvuRd and in forced in thefe States, retained in flavery, and d.fpc^fFtrT.-d of all property and capacity of acquiring any. They have furnifhed a ftriking inftance of a people carrying on war in de- fence of principles, which thtry are actually and avowedly deftroylng by legal force j ufingone meafure for themfelves, and another for their neighbours. Kvcry ftate, in order to gain credit abroad, ant! confidence at home and to give proper energy to government, fhould ftudy to be confift- cr;t j their conduct fhould not difagree with their avowed principlesj nor be inconfiftent with its fevcral parrs. Confident jurticeis thefolid bafis on which .the fabric of government will reft fecurely. Take tW away, and the building totters, and is liable to fall before every blaft. It is, I prefume, the:ivowed principle of each of us, tha't f a'll men are by nature free, and are ftill entitled to freedom, unlcfs they have for- feited it. Now, after this is fcen and acknowledged, to enact that men A 5 ihould (hould be flaves, againft whom we have no evidence that they have forfeited their right j what would it be, but evidently to fly in our own face ; to contradict ourfclves ; to proclaim before the world our own inconfiftency ; and warn all men to repofe no confidence in us ? After this, what credit can we ever expect ? What confidence can we re- pofe in each other ? If we generally concur in this nefarious deed, we dcftroy mutual confidence, and break every link of the chain that ihould bind us together. Are we rulers? How can the people confide in us, after we have thus openly declared that we are -void of truth and fincerity ; and, that we are capable of enflaving mankind in direct contradiction to our own avowed principles ? What confidence in legislators, who are capable of declaring their conftituents all free men, in one breath ; and, in the next, enacting them all flaves ? In one breath, declaring that they have a right to acquire and poflefs property 5 and, in the next, that they fliall neither acquire nor pofiefs it, during their exigence here ? Can I truft my life, my liberty, my property in fuch hands as thefe ? Will the colour of my fkin prove a fumcient defence againft their injuftice and cruelty ? Will the particular circumftance of my anceftors being born in Europe, and not in Africa, defend me ? Will 'ftraight hair defend me againft the blow that falls fo heavy on the woolly head ? If I am a difhoneft man, if gain is my God, and this may be ac- quired by fuch an unrighteous law, I may rejoice to find it enacted : but I never can believe that the legislators were honeft men ; or re- pofe the leaft confidence in them, when their own intereft would Jead them to betray it. I never can truft to the integrity of that judge, who can fit upon the feat of juftice, and pafs an unrighteous judgment, becaufe it is agreeable to law j when that law itfelf is con- trary to the light and law of nature. Where no confidence can be put in men of public truft, the exercife of government muft be very uneafy, and the condition of the people extremely wretched. We may conclude, with the utmoft cer- tainty, that it would be bad policy to reduce matters to this unhappy Situation. Slavery naturally tends to fap the foundations of moral, and confe- quenriy of political virtue} and virtue is abfolutely neceffary for the happinefs and profperity of a free people. Slavery produces idlenefs j and idlenefs is thenurfe of vice. A vicious commonwealth is a build- ing erected on quick-land, the inhabitants of which can never abide in fafety. Young gentlemen, who ought to be the honour and fupport of the ftate, when they have in profpect an independant fortune confifting in land and flaves, which they can eafily devolve on a faithful overfeeror fteward, become the moft ufelefsandiniignificant members of fociety. There 9 [ II ] There is no confining them to ufeful ftudies, or any bu fine fs that will tit them for fcrving the public. They are employed in fcenes of plcafure and diffipation. They corrupt each other ; they corrupt the morals 01' all around them : while their flaves, even in time of peace, are tar from being equally uftful to fociety with the fame number of free men ; and, in time of war, are to be confidered as an enemy lodged within our walls. I fait!, they are ufelefs infignificant mem- bers of focety. I mould have faid more ; I mould have faid, they are intolerable nuifances, pernicious pefts of fociety. I mean not to re- ^proach men of fortune 5 I mean only to point out the natural tendency of fiavery, in order to mew, how inconfiftent it is with good policy. The profperity of a country depends upon the induilry of its in- habitants. Idlenefs w;ll produce poverty ; and when fiavery becomes common, induftry finks into difgrace. To labour, is to Jlave, to work, is to work like a Negroe : and this is difgraceful. It levels us with the meaneft of the fpecies; it fits hard upon the mind ; it can- not be patiently borne. Youth are hereby tempted to idlenefs, and drawn into ether vices: they fee no other way to keep their credit, and acquire ibme little importance. This renders them, like thofe they ape, nuifances of fociety. It frequently tempts them to gaming, theft, robbery, or forgery j for which they often end their days in dif- grace on the gallows. Since every ftate muft be fupported by in- duilry, it is exceedingly unwife to admit what will inevitably fink it into difgrace : and that this is the tendency of flavery, is known from matter of facl. Slavery naturally tends to deftroy all fenfe of juftice and equity. It puffs up the mind with pride j teaches youth a habit of looking upon their fellow creatures with contempt, efteeming them as dogs or devils, and imagining themfelves beings of fuperior dignity and im- portance, to whom all are indebted. This banifhes the idea, and unqualifies the mind for the practice, of common juftice. If I hive, all my days, been accuftomed to live at the expence of a black man, without making him any compenfation, or confidering myfelf at all in his debt, I cannot think it any great crime to live at the expence of a white man. If I can rob a black man without guilt, I fhall contract no great guilt by robbing a white man. If I have been long accuftomtd to think a black man was made for me, I may eafily take it into my head to think fo of a white man. If I have no fenfe of obligation to do juflice to a black man, I can have little to do juflice to a white man. In this cafe, the tinge of our fkins, or the place of our nativity, can nuke but little difference. If I arn in principle a friend to flavery, I canror, to be confident, think it any crime to rob my country of its property and freedom, whenever my intereft calls, and I find it in my power. If I make fcny difference here, it muft be owing to a vicious education, the force of prejudice, or pride of A 6 heart* heart. If in principle a friend to flavery, I cannot feel myfelf obliged to pay the debt due to my neighbour. If I can wrong him of all his poflfefiions, and avoid the law, all is well. The deftruction of chaftity has a natural ^tendency to introduce a number of vices, that are very pernicious to the intereft of a com- monwealth $ and flavery much conduces to deftrov chaftity, as it puts fo great a number of females entirely in the power of the other fex ; igainft whom they dare not complain, on peril of the lam ; and many of whom they dare not refift. This vice, this bane of fociety, has already become fo common, that it is fcarely efteemed a difgrace, in the one fex, and that the one that is generally the molt criminal. Let it become as little difgraceful in the other, and there is an end to domeftic tranquillity, an end to the public profperity. It is neceffary to our national profperity, that the eftates of the in- habitants of the country be greatly productive. But perhaps no eftates, poffeffed in any par* of the world, are lefs productive than thofe which confifl in great numbers of flaves. In fuch eftates there will be old and decrepit men and women, breeding women, and little children :, all muft be maintained. They labour only from fervile principles, and therefore rot to equal advantage with free men. They will labour as little, they will uke as little care, as they poflibly can. When their maintenance is deducted from the fruit of their la- tour, only a fmall pittance remains for the owner. Hence many, who are proud of their eftates, and envied for their wealth, are living in poverty, and immerfed in debt. Here are large eftates to be taxed ; 'but fmall incomes to pay the taxes. This, while it gives us weight in the fcale of the Union, will make us groan under the burden of our own importance. Put all the above confiderations together, and it evidently appears, ihat flavery is neither confiftent with juftice nor good policy. Thefe are confiderations, one would think, fufScient to fiience every objec- tion ; but I forefee, notwithstanding, that a number will be made, fome of which have a formidable appearance. Itwillbefaid, Negroes were made flaves by law, they were con verted into property by an aft of the legiflature; and under the fanction of that law I purchafed them ; they therefore became my property, I have a legal claim to them. To repeal this law, to annihilate flavery, "would be violently to deftroy what I legally purchafed with my money, or inherit from my father. It would be equally unjuft with difpof- fcffirig me of my horfes, cattle, or any other fpecies of property. To 'difpoffefs me of their offspring would be injuftice equal to difpoffeffirrg Tfte of the annual profits of my eftate. This is an important objec- tion, and it calls for a ferious anfwer. The matter feems to fta'hd thus: Many years ago, men, being de- prived of their natural right to freedom, and made flaves, were by [ '3 ] by law converted into property. This law, it Is true, was wrong, it eilnbliihed iniquity ; it was againft the law of humanity, common fenfe, reafon, and confcience. It was, however, a law 5 and under the fanfticn of it, a number of men, regardlefs of its iniquity, pur- cliafed thefe flaves, and made their fellow men their property. The queltion is concerning the liberty of a man. The man himfelf claims it as his own property. He pleads that it was originally his own, that he has never forfeited, nor ali-enated it ; and therefore by the common laws of juftice and humanity, it is ftill his own. The pur- chafer of the flave claims the fame property. He pleads that he pur- chall-cl it under the fancTion of a law, enaded by the lesiflature; and therefore it became his. Now the queftion is, who has the heft claim ? Did the property in queftion belong to the leg'.flature ? Was it veiled in them ? If Jegiflatures are poffefled of fuch property as this, may another never exift ! No individual of their conftituents could claim it as his own inherent right; it was not in them colledlively j and therefore they could not convey it to their repreferitatives. Was it ever known that a people chofe reprefentatives to create and transfer this kind of property ? The le'giflature were not, they could, not be" polfefled of it; and therefore cculd not transfer it to another; they could not give what they themfelves had not. Now, does this pro- perty belong to him, who received it from a legiflature that had it not to give, and by a law they had no right to enaft ? or to the ori- ginal owrer, who has never forfeited, nor alienated his right r If a law Should pafs for felling an innocent man's head, and I fliould pur- chafe it; ha*e I, in co: fequence of this law and this purchafe, a better claim to this man's head than he has himfelf ? To call our fellow men, who have not forfeited, nor voluntarily re- figr.ed their liberty, our property, is a grofs abfurdity, a contradiction to common ft- nfe, and an indignity to human rature. The owners of fic,'>. flave-r. then are the licenced robbers, and not the juft proprietors, of wh.it theyclnim. Freeing them is not depriving them of property, g it to the right owner ; it is flittering the unlawful captive to efcape. It is not wron^inr the mafter, hut-doim^ juftice to the 'flave, rertoring him to himftlf. The rm-fter, it is true, is wronged j he may fuflfcr and that greatly : but this is his own fault, and tjie fauft cnflaving law; and not of the law that does juftice to the oppr h You Tay, a law cf emancipation would be unjufr., becaufe it would de- prive men of their property : but is there no injufticeon the other ficfe^ Js nobody intitled to juftice, hut flave-holders ? Let us con'fider the in. juftice on both fides ; and weigh them in an ev n balance. On the one hand, we fre a m.in deprived of all property, of all capacity to poflefs property, of his own free agency, of the means of inftruclion, of his wife, of his children, of almort every thing dear to him: on the othefj ther, a maa deprived of eighty or an hundred pounds. Shall we hefnate a moment to determine, who is the greateft fufferer, and who is treated with the greateft injustice? The matter appears quite glar- ing, when we cnfider, that neither this man, nor his parents, had finned, that he was born to thefe fufferings; but the other fuffers altogether for his own 1m, and that of his predeceSTors. Such a law would only take away property, that is its own property, and not ours j property that has the fame right to poffefs us, as its property, as we have to poSTefs it ; property that has the fame right to convert our children into dogs, and calves, and colts, as we have to convert theirs into thefe beafts ; property that may transfer our children ta ftrangers, by the fame right that we transfer theirs. Human legislatures Should remember, that they act in fubordination to the great Ruler of the univerfe, have no right to take the govern- ment out of his hand, nor to enact laws contrary to his j that if they fhould prefumeto attempt it, they cannot make that right, which he has made wrong 5 they cannot diSTolve the allegiance of his fubjects, and transfer it to themfelves, and thereby free the people from their obligations to obey the laws of nature. The people mould know, that legislatures have not this power; and that a thousand laws can never make that innocent, which the divine law has made criminal j or give them a right to that, which the divine law forbids them to claim. But to the above reply it may be farther objected, That neither we, nor the legislature, enslaved the Africans ; but they enflaved on another, and we only purchafed thefe whom they had made prifoners of war, and reduced to Slavery. Making prifoners of war Slaves, though practifed by the Romans and other ancient nations, and though ftill practifed by fome barbar- ous tribes, can by no means be juftified : it is unreafonable and cruel. Whatever may be faid of the chief authors and promoters of an unjuSl war, the common foldier, who is under command and obliged to obey, and, as is often the cafe, deprived of the means of information as to the grounds of the war, certainly cannot be thought guilty of a crime fo heinous, that for it himfelf and posterity deferve the dreadful punishment of perpetual fervitude. It is a cruelty that the prefent practice of all civilized nations bears teftimony againft. Allow then the matter objected to be true, and it will not juftify our practice of enflaving the Africans. But the matter contained in the objection is only true in part. The hiSlory of the Slave trade is too tragical to be read without a bleeding heart and weeping eyes. A few of thefe unhappy Africans, and comparatively very few, are criminals, v/hofe fervitude is inflicted as a puniShmeut for their crimes. The main body are innocent, unfufpedting creatures, free, living in peace, doing nothing to forfeit the common privileges ef men. [ '5 ] men. They are ftolen, or violently borne away by armed force, from their country, their parents, and all their tender connections j treated with an indignity and indecency fhameful to mention, and a cruelty fhocking to all the tender feelings of humanity ; and they and their posterity forced into a itate of fervitude and wretchednefs for ever. It is true, they are commonly taken prifoners by Africans j but it is the encouragement given by Europeans that tempts the Afri- cans to carry on thefe unprovoked wars. They furnifli them with the means, and hold out to them a reward for their plunder. If the Africans are thieves, the Europeans ftand ready to receive the ftolen goods j it the former are robbers, the latter furnifli them with arms, and purchafe the fpoil. In this cafe, who is the moft criminal, the civilized European, or the untutored African r The European mer- chants know, that they themfelves are the great encouragers of thefe wars 5 as they are the principal gainers by the event. They furnifli the fmews, add the ftrength, and receive the gain. They know, that they purchafe thefe flaves of thefe who have no juft pretence to claim them as theirs. The African can give the European no better claim than he himfelf has ; the European merchant can give us no better claim than is vetted in him ; and that is one founded only in violence or fraud. In confirmation of this account might be produced many fubftantial vouchers, and fome who had fpent much time in this nefarious traffic. But fuch as are accultomed to liften to the melancholy tales of thefe unfortunate Africans, cannot want fufficient evidence. Thofe who have ieen multitudes of poor innocent children driven to market, and fold like beafts, have it demonftrated before their eyes. It will be farther objected, That in our fituation, the abolition of flavery would be bad policy; becaufe it would difcourage emigrants from the Eaflward, prevent the population of this country, and con- fequently its opulence and ftrength. I doubt not but it would prevent a number of flave-holders from coming into this country, with their flaves. But this would be far, very far from being an evil. It would be a moil defirable event : it would be keeping out a great and intolerable nuifance, the bane of tvtry country where it is admitted, the caufe of ignorance and vice, and of national poverty and weaknefs. On the other hand, if I mif- take not, it would invite five ufeful citizens into our ftate, where it would keep out one flave-holder : and who would not rejoice in the happy exchange ? Turn your eyes to the Eaftward : behold numerous fhoals of flaves, moving towards us, in thick fucceflion. Look to the Weftward -. fee a large, vacant, fertile country, lying near, eafy of accefs, an afylum for the miferable, a land of liberty. A man, who has no flaves, cannot live eafy and contented in the midft of thofe who pofftfs them in numbers, He is treated with neglecl, and often [ '6 ] often with contempt: he is not a companion for his free neighbours j but only for their more reputable flaves : his children are looked upon and treated by theirs as underlings. Thefe things are not eafy to bear; they render his mind uneafy, and his fituation unpleafant. When he fees an open way to remove from this fituation, and finds it may be done confident with his intereft, he will not long abide in it. When he removes, his place is filled up with flaves. Thus this country will fpew out its white inhabitants ; and be peopled with flave-holders, their flaves, and a few, in the higheft pofts of a poor free man, I mean that of an overfeer. When we attentively view and confider our fituation, with relation to the Eaft and the Weft, we may be allured that this event will foon take pkce ; that the progrefs towards it will be exceedingly rapid, and grehtly accelerated by the fertility of our foil. That this, on fuppofition fhvery fhould continue, would foon be the ftate of population in this country, is not only poffible, but very probable ; net only probable, but morally certain. But is this a definable fituation ? Would it be fafe, and comfortable ? Would it be fo, even to mailers themfelves ? I pi efume not : cfpecially when I confider, that their near rteigMiours, beycnd the Ohio, could not, confiftent with their principles, affift them, in cafe of a domefUc in- furreclion. Suppcfe our inhabitants mould be fewer; they would be ufeful citizens, who could repofea mutualconfiden.ee in each other. To increafe the inhabitants of this ftate by multiplying an enemy within our own bewels ; an enemy, with whom we are in a fta'e of per- petual w.ir, and can never make peace, is very far from heirg an ob- jeftofdtftre: efpecially if we confider, that a k e' ef of the iniquity of this fervitude is fate gaining ground. Should ch s fcnt.ment obtain, fhe general belief, what might be the event? Wh-it v/ould be the fituation of a certain defcription of men ? What the condition of this country ? Another frightful objection to my doftrlne is, That mould we fet our Haves free, it would lay a foundation for intermarriages, and ari unnatural mixture of blood, and our pofterity at Itngth would all be Mulattoes. This effecl, I grant, it would produce. I alfo grant, tint this ap- pears very unnatural to perfons labouring under our prejudices of education. I acknowledge my own pride remonftrates againft it j but it does not influence my judgment, nor affect my ccnfcience. To plead this, as a reafon for the continuation of flavery, is to jp'lead the fear that we fhould dlfgrace ourftlvcs, as a reafon why we Jhouid do injuftice to others : to plead that, we may continue in guilt, for fear thfe features and complexion of our pofterity fhould be fpoil- td. We mould recoiled!, that it is too late to prevent this great ima- jginary evil j the matter is already gone beyond recovery ; for it may 6 be fs pfo\red with mathematical eertainty, that, if things go on in th prtfcnt channel, the future inhabitants of America will inevitably b* Mulattoes. How often have men children hy their own fl.wes, by their fathers' flaves, or the (laves of their neighbours ? How faft is the number of Mulattoes increaling ip every part of the land ? Yifit the little towns and villages' to the Eaftwaici; vifit the feats of gentlemen, who abound in flaves ; and fee- how they fwarm on every hand !. All the I'h.idrcn of iVluIattoes will be Mulattoes, and the whites arc daily adding to the number j which will continually increaft: the proportion of Mulattoes. Thus this evil is coming upon us in a way much more difgraceful, and unnatural, than intermarriages. Fathers will have their own children for flaves, and leave them as an inheritance to luir children. Men will pofltfs their brothers and lifters as their property, leave them 10 their heirs, or feii them to itrangers. Youth will have their grey headed uncles and aunts for Haves, call them their property, and transfer them to others. Men will humble their own . Oi' cvtn their aunts, to gratify their luft. An hard-hearted tttafUr will not know, whether he has a blood relation, a brother or a ftftvr, An uncle or an nust, or ;i ihangcr of Africa, under hi* fannying hpinK ' ithi ie 'not tht v>vik of itD.i^inatiuii j it has been i'uquently !<\Ui*ed. The worft that can be mate of this objection, ugjy as it Is, is, that it would be hastening an evil in an honsft way, which we are already bringing on pur/elves in a way that is absolutely dilhoneft, perfect!/ ^arneluJ, and extremely criminal. This objection then can have no weight with a reafonable man, who can divert himfelf of his prejudi- ces and his pride, and view the matter as really circumftanced. The evil is inevitable : but as it is a prejudice of education, it would be an evil only in its approach j as it drew near, it would decreafe j when fully come, it would ceafe to exift. Another objection to my doctrine, and that efteemed by fome the moft formidable, ftill lies before me ; an objeciiun taken from the facred fcriptures. There will be produced on the occafion, the ex- amj>le of faithful Abraham, recorded in Gen. xvi . and the law of Mofcs, recorded m Lev. xxv. The injunctions laid upon frrvants in the gotptl, particularly by the Apofhe Paul, w.ll ,.lfo be introduced here. Thefe will all be dirccled, as formidable art-llevy, againft me t and in defence ot abfolutt flavery. From the patfage in Genefis, it is argued, by the advocates for perpetual flavery, 1 hat fince Abraham had fervants born in his houfe and bought with money, they muft have been fervants for life, like our Negroes : and hence they conclude, that it is lawful for us to purchafe heathen fervanu, and if they have children born in our . ro make them fervants allb. From the J.?w of Mofes it is argued^ [ 1* J argued, that the Israelites were authorised to leave the children of their fervams, as an inheritance to their own children for ever : and hence it is inferred, that we may leave the children of our flaves as an inheritance to our children for ever. If this was immoral in itfelf y a juft GOD would never have given it the fanftion of his authority j and, if lawful in itftlfj we may fafely follow the example of Abra- ham, and aft according to the lav/ of Mofcs. None, I hope, will make this objection, but thofe who believe thefe writings to be of divine authority ; for if they are not fo, it It little to the purpofe to introduce them here. If you grant them to be of divine authority, you will alfo grant, that they are confiftent with themfelves> and that one pafiagc may help to explain another. Grant me this, and then I reply to the objection. In the nth verfe of th* i7th of Genefis, we find that Abraham was commanded to eircumcife all that were born in his houfe, or bought with money. We find in the fequel of the chapter, that he obeyed this command without delay ; and actually circumcifed every male in his family, who came under this defcription. This law of ciicumcifion continued in force j it was not repealed, but confirmed" by trie law of Mofes. Now, to the circumcifed were committed the oracles of God ; and circumcifion was a token of that covenant by which, among other things, the land of Canaan, and the various privileges in it, were promifed to Abraham, and his feed j to all that were included in that covenant. All were included, to whom circumcifion, which was the token of the covenant, was adminiftered, agreeably to God*s command. By divine appointment, not only Abraham and his natu- ral feed, but he that was bought with money of any ftranger that was not of his feed, was circumcifed. Since the feed of the ftranger received the token of this covenant, we muft believe, that he was included, and interefted in it ; that the benefits promifed were to be conferred on him. Thefe perfons bought with money were no longer loSked upon as uncircumcifed and unclean, as aliens and ftrangers j but were incorporated into the church and nation of the Ifraelites ; and became one people with them, became God's covenant people. Whence it appears, that fuitable provifion was made by the divine law that they fiiould be properly educated, made free, and enjoy all the common privileges of citizens. It was by the divine law enjoined upon the Ifraelites, thus to circumcife all the males born in their houfes 3 then, if the purchafed fervants in queftion had any children, their matters were bound by law to incorporate them into their church and nation. Thefe children, then, were the fervants of the Lord, in the fame fenfe as the natural defendants of Abraham were; and therefore, according to the law, Lev. xxv. 42, 55. they could not be made Haves* The paffages of fcripture under confideratiorv were C '9 1 were fo far from authorifmg the Ifraelites to make flaves of their fcr- vants' children, that they evidently forbid it ; and therefore are fo far from proving the lawfulnefs of our enflavinj the children of the Afri- cans, that they clearly condemn the practice as criminal. Thefe paffages of facred writ have been wickedly prefied into the fertice of Mammon, perhaps more frequently than any others : but does it not now appear, that thcfe weighty pieces of artillery may be fairly wrefted from the enemy, and turned upon the hofts oi the Mammonites, with very good effect ? The advocates for flavery mould have obferved, that in the law of Mofes referred to, there is not the leaft mention made of the children of thefe fervants ; it is not faid that they mould be fetvantsj or any thing about them. No doubt, fomc of them had children, but it was unneceflary to mention them ; becaufe they were already provi- ded for, by the law of circumcifion. To extend the law of Moles to the children of thefe fervants, is arbitrary and prcfumptuous ; it is making them include much more than is expreffed or neceffarily implied in the text. It cannot b* neceflarily implied in the expreffien, They Jhall be your bondmen for ever ; becaufe the word for ever is evidently limited by the nature of the fubjeft ; and nothing appears, by which it can be more pro*, pefly limited, than the life of the fervants purchafed. The fenfe thtn is fimply this, they fhall ferve you and your children as long as they live. We cannot certainly determine how thefe perfons were made fer- vants at firft 5 nor is it necefiary we mould. Whether they were per- fons who had forfeited their liberty by capital crimes ; or whether they had involved themfclves in debt by folly and extravagance, and fubmitted to ferve during their lives, in order to avoid a greater cala- mity ; or whether they were driven to that neceffity in their younger days, for want of friends to take care of them, we cannot tell. This however we may be fure of, that the Ifraelites were not fent by a di vine law to nations three thoufand miles difbnt, who were neither doing, nor meditating any thing againft them, and with whom they had nothing to do ; in order to captivate them by fraud or force, tear them away from their country and all their tender connections, bind tht-rn in chains, crowd them into fhips, and there murder them by thoufands, with the want of air and exercife ; and then condemn the furvivors and their pofterity to flavery for ever. But it is further objected, That the Apoftle advifes fervants to be contented with their ftate of fervitude, and obedient to their matters; and, though he charges their matters to ufe them well, he nowhere commands them to fet them free. I-n order rightly to underftand this matter, we mould recolleft the fituation of Clir&ians at this time. They were under the Roman yoke, t; i yoke, the government of the heathen ; who were watching every op* portunity of charging them with defigns againft their government, in order to juftify their bloody perfections. In fuch circumflances, for the Apoftle to have proclaimed liberty to the Daves, would probably have expofed many of them to certain deftruftion, brought ruin on the Chriftian caufe, and that without the profpedl of freeing one Tingle man; which would have been the height of madnefs and cruelty. It was wife, it was humane in him, not to drop a fmgle hint on this fubjecl:, farther thari faying, If tbou mayeft be madefr^ ujt V rather. Though the Apoilles acted with this prudent referve, the unreafon- ablenefs of perpetual unconditional flavery may eafily be inferred from the righteous and benevolent doclrines and duties taught in the New Teftament. It is quite evident, that flavery is contrary to th,c fpirit and genius of the Chriftian religion. It is contrary to that ex- cellent precept laid down' by the divine Author of the Chiiftian in- ftitution, viz. Wbatfivaer yt would that men jhwld do to you-, dc ye even fo to them. A pr.ecept fo finely calculated to teach the duties of 1 juftice, to inforce their obligation, and induce the mind :to obedience, that nothing can excel it. No man, when he views the hardships, the futTerings, the exccffive iai-curs, the unreafonabie chaftifements, the reparations between loving hufbands and wives, between arfedlionate parents and children, can fay, " Vv'ere I in their place, I mould be contented. I fo far approve this ufage, as to believe the law that fub- Jcls me to it is pet fcdly right ; that I and my pofterity fhould be de- nied the protection of law, and by it be expofed to fuffer all thefe cala- mities; though I never forfeited my freedom, nor merited fuch treat- ment, more than others." No; there is an honeft SOMETHING in our breafts, that bears teftimohy againft this, as unreafonabie and wicked. I found it in my own breaft near forty years ago ; and through all the changes of time, the influence of cuftom, the arts of fophiftry, and the fafcinations of intereft, it remains there ftill. I believe it is a law of my nature; a law of more ancient date than any aft of parliament j and which no human leiflature can ever re- peal.' It is a law infcribed on every human heart ; and may there be feen in legible characters, unlefs it is hlotred by vice, or the eye of the mind blinded by intereft. Should I do any thing to countenance this evil, I fhould fight againft my own he.irt- fhou'd 1 not ufe my influence to annihilate it, my own conference would condemn me. It maybe farther objected, This flavery, it is true, is a great evil} but ftill greater evils would follow emancipation. Men, who have laid out their money in the purchafe of (laves, and now have little other property, would certainly be -reat fufferers. Befidesy the (laves themfelvts are unacquainted with the arts of life ; being ufed to ad .only under the direction of others, they have never ac- quired quired the habits cf induftry ; have not that ferrfi? of property anj fpirit of emulation neceffary to make them ufehil citizens. Man/ have been fo long accuftomed to the meaner vices, habituated to ly- ing, pilfering and dealing, that when pinched with want, they would commit thefe crimes, become pert* to fociety, or end their days on. the gallows. Here are eyils on both hands, and of two evils, we fhould take the leaft. This is a good rule, when applied to natural evils $ but with moral evils it has nothing to do ; for of thefe we muft chufe neither. Of two evils, the one natural, the other moral, we muft always chufe the natural evil } for moral evil, which is the fame thing as fin, can never be a proper object of choice. Enflaving our fellow creatures is a moral evil $ fome of its effects are moral, and fome natural. There is no way fo proper to avoid the moral evil effects, as by avoidl ing the caufe. The natural evil effects of emancipation can never be a balance for the moral evils of flavery, or a reafon why we fhould. prefer the latter to the former. Here we fhould confider, on whom thefe evils are to be charged ; and we fhall find they lie at our own doors, they are chargeable on us. We have brought one generation into this wretched ftate; and fhall we therefore doom all the generations of their pofterity to it ? Do \v fend by experience, that this ftate of flavery corrupts and ruins human nature ? and fhall we perfift in corrupting and ruining it, in order tb avoid the natural evils we have already produced ? Do we find, as the ancient Poetfaid, that the day we deprive a man of freedom, we take away half his foul ? and fhall we continue to maim fouls, becaufe a maimed foul is unfit for fociety ? Strange reafoning indeed ! An aftonifhing.confequence! I fhould have looked for a conclufion quite oppofite to this, viz. That we fhould be fenfible of the evil of our con- duct, and perfirt in it no longer. To me this appears a very powerful argument againft flavery, and a convincing proof of its iniquity. It is ruining GOD'S creatures whom he has made free moral agents, and accountable beings ; creatures who ftill belong to him, and are not left U> us to ruin at cur pleafure. However, the objection is" weighty, and the difficulty fuggefted great. But I do not think, that it is fuch as ought to deter us from our doty, or tempt us to continue a practice, fo inconfifteut with juftice and found policy. Therefore I give it as my opinion, that the fiift thing to be done is, To njolve UNCONDITIONALLY to put an e*d to Jiwtry In this ftatt. This, I conceive, properly belongs to t'ie Convention ; which they can eafily effect, by working the principfe intoth* conftitution they are to frame. If there is net in government fome fixed principles fuperior to all law, and above the power of legislators, there can be no liability, or confifUncy in it : it vrillb* continually fluctuating with tht-Dpinions, humour, humours, paffions, prejudices, or interefts, cf different legiflative bodies. Liberty is an inherent right of man, of every man 5 the existence of which ought not to depend upon the mutability of legif- lationj but fhould be wrought into the very constitution of our government, and be made effential to it. The devifing ways and means to accomplifh this end, fo as fhall beft confift with the pubiic intereft, will be the duty of our future legislature. This evil is a tree that has been long planted, it has been growing many years, it has taken deep root, its trunk is large, and its branches extended wide : mould it be cut down fuddenly, it might crufh all that grow near it j fhould it be violently eradicated, it might tear up the ground in which it grows, and produce fatal effects. It is true, the flaves have a jufl claim to be freed inftantly : but by our bad coh- duft, we have rendered them incapable of enjoying, and properly ufingthis their birth-right 5 and therefore a gradual emancipation only can be advifeable. The limbs of this tree muft be lopped off by little and little, the trunk gradually hewn down, and the flump and roots left to rot in the ground. The legislature, if they judged it expedient, would prevent the im- portation of any more flaves ; they would enaft that all born after fuch a date fhould be born free ; be qualified by proper education to make ufeful citizens ; and be actually freed at a proper age. It h no fmall recommendation of this plan, that it fo nearly coincides \vith the Mofaic law, in this eafe provided j to which, even fuppofe it a human institution, great refpeci is due for its antiquity, its jurtite and humanity. It would, I think, avoid in a great meafure, all the evils mentioned in the objection. All that was the matter's own, at the time fixed upon in the aft, would be ftill his own : All that fhould defcend from them would be his own until he was paid for their education. All he would lofe would he the profpeft of his children being enriched at the expence of thofe who arc unborn. Would any man murmur at having this profpeft, which was given him by an iniquitous law, and cannot be enjoyed without guilt, cutoff by a righteous law, that frees from oppreffion future generations ? Is there any fuch man to be found ? Let us ftop a moment to hear his complaint. " I have long lived happy by oppreffion. I wanted to leave this privilege as an inheritance to my children. I had a de- lightfome profpect of their living alfo in eafe and fplendour at the expence of others. This iniquity was once fanclified by a law, of which I hoped my children's children would have enjoyed the fweets ; but now this hard-hearted, this cruel Convention has cut off this pleating profpect. They t ** ] ** They vrill not fiifFer my children to live in eafe and luxmy, at the expence of poor Africans. They have refolved, and alas ! the refolution muft ftand for ever, that black men in the next generation fhall enjoy the fruit of their own labour, as well as white men j and be happy according to the merit of their own conduct. If jufttce be done to the offspring of Negroes, mine are eternally ruined. If my children carniot, as I have done, live in injuftice and cruelty, they are injured, they are robbed, they are undone. What, muft young mafter faddle his own horfe ? Muft pretty little mifs fweep the houfe and walh the dimes ? and thefe black devils be free ! No heart can bear it ! Such is the difference between us and them, that it is a greater injury to us to be deprived of their labour, than it is to them to be deprived of their liberty and every thing elfe. This wicked Convention will have to anfwer another day, for the great injury they have done us, in doing juftice to them." Emancipation on fome fuch plan as above hinted, would probabiy, rn many inftances, be a real advantage to children in point of wealth. Parents would educate them in fuch a manner, and place them in fuch circumftances, as would be more to their intereft, than poflefling fuch unproductive eftat.es as flaves are found to be. The children would imbibe a noble independent fpirit, learn a habit ef managing bufmefs and helping themfelves. They would learn to fcorn the mean and beggarly way of living at the expence of others, living in fplendor on plunder of the innocent. Where eftates were wifely managed, children would not find their fortunes diminished. They would not be mocked with nominal, but poflefs real wealth j wealth that would not merely feed their vanity, but fill their coffers. The children of the flaves, inftead of being ruined for want of education, would be fo brought up as to become ufeful citizens. The country would improve by their induftryj manufactures would ilourifh ; and, in time of war, they would not be the terror, but the ftrength and defence of the ftate. It may be farther objected, That to attempt, even in this gradual way, the annihilation of flavery in this country, where fo many are deeply Jnterefted, might fo fcnnbly touch the intereft of fome un- reafonabU men, as probably to ftir up great confufion, and endanger rej'idice orcovetoufnefs, might be made uneafy and dif- pofcd to clamour} yet I apprehend but little danger of any ill effects. The meafure would be fo agreeable to the honeft dilates of confci- ence, the growing fentiments of the country, and of many even of the flave-holders themfelves, that any opposition they might make would not be fupported j and they would be too ivifc to hazard the an event they fo much dread. If r. n r If the growing opinion of the unlawfulnefs of flavery fliould con- tinue to grow, holding men in that Hate will foon be impracticable J there will be no cauf'e exifting fumcient to produce the effect. When this (hall happen a certain event may fuddenly take place, the confe- quences of which may be very difagreeable. This I t..ke to be the proper time to prevent this evil. We may now do it in a peaceable manner, without going a ftep out of the way of our duty, and with- out hazarding what might be attended with tenfold more confufion and danger. The flavery of the Negroes began in iniquity ; a curfe has attended it, and a curfe will follow it. National vices will be puniflied with national calamities; Let us avoid thefe vices, that we may avoid the punifhment which they deferve ; and endeavour fo to aft, as to fecure the approbation and fmiles, of Heaven. Holding^mtn in flavery is the national vice of Virginia j and, whil* a part of that ftate, we were partakers of the guilt. As a fepar.ite ftate, we are juft now come to the birth; and it depends upon our free choice, whether we fhaH be born in this Tin, or innocent of it. We now have it in our power to adopt it as our national crime ; or to bear a national teftimony againft it. I hope the latter will be ou* choice; that we (hall warn our hands of this guilt, and not leave it in the power of a future legiflature, ever more to ftain our reputation cr our conference wstb it. THE E N B. Of M. G u R N E Y may alfo le bad y . Moft of the PAMPHLETS lately pubKihed on the foregoing SUBJECT* Binder Oylord Bros.. Inc. Stockton, Calif. .M.Beg.U.S.Pt.- M10299 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY