YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

SOUTHERN SLAVERY

GONSIDEEED

GENERAL PRINCIPLES.

Hi'

0. murphy's son, printer, 66 FCLTON STREET, NKW-TOHK.

SOUTHERN SLAVERY

aox<rsii3SiiBr>

OK

GENERAL PRINCIPLES

¦OB,

% Staple toit^ l^tetrat&nisfs.

BY A NOET? OAEOLINIAN.

NEW YORK:
D. MURPHY'S SON, PRINTER, 65 FULTON STREET.
186L .

C ZO

SOUTHERN SLAVERY CONSIDERED
ON

"All men are horn free and equal," says the Declaration of Ameri
can Independence. The intention of the instruraent is simply to affirm
that, as all were originally "free and equal," their freedom or equality
¦ could not be destroyed except on sufficient reason ; that, independent
of controlling circumstances, it could not be taken away at all, — or to
use thc term in thc instrument itself, was "inahenable." It would
argue, therefore, that every people, nation, kingdora and state, in its
normal condition, is free from, and independent o.", every other, and
prima facie, equally entitled to the right of self-government. Hence,
that the interests of one community are not to be advanced at the ex
pense of another without cogent and unavoidable reasons ; and that,
¦ under the same circumstances, the same measure of freedom and
equality belongs to one as to another. Thence proceeding to an appli
cation of the principle, the Declaration would assert, that no circum
stances existed, which necessitated depriving the people of tlio colo
nies of any rights, which appertained to thc people of England.
The proposition, in its application to thc internal government of
society, in like manner, expresses what is true, only in an original or
abstract sense — that is to say, true apart, or abstracted from, all circum
stances, that might in any way control, alter or modify the principle ;
which is all that is meant when wc say that a thing is abstractly truc.
For example, a man qommits a crime, and we straightway take away
both his freedom and equality : and why ? because thc crime is a con
trolling circumstance, which, by endangering the peace and good order
of society, h.as thrown us upon our right of self-defence. The ca.se,
therefore, has ceased to be an aibstract one, and we cease to apply to it
an abstract principle. Wc judge of it now with a view to the con
trolling circumstance which has entered into it, and we act accordingly.
It is evident, then, if our action be right, that what is abstractly tru«
may be concretely false ; that is, false, when controlling circumstances
come in to alter or niodify the abstract case. To give another illus
tration : I havc no abstract right to peril the life which Heaven has
lent mc in a burning building ; but if it be to save a fellow creature,

I not only acquire the right, but it becomes my duty. And thu3,
what was wrong in the abstract, becomes at another time both a right
and a duty. To act conscientiously, therefore, requires an enlightened
view of each and every controlling circumstance, which from time to
time may enter into a question and destroy its abstract nature. Fur
ther instances might be multiplied, which to some minds, perhaps,
may be more forcible than those already given. But I am only aiTirm-
ming the old saying, that "circumstances alter cases;" and clearly
the abstract is one case, and the concrete quite another.
Thc inability to distinguish between the two, is the peculiar failing
of the human intellect, exhibited in greater degree in v/eak, illoglc.:.!
minds, or imaginative and im]ias3ioned teinperarnonts. We naturally
look for errors of this sort among novelists, poets and impulsive orators ;
also among young people and enthusiasts. Those thinkers are rare,
who are able to take into comprehensive view all thc circumstances of
the several cases as thoy arise, and to form their judgment, not from an
abstract principle alone, but from a due estiraate of thc influence and
bearing of all the facts in each particular case. Such men tower up at
once above their follows, and are recognized as tho wise and prudent
of tho earth. If statesmen, they are appropriately called the men for
the times. In opposition to them, are the whole tribe of petty politi
cians, hasty reasoners and wild abstractionists, who, failing to perceive
the difference betvveen questions abstractly considered, and when
brought into juxtaposition with controlling circumstances, incline of
course to narrow-mindedness, fanaticism and intolerance.
Abstractionists at all times are the bane of society ; and the common
prejudice against them is just and natural. They are sometimes known
as one-idea people, from the pertinacity with which they cling to, and
attempt to carry out, their one abstract idea, amid the constantly
changing phases of life. Of facts or circumstances that destroy the
abstract cliaracter of propositions, and necessitate new rules of action,
they are perfectly oblivious. They will even deny point blank their
possible existence. Sooner or later, this ardent faith in abstractions
carries its possessors into all tho isms of their day. Such men were
the genius and soul of the French Eevolution. They bid fair to be
come, in like manner, the pestilential gang that shall bring destruction
to the greatness and liberties of America.
With regard to the question of the freedom and equality of man,
these persons forget, that it is one thing to regard man abstract!}' tuS an
individual, aud quite another to consider him concretely as a member
of society. If, for example, instead of in abstract cases, or without
good and sufficient reason, as our Declaration of Independence affirms,
it be asserted that liberty and the other righta referred to are absolutely

'inalienable;" if in fact mankind are perfectly free and equal under all
circurastances ; of course no government could have thc contrary right
of marring their perfect freedom and equality in the least respect or for
any occasion. Therefore, no duties should be imposed, no taxes levied,
and no one elevated to bear rule over his fellows. E.ach should be
free to import and to export, and to enjoy equally his portion of this
world and its goods ; and all exclusive and unequal rights of property
ought to be taken away. The liberty and political status of criminals,
in like manner, should be left untouched. But the condition to which
society would be reduced by this attempt to carry out abstract princi
ples into consistent practice, must stagger thc faith even of a Alidship-
man Easy.
Clearly then, when mankind enter into social relations, ."-.nd irapose
upon themselves the wholesome rcstriiuts of social order, tlicy a.-f no
longer in an nbstract condition. Obedience to tho great duty of self-
preservation, and of mutual protection and convenience, has driven them
from thc maintenance of their abstract rights ; and they subrait to the
necessity of government and law J grateful, indeed, that their Maker
has so ordained it. They are satisfied, nay obliged, to surrender a
portion of their abstract freedom and equality, in exchange for the
great blessings of security and protection.
But a thing cannot be claimed and surrendered at the same time :
and our abstract rights, or a portion of them, being thus nfecessarily
surrendered, we can no longer fall back upon rhem^ and demand their
recognition, and that too to the full measure and extent. Controlling
circumstances must be kept in view ; those, namely, which have caused
Heaven mercifully to ordain governments for the good of man. And
what are they ? The want of security, the necessity of protection, tho
instinct of self-preservation, and also mutual convenience. So far
forth, then, as these controlling circumstances have forced us from an
abstract condition, to that full e.xtent do abstract principles and rights
cease to have an application. In short, the question ia not, what is my
abstract right? but how much of it have I surrendered? what Jid I
surrender it for ? have I fully obtained raj object ? has thu sur
render been too much or too little for the purpose ? If clcnrly too
much, then I deraand back that portion which was unnecessarily sur
rendered : for I have received no equivalent therefor ; and i havc no
right to throw away any of God's gifts. I can only yield tliem up .or
motives which He would approve. He approves of forboarancj, in
deed; and I will practice it, therefore, until forbearance shall ccuse to
be a virtue. Then, however, but not till then, will I hold my liberties
to be " inalienable ;" for thea, there will be no controlling circumstar.cc-i
in the case, and abstract principles will of courso apply.

But if, on the other hand, society is in a stato of anarchy, or is in
danger of becoming so, my end has not been obtained; and the
general good demands of mc perhaps a still greater surrender. If so,
with a conscientious view to all the circumstances of thc case, and not
basing my judgment upon abstractions alone, I will endeavor to make
whatever sacrifices patriotism and my duty to my neighbor require
of me.
And, after the manner of St. Paul, " my answer to them that do ex
amine me is this :" " Am I not free ?" " Havc I not," abstractly speaking,
"the power" to do this, or that, or the other? "Nevertheless, I have
not used this hberty." ' For necessity is laid upon me" by thc con
troHing circumstances of the case ; and I must ronder unto Cesar the
things that are Cesar's. "Yea, wo is unto me," and to my neighbor,
and to my country, if I obey not my conscience in this matter. "For,
brethren, yc havc been called unto liberty ; only use not liberty for an
occasion to the flesh, but by love serve ono anotlier."
Let us apply these principles. And first, with regard to ourselves.
Are we maintaining or carrying out tibstrnctions, which arc tending lo
the overthrow of government, the breaking up of society, the destruc
tion of its peace and good order, the bringing in of anarchy and ruin ?
Clearly wc ought to surrender these abstractions. The general good
requires the sacrifice, and it should be patriotically laid upon the altar.
In doing so, we surrender no more than all men necessarily do in the
eoci.al relation ; namely, give up a portion of their abstract liberty of
action, in exchange for the blessings of good government, and to avert
from them anarchy and ruin. But if it be a dutj-, let it be done in all
humility. Let us not defer it through pride, or strife, or vain glory.
And next, with regard to the slaves at the South. Is a greater
surrender of abstract rights on their jiart enforced, than is necessitated
by the controlling circumstances of the case? Ah! remember, that it
is one thing for a person to answer this question in the quiet security
of his doraestic circle at the North, and quite another to live at the
South, surrounded by the dear raembers of his family, and run the risk
of having it answered for him, in a way that would appal his heart,
however br.ave and noble its instincts. The peace of those beloved
ones, if not the good of his country, and ©f thc ignorant blacks them
selves, would make him pause and ponder well, before removing from
them the least restraint, which maddened abstractionists migia dictate,
lest he should thereby only expose more and more their unreflecting
minds to the poisonous influences of his enemies.
Indeed, if the people of the North acknowledge tiie right of soif-
government, and the equality of the States in regard to their owa
domestic affairs, clearly the determining, of this c|uestion belongs, not

tb them, but to the people of tho South only. And they have deter*
mined it ; and their wisest, purest, most humane, and most generous-
hearted men agree in the determination. Those at a distance, who
have not the opportunity of seeing daily all the controlling circum
stances of tho case, should have tho charity, if not tho modesty, to
allow, that so great a unanimity of sentiment among the wise and good
mon of the South, is strong proof that the question has been determined
by thom wisely and well.
The fact is, if man in tho social state necessarily surrenders a portion
of his individual rights, in order to obtain greater security and protec
tion for the remainder, then the best form of human government is not
that which is the most lax, or which exercises tho least restraint upon
the governed, or, in other words, which offers tho most freedom, but
the one that secures as much as is consistent with the actual circum
stances of the case — ^in short, the one which most exactly adapts and
proportions the amount of surrendered freedom, to the needed amount
of security and protection. Hence, the respective forms of good gov
emment will be as diverse as are the different circumstances to which
they are to be applied. As men rise in elevation of character, purity
of morals, industry, and an enlightened appreciation of their social
duties, the measure of surrender needed of them becomes proportiona
bly less and less ; and the greater their inferiority as a race or peo
ple, or the further they recede into barbarism, fanaticism, ignorance or
vice the greater will be the amount of individual rights necessary to
be surrendered by them to ensure peace and good order to the com
munity. Whether a government should therefore be a republic, a
monarchy or an absolutism, depends entirely upon the condition of the
people to be governed. In like manner, whether different races in the
same community should enjoy equal political or social rights, depends
likewise upon their relative condition and circumstances.
I have heard some people argue, that the negroes were in the first
place wrongly and unnecessarily forced into slavery. Hence, they
conclude, keeping them therein is a continuation of the wron^- : and
two wrongs cannot make a right. The fallacy of the argumant will
be apparent from a parallel illustration. One mau makes another drunk,
or drives him crazy, and then confines him in my house, without my
consent. The argument is, that as the original causo which led to the
confinement was wrong, I cannot in good conscience continue it, but
am bound in justice to set the drunkard or lunatic instantly free, how
ever injurious it be to the unfortmiate fellow himself, and however
much it may endanger the peace or safety of my family. The argu
ment assumes the continuance of slavery to be wrong, as well as the
cause of its existence. It assumes, therefore, the very question ia

8' 1
dispute, and is a palpable begging of that question. Two wrongs
cannot indeed make a right ; but wo deny that they have shown two
wrongs. One of tho two is both a necessity and a duty.
Tho fact is, necessity knows no law ; and when a man is unavoidably
boset by stubborn facts, he is compelled to deal with them. His duty
sternly requires it, and he can only repent of causes. Indeed, selfish
man is suro to act practically, whon a matter affects his personal inter-
osts or safety— he indulges in abstractions, only when it concerns tho
peace or welfare of his neighbors.
If then, my reasoning bo correct, the business of government is with
the actual facts of each particular case, — not with tho cansts that led
to or produced those fact.-). Tho measure of surrender of abstract
rights required of a people, is determined, not by the causes of their
ignor.nnco, flinaticism, degradation or barbarism, but by the .actual ex
tent to which those causes have operated — in plain words, by the
precise amount of that ignorance, fanaticism, degradation or barbarism.
It makes no difference, therefore, by what course of wrong and oppres
sion a people may havo been brought to the necessity of greater sub
jection. For the fact that a controlling circumstance was wrongly
brought about, docs not make it any the less a controlling circumstance.
If the necessity exists, it is enough to justify the greater subjection,
and tliis, without lessening in any degree the moral obliquity of those,
who originall J' caused the unpalatable necessity.
The aim of the patriot, of the good citizen, of the conscientious ma;i,
should therefore simply be, to see that there shall bs the least amount
of surrender required, under the actual circumstances of the case, in.
exchange for the greatest amount of security and protection. If, in
any way, consistently with the public good, he can elevate his fellow
creatures as a whole, so as to render them capable of enjoying greater
and greater privileges, it is his duty to do so; and whenever he
assuredly finds a people or race, as a whole, elevated to a degree be
yond the privileges which they enjoy, it becoraes then his duty to
restore such a measure of abstract, individual freedom, as may be com
mensurate to their additional elevation ; always taking care, however,
to avoid hasty action, and very great and sudden changes — in other
words, to be fully confident of thc additional elevation and qualifications
of the people or race, before elevating their social condition.
Exactly to fulfil one's duty in these respects, would be to preserve
that even balance between conservatism and progress, which is the con
stant aim of a good govemment, and of great and conscientious states
men. And it is precisely our mode of dealing with our children.
Thus, in the earliest periods of existence, however they may be
abstractly "bom," they are necessarily wholly deprived of liberty.

But we begin straightway that systematic training, which shall qualify
them for the enjoyment of higher and higher privileges. As they
grow up to be boys and giris, they may be allowed to run a little about
tho streets at their pleasure, but it is always under some restraint,
more or less, according to the character and circumstances of the
children, and the good or lax government of the parents. And it is
only when they attain to the full vigor and maturity of manhood and
womanhood, that we extend to them equal privileges with ourselves.
It is nature's own teaching, coming down to us in that patriarchal
form, which was the p'rimeval origin of all government. And who,
forsooth, talks to children about their abstract rights ? yet if they
are "born free and equal," and no controlling circumstance can affect
what 13 abstractly right, why do We not allow them their boasted
freedom and equality ? The truth is, that as no two faces can bo '
found, exactly alike in all respects, so no two human beings, perhaps,
ever were bora into this concrete world of ours, exactlj- the equals of
each other morally, intellectually, or physically. Some are born -ivith
minds to govern, others with bodies to labor. The law of our fallen
nature has worked out for us this necessary inequality, along with all
the other ills that flesh is heir to ; and the pride of man must bend,
with reverent submission, before the awful penalties of Heaven's
violated law.
If, indeed, we could suppose a whole race to be born at once, all
full grown men — perfect in every respect — in wisdom, for instance,
like Minerva from the brain of Jove — without the least taint of human
frailty — Gloving God, and each other, with all their hearts — performing,
and ready to perform, every duty, which that love requires ; — then,
perhaps, we could prate to the full about abstract rights ; for tlien, the
race would be affected by no controlling circumstances, such as infancy,
ignorance, infirmity, depravity, and the like, to mar the abstract prin
ciple of perfect equality. Such a race, like the angels of Heaven,
would need no other government, than the moral government of their
, Maker : for they would be . a law unto themselves. Nor are we to
suppose that Heaven would ordain for them a civil government ; for
rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. They ought,
therefore, to be bound by none ; and hence, would be born perfectly
free as well as equal. And the nearer a racC attains to this perfect
standard, that is to say, the more removed it is from the influence of
controlling circumstances, the nearer we are to the realization of the
abstraction ; and the 'greater, therefore, will be the freedom and equality
to which the members of such a race will be entitled. Hence, the
only application that the principle will bear to our imperfect condition,
is simply this; that freedora and equality, in any particular, ought aot
2

10
to be taken aWay without good and sufficient reason; and that, so long
as the circumstances are equal, thc measure of freedom and equality, to
whicli each race is entitled, is also equal, and is neither more nor less,
in any case, than is suitable to those circumstances.
Slavery, then, cannot be called unjiist, simply because it interferes
with freedom, or equality, or any other abstract right of man ; provided
there be any controlling circumstances connected with thc existence of
the institution to justify it. Indeed, as has been shown, if wc assume
that we may never interfere with thc free will of another, to be logical
and consistent, we raust take ground against every human law whatso
ever. The laws of property, thc tariff laws, tho tax laws, thc laws to
compel witnesses to give testimony, and otherwise to ensure the ad
ministration of justice, the criminal laws too, all interfere with freedom
of will and of action. And yet wc justify them, separately and collec
tively. And why ? because we consider them necessary to the peace,
good order, protection or welfare of society.
But if freedom may bo interfered with in sorae cases, and to the full
extent that it may be necessary to thc peace or welfare of society, why
not in others? Would society be equally protected, good order as
surely prevail, and no disturbances of the peace ever arise, if four mil
lions of an ignorant, inferior race were suddenly turned loose to shift
for themselves, who had previously never been accustomed to have a
care for the morrow? Would it not be far safer, and just as humane,
to turn an equal lot of our boys and girls into the streets, instead of
compelling the little, happy, thoughtless ones, to keep on servuig their
fathers and mothers, just the same, whether they be harsh or gen- '
tie? The cases are more analagous even, than at first sight might
appear. For, until children arrive at the age of twenty-one, their parents
have the entire property and control of their services and persons,
and may inflict corporal or other punishment upon them ; and they are
protected in these rights, by the laws of every civilized nation on the
globe. Nay, by the system of apprenticeship, or that of guardianship,
they may convey these rights to others : And they may bring suit at
law, and recover damages, for any violation of these rights of property
in the services or persons of their children. To all intents and purposes,
therefore, children, duiing minority, are under the same legal subjection
as slaves. Hence, the language of St. Paul, "that the heir, as long as
he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of ail." ,
The principle is the same; only the thing is called by another name.
In both cases, the peace, good order and welfare of society are alone
consulted. Indeed, in point of fact, slavery is to be justified or condemned, on
precisely the same rules with all other human laws and institutions,

11
not even the punishment of crime excepted. TIio samo arguments that
arc used in support of any one, apply with equal cogency to the othera.
The measure of severity with which each is to be enforced, depends
also on precisely the samo principles. And these principles are tlie
necessity or controlling circumstances of the case. As, however, tho
right to deprive a crimin.al ofhis freedora is universally adraitted, and
as some^ might be disposed to think, that the alienation of "inalienable
liberty," in this case at least, grows out of a right ofthe government to
punish for moral offences, and therefore is not applicable to the case of a
elave, who has committed.no crime, I propose to consider the founda
tion of the criminal code more at length, and to show th.at it lias pre.
ciscly the same foundation with the slave code, as well ns with all othor
codes and. laws of human government.
Whence, then, docs government derive ,tho right of punishing crim-
inals ? The believer in revealed truth tells us from Gon ; and tho
philosopher says, from tho neces,sity of providing for thc mutual defence,
convenience and welfare. This, says he, is tho first and great duty
of human society, and constitutes tho motive, aim and origin
of all human government. Both the believer and the philosopher are
right. While the one has contented himself with giving the Great
Source of this, as of all other power, the othor has gone further, and
defined the extent of the power derived from that Source. Tho believ
ing philosoplier tells us, therefore, that God has not given to finite man
infinite power, but that it has a limit ; that human government is the
minister of God to us for good ; and that, as it clearly can never claim
a divino riglit to do wrong, so neither can it exercise any greater
power, whether by constitutions, "powers," "principalities" or "magis
trates," than is necessary for the general good. Whatever is fitting
to be done to ensure tho peace, good order, protection or welfare of
society, comes within the province of human government. Whatever
is unnecessary to, or militates against, these ends, is usurpation and
tyranny. Murder, theft, public drunkenness, (not private,) and the
like, are therefore offences, of which human tribunals take cognizance,
and against the commission of which, they have a power derived from
God to protect society.
Observe, however, that they do not punish tho criminal, because he
has been guilty of a moral offence, no matter how gross it may havo
been, but only to deter him and others from the commission of
offences, which endanger tlie peace of society. Govemment may 'qj
its penal code warn,' but never pimi.sh, in the strict signification of the
word. It would be strange, indeed, if sinful man could claim the right
to pasa judgment upon, and to punish, the sins of his fellows ! No I
" Vengeance is Mine, I will repay, saith the LoBD," The laws of Goi.

12
aro too pure, too wise, too holy, to be enforced by fallen creatures ;
and the Great Creator and Legislator of tho Universe, is also the
Judgo of all the earth. The right to meet out justice for each and
ovory moral transgression, is reserved to Himself alone. As for cor
rupt and puny man, ho is solemnly forbidden to judgo his brother
at all, lest he himscif should in hke manner be judged. If, therefore,
he will venture to cry out against the sins of his brother, it can only
be in tho language of the Psalmist, " Thou God, to Whom vengeance
belongeth, show Thyself."
But, although the Creator has conferred upon mcn^ no juriadiction
over moral offonce?, and Himself only enforces His great first law of
love, which includes the whole moral code. He has nevertheless given
to mankind all powers necessary to their mutu.al defence and temporal
welfare; and, to ensure a wiser and more faithful exercise of these
powers, has ordained governments, which shall be the ministers to us
for good, having for their objects the peace, good order, protection and
welfare of all. Hence, not the higher law of lovo, nor its subordinate
law of morals, but thc mutual defence and temporal ^i-clfare are the first
great laws of society, and the only divinely laid foundations of human
government; and on these first laws all others "hang," and to enforce
them all others are made. Every enactment, which truly tends to pro
mote these objects, lies within the scope and power of human govern
ment, and has for its sanction the will of God ; and proud man, with
all his boasted abstract rights and privileges, must bow the neck in
humble obedience. On the other hand, any enactment, which ii.^s not
these objects in view, is a usurpation, even though it be in direct affirm
ance of the higher law of God. For, even if it were possible, man has
no right to force a sinner to righteousness, and may neither compel his
brother to obey God's law, nor rightfully punish his disobedience.
On the contrary, the Great Maker of that law expressly declares, that
His service shall ba a free-will offering ; and governments, as well as
individuals, must abide by the declaration. In short, civil government,
being only intended to minister to the good of man on earth, can claim
no right to deal with crime per se, or apart from the temporal peace or
welfare of society. If this be not disturbed, the government is com
pelled to suffer, as it cannot help, the degenerac}', corruption, and fallen
condition of raan. Nay ! like Moses of old, for the hardness of men's
hearts, it must often consent to, and regulate, (though it may never
command,) practices, which are undoubted crimes, and as such utterly
abhorrent to the pure law of God.
When, therefore, the question is purely one of morality or religion,
and does not affect the peace or welfare of society, the Creator suffers
no controlling circumstance to alter or modify our abstract freedom of

13
will, and we remain, as we were lorn, "free and equal." Any inter
ference, in fact, by government in matters pertaining to the soul, or its
eternal condition, would bo a most dangerous usurpation, and an un
qualified tyranny. Hence, the common saying, that "every man has a
right to serve God according to the dictates of his own conscience."
Not, indeed, that a man may refuse to hear the voice of his Maker, say
ing, "This is the way, walk ye in it;" or that he is right in choosing
any other than the divinely appointed way ; but simply, that he has a
social right to follow his own conscience, independent of all coercion
from individuals or governments. If alas ! he be too perverse to servo
God at all, or choose to serve Hira according to the dictates of a per
verted conscience, no man or government may interfere in any compul
sory manner, so long as the peace or welfare of society is not disturbed.
The right to choose rests with the individual, and with hira also the
dread responsibility.
Perhaps, in no period of the world's history, has the free-will and in
dependent, though fearful, responsibility of individuals, in purely divine
matters, been fully recognized and acted upon. Again and again, have
the governments of the past attempted the enforcement of moral and
religious duties; but only that bloody wars and bitter persecutions might
attest the folly and wickedness of those, who presume to usurp power
which God Himself has withheld from them, and has left to the free
will of the individual man.
The authority of human government is then limited and defined. It
does not interfere, in the least, with God's exclusive sovereignty in the
moral kingdom, but is delegated by him for other purposes and objects.
It was not, therefore, because man was sinful, but because his sins
interfered with the peace of his neighbor— not because he offended
God, but because he endangered man— that " the powers that be are
ordained of God." Hence, "Thou shalt not steal," is the law of hu
man government, in order simply to protect society, and not in any
sense to affirm God's law, or because it is a moral offence to steal.
And so of the rest of the criminal code.
But, though the powers that be are divinely ordained, solely for the
mutual defence and temporal welfare of humanity, and are thus limited
in their nature and operation, still, of course, to carry out the purposes
and objects for which they were ordained, those powers are ample, and
sufficient to cover every necessity. Hence, however inahenable the
rights of man are in- abstract cases, governments nghtfuliy mar, and
continually do, take away life, liberty, and thepursmt of temporal hap
piness—yea! free speech, and the control of one's own person and ser
vices or any other abstract right of man, whenever the peace, good order,
protection, or welfare of society, reaUy becomes so endangered as to

u
necessitate such measures. And so, at one time, men nro cither
butchered by wholesale, or taken prisoners, iu bloody wars ; and, at
another, citizens are shot down as rioters or rebels : Now, society h.angs
the murderer ; and again, it immures thc highwayman in prison walls,
totally depriving him of liberty, and compelling him to labor as a slave
for life, in tho meanest and strictest of all bondage. And all these
actions are just, and have the Divine Sanction, provided only, they be
really necessary to the protection or welfare of society. So far from
being sins, they in such cases become duticF. But if tlicy be unneces
sary to such protection or welfare, no moral guilt, wliethcr of nations
or criminals, will justify them in the slightest dcgvc'-;. Vongcancc
belongeth unto God, and He will repay. It is not crime, therefore,
per .sc, it is not the moral offence, in any senso, tliat justifies the taking
away of life, liberty, or any other abstract right of ni.in, by hia fel
lows, but only tho protection or welfare of society.
It is app.arent, then, if slavery becomes, under any circumstance^, iu
like manner necessary to tho peace, good order, protection or welfare
of society, it rests on precisely tho same grounds, and is equally justi
fiable, with all other acts of human govemment, not even the taking
away of the liberty of criminals excepted. Nay, moreover, if tlie one
be in any sense a duty, the other is also. So that, in fact, instead of
beinn- a great moral wrong, under certain circumstances the sin would
be, not in keeping z, race in slavery, but in setting it free ; just as, in
the cases put above, it would be highly reprehensible to give freedom
to the drunkard or lunatic, and thereby endanger the safety of the poor
fellow himscif, and of others in his vicinity, whom it was our duty to
protect. The reader will observe, in fact, thai; tlic argument is ofthe aforiiore
kind. For, if the taking away even of life, or the immuring of a raan
in a state prison, at hard labor, all his days, is, because necessary to
the protection and welfare of society, a power belonging to haman
government, and received from God, much more, if the same necessity
exists, is the milder deprivation of"' abstract rights, in the ca.t of the
negro," who can still walk the green fields, and enjoy the refreshing
breezes and glorious sunshine, in happiness and content.
It is not my intention, in this article, to bring out to view the con
trolling circumstances that justify slavery as it exists in our country.
Those controlling circumstances are patent, and very generally admitted.
I have, therefore, confined myself to general reasoning; simply endeav-
orinK to show, that if such controlling circumstances do exis., then
slavery becomes as justifiable as any other human lawyer institu'aou
whatsoever; and that all alike depend upon the Divme ^anc.ion, and
on the same principle. I am persuaded, that no reader, fuhy aware of

16
the facts, can acknowledge tho correctness of the abovo reasoning,
without inevitably, and by a logical necessity, coraing to thc conclusion,
that the institution of slavery in the Soutli ia, as a whole, both just
and humane.
I know that it is sometimes abused to purposes of oppression and
vice ; for what institution among frail human beings is not ? but I have
yet to learn that the abuse of a thing is any argument against its use —
except, perhaps, among feraale novelists and reverend sensation orators.
The divine institutions of husband and wifc, and parent and child, aro,
in like manner, liable to abuse, and are abused ; yet what ono of us is
so presumptuous, as to reproach the Divine Law-giver for ordaining
those abused institutions, however much we condemn thc guilty
creatures, who thw.art His bencficicnt purposes, and take advantage of
His holy ordinances, for their own unhallowed ends. I am aware that
there arc selfish, wicked, harsh and cruel masters; and I am aware,
also, that there arc many, very many, selfish, wicked, harsh and cruel
husbands, aye! and even parents. I rejoice to know, iio\''evcr, that
tho majority of husbands and wive.', and parents and children, learn,
from those very relations themselves, to be unselfish, pure, mild and
benevolent beings : and I bless our Great Creator for His benign in
stitutions, while I condemn, all the more, the hard-hearted creatures,
upon whom His goodness and mercy will make no impression, and who
receive His daily blessings only to abuse them.
But, if the institutions of the Wisest and Hohest of beings become,
.with some of His fallen creatures, only additional means of gratifying
their wicked natures, surely we must not expect it otherwise with tho
institutions of those fallen creatures themselves, however wise or bo-
nicrn, upon thc whole, they may be. If I find, therefore, that most
masters are not selfish, or wicked, or harsh, or cruel, but, on the con
trary, out of the domestic character of the very institution of slavery
itself, derive a sort of patriarchal interest in the happiness of their
servants, thus bound to thera for life, and, by a mild and generous
treatme;t, are ever seeking to gain the good-will, affection and laithful
ser.-ices of those servants; and that it is their interest to do so , and
that even a great deal of the rigor which may be exercised by sc..th-
^ mirers i^ on the whole, necessary to preserve their servan. from
idleness and degradation, and also society from anarchy and rmn-am
i to re roach the institution, or those who uphold it, because some bad
m n aluse it, and are too hard hearted, to be influenced by its patna -
Il «; ? And if, further, I find the sWes, as a class f^e fr.
care, contented and happy-yea! happier ^^^^^ ^^l^^;;] ^'lobe-
and drawers of water of any other country on the face of the .lobe

16
and, in fact, that tho slaves of the more rigorous masters are better,
more elevated and happier, than those of tho more lenient, am I, in
turn, to be reproached, for believing an institution which acts thus
benignly to be humane, and aptly adapted to the circumstances and
condition of the blacks ?
It is a very common fallacy, to speak of the civilized world as so far
advanced since the periods during which the Bible allowed of slavery,
that, however merciful and bencficicnt a provision, it is confessed to
have been, for the spiritual elevation of the heathen nations of thoso
periods, modern civilization and progress, will not brook it : and that
it is manifestly wrong and improper, to uphold the instilution a,<;aiii8t
thc sentiment of the civilized world.
Now, apart from the arrogance of considering thc corrupt civilized
world, as moro advanced than faithful Abraham, who was called the friend
of God, people ra.ake tho strange mistake of talking, as if it ^vore tho
civihzed world itself, or a portion of it, that was enslaved, instead
of the barbarous Africans, whose degradation and heathenism calls for
the tutelage of the domestic institution, fully as much as ever did the
Canaanites of old. If, therefore, it were true, that the civilized world
is so far in advance ofthe holy patriarchs, that would only be an additional
argument in favor of African slavery, that thus the inferior race might
be mercifully brought under the beneficient influences of so superior a
civilization, and might receive the greater care and tenderer considera
tion, that would naturally result from actual contact and relationship
with it.
Modern civilization and progress not brook slavery, indeed I Then
modem civilization and progress is but of doubtful virtue, and selfishly
seeks its own advancement alone, regardless of the degradation of
those by whom it is surrounded. And thus, while vaunting its supe
riority even over "the father ofthe faithful," basely shirks the irksome
duty of elevating and civiUzing inferior races, on the ground of that
very civilization, which makes the duty of greater force I Thus did
not Abraham.
And here let me expose another common fallacy of caUing slavery a
necessary evil, which ought not to be extended. There is an evil in
the case, to be sure, and against its further progress, we ought, indeed,
to labor. It is is not slavery, however, but the fall of man, and
the ignorance, barbarism, fanaticism and depravity, consequent thereupon.
To these miserable wounds, remedies must be applied. And the in
stitution of master and slave is rather one of these necessary remedies,
whereby faUen, degraded man is to be educated and elevated, and his
best interests promoted. As well, therefore, might we call schools for
the ignorant, medicine for the sick, and gorernment for the lawless.

17
necessary evils, and argue solemnly against their extension, instead of
praising them a» among our best blessings, and laboring to extend
more and moro their beneficial influences amongst us 1 When children,
indeed, are no longer ignorant, wo will not send thera to school ; when
all men arc well, we will not give th9m medicine ; and when millenium
days havc come, .and the kingdom of Christ is fully set up among men,
its holy, happy citizens may, pcriiaps, solely enjoy tho spiritual gov
ernment of their Maker. In like manner, when science shall havo rid
mankind of the necessity for hewers of wood and drawers of water,
and tho negroes of the South shall havc become (if ever) in morals,
civilization, and an enlightened appreciation of their social dutins, the
equals of the whites, they will no longer be kept under thc tutelage of
slavery. Meanwhile, however, to make their tutelage more beneficent
and effectual, the more of the white race they arc diffused amongst the
better, provided they still occupy their dependent relation ; and he is
no true friend to thc negro of the South, nor to thc white man either,
who selfishly opposes tho extension of the institution into any territory,
iuto which Divine Providence permits it to enter and thrive.
An inspired apostle has consoled such of the more elevated white
slaves ofhis day, as were also servants of God, with the reflection that
they were the Lord's freemen ; and directed thera, not to care because
of their enslaved condition, but to abide in the calling, though so low
it be, in the which they wero called : and this, notwithstanding their
sufficient elevation, aided by the ennobling influences of Christianity,
to use freedom rather, if a just opportunity were offered. (1 Cor. vii. 21.)
This was thc true doctrine of progress, hallowed by a raild conser
vatism, and a wise and noble forbearance ; and tended to the peace and
welfare of society, rather than to its overthrow. But hov; much more im
portant and necessary is this yielding up of abstract rights, for his own
and the public good, on the part of the ignorant and degraded negro I
Indeed, in cases where the salvation, temporal or eternal, of the mem
bers of an inferior race, depends upon a life of constant bodily toil, in
the lowest grades of society, the condition of domestic servitude seems
to me necessarily the best; inasmuch as it frees the laborer from
pressing cares of a temporal nature, providea him ^-^•ith i,i)oso comforts
and necessaries, which are the great sources of contentment, espe
cially in feeble capacities, and, at the samo tirae, puts a wholesome
check upon his more developed animal propensities, by employing both
his mind and body, in moderate, simple and cheerful labor.
Eoman slavery, at any rate, in the days of St. Paul, was not incom
patible with tho true interests and spiritual freedom of the white bonu-
raan — and much less is American 8laVe:;?y now with thoae of the negro.
Indeed, the latter, oven iti an ea?thly seusC} In comparison with tho
3

18
white laborer ofthe North, is practically, if not tlicorctically, the freer
man. For his raind is not so wholly har.asscd, nor his. .body so inevitably
subjected lo constant toil, to satisfy thc pressing demands of cruel
necessity, and that sternest of master.s, daily hunger. And even in
times of commercial .and fin.ancial distress, he is not, like other laborers,
suddenly thrown from his employment, and left to beggary and starva
tion : but production continues to go on the same as over, and thc
interests of thc individual and of the community .are equally prosorvod.
And when, through sickness or calamity, the master has been brought
low, the master suffers, but his slave is necessarily disposed of to
another who is .able to provide for him. If the slave himself becomes
¦ sick, or aged, or infirra, or blind, or maimed, instead of being left to
the cold and uncertain charities of the worid, he is kindly nursed and
his wants supplied. Indeed, I think that provision is very generally
made by the statutes of Southern States for the aged and infirm slaves
of an estate, before the children and heirs at-law can come in for their
portions. And as for the involuntary separation of slave families, of
which so much' is said, I venture, confidently to affirm, that there are
far more involuntary scp.arations daily taking place among the poor
white families of the North I and in these latter cases, the desponding
laborer goes forth with a weight of anxiety as to his future subsistence
beclouding his brow, in addition to the pain of separation oppressing
his heart. Moreover, at the South, slave families are constantly kept
together from compassionate motives ; while, at the North, the benevo
lent hand is stretched out to aid emigrations from the heavily burdened
laboring family, rather than to preserve its domestic unity. Involmi-
tary separations belong, in fact, to the world, and to time; and no
condition of life is free from them. They are not, therefore, properly
chargeable to the institution of slavery, which, even counting all its
abuses, rather tends, on the whole, to diminish the number of them.
But let the reader particularly observe, that, at the South, the race
taken care of and benignantly provided for in a state of slavery,
is an inferior one, and has been thus kindly treated in consequence of
its very subjection, and of that alone; and in spite of a strong antipathy
to them on the part of the dominant race ; — an antipathy, whether
right or wrong, which nothing but this partriarchal relation could over
come I Does not our own experience tell us, that, without this subjec
tion, if brought into contact .with the white man, they sink to the
lowest depths of degradation, and become a nuisance to society ; havmg
little or no self-respect to sustain, and scarcely a worldly motive to
stimulate them?
And why, indeed, should it be otherwise? For, by .mnaturaliy
.placing the. inferior and superior races upon the sarae footing, and

19
taking away all acknowledged dependence of tho one upon thc other
you but leave them, withont any relative obligations and rosponsibi-
htics, to tho uncontrolled operation of tho laws of self-interest. Tho
poor negro is thus deprived of any special caro and consideration on tho
part of tho white man, and abandoned to work out his own destiny, in
an irrepressible, but hopeless competition of conflicting interest.'^, with
nil the onorgies, talents, moral powers, preferences, prejudices and anti-
pathirs, of his superior white brother. It would need no prophet to
foretell his inevitable degradation, and the wasting away of his race
like thiit of the poor Indian — and al.as I also, with hig increasing degra
dation .and incapacity fer iclf-resurroction, tho white m.au'.s incrcislng
lust and oppression.
Indeed, tho comiiarison of the condition of tho slave, v/itli that of the
white laborer of tho North, although T havo not shrunk from makin"
it, does not afford any just standard for judging of tho vital neeo^!sity
of tho domestic institution of slavery, in thc moral and temporal im-
provement of tlie blacks. For it docs not follow, bocause a whito
l.aboror may got along, after a fashion. In a freo competition with whito
laborers, that an inferior black would faro cqu.ally well, in tho " irre-
prossiblo conflict" that emancipation would be miro to bring ou, A.
more correct comparison, for our purpose, would be between the slaves
ofthe South, and the free negroes of tho North; and here, d.as ! wo
have already intiraations in plenty, but only intimations. In tho wast
ing, demoi'alized condition of the negroes of the Northern States and
Canada, of what would be tho result of giving freedom to the slaves.
And one striking proof of the degrading tendencies of freedom upon
the blacks, is brought before our very eyea by tho circumstance, that
thc proportion of free mulattoes is ahvays far greater than t'lc propor
tion of slave mulattoes ; and that tho proportion, .also, of raulattocs in
tho non-slavcholding. States is greater than the proportion of mulattoes
in the slaveholding States. An undeniable fact of this kind has a far
more important bearing upon the general question, than any isolated
instances of lust and oppression, which may be cunningly wrought up
into a horrifying picture, by the glowing pen of thc novelist, or tho
burning words of thc orator. The statesman or logician never ex
pects, that tho wisest of human institutions will rid the v/orld of lust
and oppression. He confines his attention, therefore, to a comparison
of general results, and, however much ho may rogret individual wrongs,
he does not mislead his judgment by dwelling too prominently upon
thom. I should mention here one more general fact, wliich is also un
deniable, and bears upon thLs'branch of the question. It is the wastuig
away of the free negroes of Northern States, coupled with the rapid,
multiplication of the slaves from natural causes, notwithstanding the
constant emigration of the race from the South to the North !

20
But, oven in a comparison of tho happy and contented slaves, with
the indolent, ill-humored and domoralizod freo blacks of the North, wo
do not fully solve the problem of om.ancipation. h'or a few thousand
worthless, depraved negroes might, perchance, find a scanty Kubsistciicc
among whites, where labor was in demand, nnd httlo opportunity was
afforded for bringing out a close competition, with all tho profercncop,
prejudices and antipathies of the superior race, but let the po]mlatioa
ofthe country goon incrensing, as heretofore, both of whiles and blacks,
until by a favoring immigration, and tho density of population, tho
supply of whito labor begins to get in excess of tho demand, and wlmt
is to bo the fate of, not the fow thous.and, but your inlliions of emanci
pated, miserable negroes, In tho then formidable competi lion for labor
and bread ?
Even in cases where the black element has vastly predomliiatod,
and they have succeeded in driving out tho whites, havc wc
not tho experience of a St. Domingo, of Jam.aica even, and othor
Islands ? Is not tho evidence of the miserable effects of emancipation
full and overflowing — stronger, far stronger, than that which we act
upon in the other questions of ordinary life, where our prejudices or
preconceived notions arc not so intimately concerned ?
For my part, I fear emancipation, whether immediate or gradu.al, to
be a most dangerous experiment, so- long, at any rate, aa thc two races
are kept in contact with each other. The inferior race is suro to sink,
as soon as its dependence upon the dominant race Is cast off. It will
have no motives to exertion, no self-respect to preserve. With the
antipathies of tho dominant white man all against thera, and themselves
totally destitute of any pride of race, with no energy, even if they had
the will, to contend against public sentiment, and being also in a hope
less minority, as a people, they would necessarily sink to the lowest
depths of degradation and vice. A few exceptional ca.-es might exist
araong them — a Christian, perhaps, who had learned not to Jc^jcnd
upon worldlj^ raotives for exertion ; or some erratic meteor of individual
power flashing wildly across the darkness of their night — only "this,
and nothing more. But for the race, and that is what it is thr- duty
of society to consider, God help them 1
Indeed, one great reason why the christian mind of tho South Is in
¦ favor of revolution, is because the future of the negroes, as well as that
of the whites, is perilled by the domination of sectional abstractionists,
and, more especially, by the territorial policy of the North. For it
cannot be too strongly enforced upon the conscience, that, in consider
ing the welfare of society, the colored race, though in an humble
condition, do not aiiy the less form a part of society. The conscien
tious legislator ought always, therefore, to consider the bearing of his

21
measures upon the true interests of those people, as well as of tho
whites, and the moro so, because of thoir inability to take caro of thom.
selves. And it is on this very principio that tho Constitution of our
country gives to the slaves, through those, who arc supposed to be, and
are, most interested in their welfare, a representation in tho halls of
the National Legislature. The error is, in not giving the whole raco'
a representation, instead of but three-fifths of thom. If this act of
justice had been done them, tho evil day of our country might havo
been still longer, if not wholly deferred.
And it is no valid objection to say, that, having been made property,
they ought not, at the samo time, to be represented as pr rsons ; espe
cially, since the objector, as a general rule, denies most inconsistently,
that they are property, or have been made so by the Constitution !
But, supposing them to bo propert)', can an abstractionist, forsooth,
affirm, that a slave is not entitled to any of tha rights of a man? My
only reply to him, therefore, would simply be, but they are parEo.is;
you admit it the same as I ; and if persons, you should permit them
to be represented as such, whether raade property or no ; the sama as
are the females, children, negroes too, and other non-voting population
ofthe North.
For, in arguing that a person may become property, I do not, there
fore, argue, that he ceases to be a person, or to possess any personal
rights. On the contrary, I wonld oppose the crushing influences of
abolitionism, which is cruelly, but necessarily, depriving the slave of
the personal rights yet remaining to him ; and I would give his per
sonal rights a full representation in the- govemment, which is over
him as well as others, through those who feel an intelligent interest in
his welfare.
And to the objector, I would say, it is not logical, nay it is tortuous?,
eel-like, for men, at one time to bluster, because property is being repre
sented, and. at another, when it suits a purpose, to claim that the
negroes are not property, and have never been made so ; but aro per
sons, and that the rights of persons, under any and all circumstances,
are inalienable ; and for the sarae men, at still another time, as though
not content with one glaring inconsistency, to proceed stili further to
stultify themselves, by taking both these positions with interest, and
affirming, unblushingly, that slavery Is a most wicked property in the
bodies and souls of men I
What sophist first propagated that folly about the master having a
property in the soul of his slave, I do not know. I presume, how
ever some hot-headed orator, mounted upon his high horse, and en
deavoring to ride rough-shod over the, sensibilities of his hearers, by
talking, in inflamed and stilted language, about one's inalienable manhood,

2^
and tho horrid idea of owning thc soul of another! As though any
human law, ovon if tho will woro there, could possibly create ownership
in tho invisible, immortal soul — that soul, whose workings aro inward
and unseen, and which God has created so perfectly Independent, that
even He Himself will take only its free-will offerings I Ifthe human
soul, indeed, wero not thus independent of control from without; if it
were not endowed with an inalienable free-will to choose evil or good,
to serve God or Mammon ; if it woro not thc perfect master of its own
actions, and so unalterably made, beyond nil possibility of involuntary
onslavcraent ; then would our Honvcnly Father bo most unjust ; for
Ho holds every hum.an being, slaves nnd freemen alike, to a fiiarl'ul,
individual responsibility, undor nil circumstcanccs, and in the midst of
all temptations ; nnd brings every thought into judgment, whether it
bo good, or whether it be evil 1 Oli, what deep meaning there was in
St. Paul's expression, thnt oven thc Roman slave was thc Lord's
freeman I
It is all very well, then, to appeal to our sympathies, and to en
deavor to blind the judgraent, by talking largely of the horrid wicked
ness of owning property in man; and all this may do, perhaps, for'
our next attempts at popular oratory or fiction ; but we must tako
good care not to let it out, that, as a matter of moral certainty, for one
man to own the soul of another is an utter impossibility ; and that,
therefore, our apparently sharp-looking point is, in fact, no point
at all.
If, however, leaving the soul, and coming back to the body, we
mean by the horrid wickedness of owning property in man, to denounce
property in men's involuntary services, then I fear that all of us aliko
must plead guilty to the charge. For our whole race has been invo
luntarily earning its bread by the sweat of the brow, ever since thc
curso descended upon it; and every time we hire a needy laborer, wo
have a property in men's involuntary services. And if this instance
be objected to, because the laborer gives his consent, I reply, true,
after a fashion ; and so does the negro slave ; and both arc forced to
do so by the controlling circumstances of the case. And, while the
cunning, light-hearted black slave is let off by the owner, with but
half his labor, the unfortunate white one finds no escape from his
severer task-master; but, by day and by night, in slclviiess and in
health, in season and out of season, he bears the penalty of the race,
and works, works, works, under the unpitying lash of poverty and
hunger. And this, men call freedom ! and the other, slavery 1 Oh,
how much there is in names! But what sort of property, forsooth,
have we in pur .wives, when wedlock's chain clanks a little harshly?
and what sort bave we in our very children? Is there, really, araong

23
Us, ho property in man, or in his involuntary services ? Where, then,
are our criminals ? whose bodies are confined, and whose services thc
State coolly appropriates, and even hires out whole prisons full of
them to contractors ; thus selling, without any body's gainsaying, thc
right to the -involuntary services of our fellows I And this, as I have
shown, not because of the moral guilt of criminals, but simply for the
peace and welfare of the Stato,
Talk, then, as much as we please, abstractly, of man having an
inalienable right to his own labor and services ; yet, just so surely as
the controlling circurastance comes in, we, ourselves, immediately
take away the "inalienable" right! and whenever we do it, that very
instant wo claim and exercise a "property in mnn." Wc are, there
fore, to make the best of it, a most ho-rridly wicked people.
And while, moreover, we thus like to talk as much as we please,
and yet interfere, for all that, with the very right of our neighbor, of
which we are talking, we are not a bit tho slower, as often as wo find
it necessary or convenient, to check other abstract rights of his, also,
and, araong others, even the boasted right of freedom of speech, or of
talking as much as we please, of which we arc, ourselves, so fond.
Sometimes, for example, our wives tongues (I hopo I do not slander
them) are a little too long; or, at any rate, our children are given to
tattling. And, even if we are pretty orderly at home — that is, in
our own opinion — beyond all question, the "little member" of our
neighbor, or ofhis wife or children, runs too freely. And some of us,
perhaps, have thought it necessary to kick a fellow with too much
liberty of jaw, out of our houses, or to have him arrested for slander.
In short, freedom of speech, and all other abstract rights, are very good
things for ourselves, or for the people in Borrioboola Gha ; but, some*
how or other, they don't seem to answer for bur neighbor, Yet, surely,
if they are not to be allowed, where but an individual is injured, a
fortiorBf they should be taken away, where whole commuhities are put
in jeopardy by them.
Hence, would we indeed follow the goldett rule ? theh let us concede
to others the same right to restrain, alter or modify, abstract rights,
which wo claim for ourselves, and to the full extent that controlling
circumstances may render necessary. And, perceiving that the institu
tion of domestic slavery is demanded for the peace and good order of
the South, and that it elevates, refines, and even dignifies the negro,
when in contact with the white race, and makes him a happier and a
better man j while, on the other hand, a state of freedom would be
only nominal, and Would, in reality, tend to sink ahd degrade him, let
Us learn to exercise a little restraint, also, over our own abstract rights,
and acknowledge, that freedom of speech may sometimes be but another

24
name for licentiousness of speech, and, like all othor unbridled freedom,
may destroy thc peace, and disrupt the very foundations of society".
But, whether we restrain ourselves or no, so long as hewers of wood
nnd drawers of water shall be necessary to society, and so long as there
are inferior races among mankind, and thoso inferior races arc brought
into contact with each other, the institution of domestic slavery will
continue to be, as alwnys heretofore it has been, necessary for the
peace, good order, protection and welfare of society ; and hence, will
be a wise, just and humane institution. And the amount of rigor
which may be justly exercised over the slaves, will depend entirely
upon the unavoidablo circumstances of the caso, and may, imioi tunately,
be lamentably increased by opposition from without, and by this very
unpitying freedom of speech, which wc are so determined to exercise.
In conclusion, however, that I may part from the reader in good
humor, allow me to suggest to him, a re-perusal of Midshipman Easy,
before he takes another plunge into abstractions, or nm^ wild about
the rights of raan.
Dbckmbkb, I860,

3 9002 00557 1584

|;^^.^m;"^f^^?:^a,:^'