Center for Biblical Theology and Eschatology
Negro Slavery Unjustifiable
A Discourse
by Alexander M’leod, A.M.
THE Author of this Discourse had
a call presented to him, in November, 1800, to take the pastoral charge
of a congregation in the county of Orange, in the State of New-York. He
perceived among the subscribers the names of some whom he knew to be holders
of slaves, He doubted the consistency of enslaving the Negroes with the
Christian system, and was unwilling to enter into a full ecclesiastic communion
with those who continued the practice. He hesitated to accept the call;
but took an early opportunity of writing to the Elders of the Church, and
of intimating to the Presbytery his sentiments respecting slavery.
The Reformed Presbytery has judicially condemned the practice,
and warned their connections against it. This produced an additional evidence
of the force of Christian principle, It triumphed over self-interest; and,
in several parts of the United States, have men sacrificed, on the altar
of Religion, the property which the civil law gave them in their fellow
men, There is not a slave-holder now in the communion of the Reformed Presbytery.
A sense of duty determined the author to commit this Discourse
to the press. In the publication of it he has particularly in view the
instruction and establishment of those inhabitants of Orange who have placed
themselves under his pastoral care. Through them he addresses all into
whose hands the Discourse may come.
If the Redeemer shall be pleased to bless it, and render
it the means of ameliorating the bondage, or of procuring the liberty of
any miserable African, the author shall receive more than a recompense.
The divine law declares this a crime, and prescribes the
punishment. He who stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found
in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
This law was given to the Hebrews as a body politic; but
it proceeds on a moral ground, and is, consequently, obligatory still on
every subject of moral government.
He who acknowledges the morality of the eighth precept
of the decalogue, will not require another proof of the morality of the
conduct recommended in the text. If he who steals my purse, my coat, or
my horse, be guilty of an immorality, he cannot be innocent who robs me
of my father, my brother, my wife, or my child. Against this principle
an inspired Apostle directs his argument, in his Epistle to Timothy. 1
Tim. 1:9. Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man,
but for the lawless and disobedient—for MAN STEALERS—and
if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine. Man stealing
is classed with the most detestable crimes. It is considered not only reprehensible
among the ancient Hebrews, but a moral evil, in every age, and in every
nation.
From the text, I consider myself authorised to lay before
you the following proposition:
The practice of buying, holding, or selling our unoffending
fellow creatures as slaves is immoral. The text will certainly support
this proposition, According to the common principles of law, the receiver
of stolen goods, if he know them to be such, is esteemed guilty as well
as the thief. The slave holder never had a right to force a man into his
service, or to retain him, without an equivalent. To sell him, therefore,
is to tempt another to sin, and to dispose of that, for money, to which
he never had a right.
The proposition does not militate against slavery under
every form. By no means. A man, by the abuse of his powers, to the injury
of society, may forfeit liberty, and even life: He may deserve slavery
in the fullest sense of the word, in order that his punishment may be a
sanction to the law—may be an example to others—and may compensate, as
much as possible, for the injuries done to society. By "innocent fellow
creatures," in the proposition, it is not designed to teach that any of
the human race is so in relation to the divine law: it is not to be understood
in a moral, but in a political sense. As the subjects of Jehovah’s government,
we are all guilty, and deserve to perish. We have merited eternal imprisonment
from him. But, in relation to civil society, men are deemed innocent unless
they have violated its laws. These are assuredly entitled to personal freedom.
It is intended, in this discourse, to confirm the doctrine
of the proposition—to answer objections to it—and make some improvement
of it.
I. To hold any of our fellow men in perpetual slavery
is sinful.
1. This appears from the inconsistency of the practice
of holding slaves with the natural rights of man, This is a term
which has been much abused. It is proper that accurate ideas should be
annexed to it, otherwise its force, in the present argument, will not be
perceptible. If man were a being, owing his existence to accident, and
not a creature of God, his rights would indeed be negative. If he stood
in a state of independency of his Maker, and not a subject of law, his
rights could be determined only by the will of society. But he is neither
the son of chance nor the possessor of independency. His
life and his faculties are the gift of God. From heaven he derives positive
rights, defined by positive precepts.[1]
Considering man as a free agent, by the constitution of nature he
has a right to the exercise of freedom, in conformity to the precepts of
that law by which the author of nature has ordered him to regulate his
actions. A delegated power he has from God, and no creature has a right
to restrict him in its rightful exercise. To oppose the force of an individual,
or of a society, to this, is to wage war against the Supreme Ruler: It
is an attempt to reduce a moral agent to a mere machine, whose motions
are to be regulated by external force; and, consequently, a denial of his
right to the person enslaved, and an arrogant assumption of lawless authority
by the usurper. Is it necessary to pursue this argument before an American
audience? It is generally, if not universally admitted. The principle is
stated and maintained in that instrument which lies at the foundation of
your national existence. In defence of it you have fought—you have appealed
to the Lord of Hosts; and in its support he has led on your armies to victory.
2. If an opposite principle of action were universally
admitted, it would lead to absolute absurdity. A demonstration of this
will confirm the proposition.
If one man have a right to the services of another, without
an equivalent, right stands opposite and contrary to right. This confounds
the distinction between right and wrong. It destroys morality, and justice
between man and man, between nation and nation. I have a right to enslave
and sell you. You have an equal right to enslave and sell me. The British
have a right to enslave the French, and the French the British—the Americans
the Africans, and the Africans the Americans. This would be to expel right
from the human family—to resolve law into force, and justice into cunning.
In the struggle of contending rights, violence would be the only arbiter.
The decisions of reason would be perverted, and the seine of morality extirpated
from the breast.
Such absurdity will meet with few advocates to plead its
cause in theory. Is it not, therefore, lamentable, that any should indulge
a principle, or countenance a practice, the justification of which would
necessarily lead to it? But,
3. The practice of enslaving our fellow men stands equally
opposed to the general tenor of the sacred scriptures.
The Bible is the criterion of doctrine and conduct.
It represents the European and the Asiatic, the African and the American,
as different members of the same great family—the different children of
the same benign and universal parent. God has made of one blood all
the nations of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined
the bounds of their habitation. Acts 17:26. In relation to one another,
they are equally bound to the exercise of benevolence, and are respected
as naturally having no inequality of rights. Every man is bound to respect
his fellow man as his neighbour, and is commanded to love him as himself.[2]
Our reciprocal duties the divine Jesus summarily comprehends in that direction
commonly called the golden rule: Whatsoever ye would that men should
do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.[3]
This is the sum of the duties inculcated in the law of Moses, and in
the writings of the inspired prophets. How opposite the spirit of these
precepts and doctrines to the practice of the slave-holder! If he is consistent
with himself he will reason thus: "These slaves are not of one blood with
me. They are not entitled to the love I give to my neighbour. The conduct
which I should pursue, were I enslaved by another, I would not recommend
to them. I shall feed and clothe them from the same principle that I feed
and stable my cattle. They are my property as much as these; and when they
do not serve my purpose agreeably to my wishes, I shall dispose of them
for money to another trafficker in human flesh. I acknowledge, if any person
was to enslave me, I should endeavour to embrace the first opportunity
of making my escape. But if my Negro offers to run away, I shall pursue,
and severely chastise him. He has no right to leave his master; the rule,
Whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye also so to them,
notwithstanding."—I need not add, brethren, that such sentiments are opposite
to the principles of the Christian Religion.
4. The practice which I am opposing is a manifest violation
of four precepts of the decalogue.
If this can be shown, it will be an additional confirmation
of the doctrine of the proposition. Revelation informs us, that
whosoever offends in one point is guilty of all. James 2:10. And the reason
is added, because the same authority is wantonly opposed in that one point
which gives sanction to the whole of divine revelation. By inference, therefore,
the whole decalogue is violated; but there is a direct breach of the fifth,
the sixth, the eighth and the tenth commandments.
The fifth requires the performance of those duties
which respect the several relations in which we stand to one another; and
particularly enforces obedience to our natural .parents. The Christian’s
duty to the wretched African, brought providentially under his care, is
to afford him the necessaries of life—to bring him up in the nurture and
admonition of the Lord—to instruct him in the knowledge of his duty and
his rights—to habituate him to honest industry—to help him to some business
for himself, and set him at liberty from his controul. But the slave-holder
exercises often a cruel, always an illegitimate, authority
over his slave. He destroys, to a great degree, natural relationship. He
sets aside the authority of the immediate parent; and, in opposition to
the divine law, Which commands each to honour his father and mother, the
child is taught, from the cradle, that his duty consists in implicit
obedience to the command of his master.
The sixth requires the use of all lawful means
to preserve the lives of men. But ah! Slavery, how many hast thou murdered?
Thou hast kindled wars among the miserable Africans. Thou hast carried
the captive, who escaped death, into a still more miserable state. Thou
hast torn from the bosom of the grieved mother her beloved daughter, and
broughtest down the grey hairs of an aged parent, with sorrow, to the grave.
Thou hast huffed them on board thy floating prisons, and hast chained them
in holds, which have soon extinguished the remaining spark of life. The
few who have escaped thou hast deprived of liberty, dearer itself than
life.
The eighth forbids the unlawful hindrance of our
neighbour’s wealth. The whole life of the slave-holder is an infringement
upon it. The labour of a man is worth more than his food and cloathing;
but the slave receives no more. His master robs him of the fruits of industry.
He steals him from his relations. He robs him of his liberty of action.
He steals him from himself.
The tenth commandment forbids all inordinate desires
after worldly property. The practice of the slave-holder is an evidence
of his avarice. He employs servants without wages. He sells to a hard master,
for money, the man and the woman whose severe services have already done
more than make him compensation for any trouble or expense to which they
had subjected him. Not only the avaricious merchant who sails to the coast
of Africa with his ship fitted out with the implements of cruelty, in order
to import and expose to sale our sable brethren; but the American slave-holder
also, is convicted of a breach of the tenth precept of the moral, law.
5. The system against which I contend is also inimical
to that benevolent spirit which is produced and cherished by the gospel
of free grace.
In the system of grace all men are represented as proceeding
from one pair—as fallen from a state of integrity and happiness, into a
situation that is sinful and miserable. God is revealed as beholding man
in this condition with an eye of benevolence—having pity for the distressed,
mercy for the miserable, and grace for the unworthy. Jesus, God in our
nature, appointed as the Saviour of sinners, and without respect of persons,
gathering from the north and from the south, from the east and from the
west, out of every kindred, tongue, and people, and nation, an innumerable
multitude, to be introduced, through his divine mediation, into a state
of unspotted purity and unspeakable happiness.
The influence which the grace of the gospel has upon the
heart, is to cultivate, increase, and perfect every benevolent affection,
and suppress all malevolence, extirpating the principles of sinful selfishness
from the soul—to produce a spirit of meekness and self-denial, of readiness
to forgive real injuries, and of prayer for the good of our enemies. Yes,
the spirit of the gospel is love to God and to man, evidencing its existence
by suitable exertions for the glory of our Creator, and the happiness of
all our brethren, here and hereafter.
How does this system, Christian, correspond with the slave-trade?
You behold your African brethren in the same miserable state in which you
are yourself by nature.[4] Do you
not sympathize with them? Your Maker has not excluded them from a share
in his love, nor has the blessed Redeemer interdicted them from claiming
a share in his salvation. How can you degrade them, therefore, from that
rank which their Maker has assigned to them, and endeavour to assimilate
them to the beasts that perish? By divine grace you are taught not to love
this world, nor to be conformed to its sinful practices. Rom. 12:2. Look
at your slave! How came you by him? Who had a right to tear his father
from the bosom of his friends, in order to enslave him and his offspring,
and sell this wretched victim to you? How long will religion suffer you
to retain him in bondage? for life? Ah! hard-hearted Christian! is it thus
you imitate his example who died for your sins? who voluntarily descended
from his heavenly glory, and humbled himself into the death, in order to
deliver you from slavery? On him rested the spirit of the Lord, for he
preached glad tidings unto the meek. He proclaimed liberty to the captive,
and the opening of the prison doors to them who were bound. Isa. 61:1.
Does the same spirit rest on you? does it produce a similar disposition?
Consider the contrast: consider it attentively. You have pronounced heavy
tidings in the ear of your slave. You have proclaimed bondage for life
to the captive. You have even closed upon him the door of hope in his prison.
You have purposed to enslave his offspring. Merciful God! how unmerciful
do thy creatures act towards one another?
6. The last argument I shall use for confirming the doctrine
of the proposition, shall be taken from the pernicious consequences of
the system of slavery.
To this manner of reasoning there can be no valid objection,
if it be kept within proper boundaries. That evil consequences follow a
certain practice is not always a decisive evidence that the practice is
wrong; but it is a sufficient reason for us to pause, and examine it in
the light of truth. If we be required, in the divine law, to pursue this
path, we must obey, leaving the consequences to his management who commands
us. If it be in itself lawful, but not requisite, evil consequences presenting
themselves would teach us not to proceed. But if it really be a forbidden
path, the pernicious effects of travelling it are additional warnings against
continuing in it any longer.
Ministers are commanded to preach the gospel, though it
should prove the occasion of submitting many to tribulation in this life,
and be to many a savour of death unto death in the next. It was
lawful for the Apostle to the Gentiles to eat whatsoever meat was sold
in the shambles; but if his using this liberty would have been productive
of evil consequences, he would have instantly desisted from the practice.
1 Cor. 8:13.
If, then, from a lawful practice, it be expedient to desist,
because, although to ourselves useful, it is detrimental to others, it
is certainly our duty to relinquish a system which is dubious in its nature.
When we have presumptive evidence that we are fundamentally wrong, evil
consequences are decisive against us; and, as in the case before us, when
other evidences condemn the practice, its pernicious consequences loudly
demand that from it we should immediately desist.
1. This practice has a tendency to destroy the finer feelings,
and render the heart of man more obdurate. The butcher, long inured to
slaughter, is not hurt at the lowing of the oxen or the bleating of the
lambs which he is about to kill.[5]
Nor is the common executioner much agitated in his work of blood, whether
the victim be innocent or guilty. The slave may roar under the lash of
his master, without commanding the least sympathy. The slave-holder views
all the Ethiopian race as born to serve. His heart is steeled against them.
Nor is the transition great to become hard-hearted to all men. "The whole
commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous
passions—the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading
submission on the other. The parent storms—the child looks on, catches
the lineaments of wrath, puts on the same airs in the circle of smaller
slaves, gives a loose to the worst of his passions; and thus nursed, educated,
and daily exercised in tyranny, cannot but be stamped by it with odious
peculiarities. The man must be a prodigy who can retain his manners and
morals undepraved by such circumstances."[6]
2. It debases a part of the human race, and tends to destroy
their intellectual and active powers. The slave, from his infancy, is obliged
implicitly to obey the will of another. There is no circumstance which
can stimulate him to exercise his own intellectual powers. There is much
to deter him from such exercise. If he think or plan, his thoughts and
plans must give way to those of his master. He must have less depravity
of heart than his white brethren, otherwise he must, under this treatment,
become thoughtless and sullen. The energies of his mind are left to slumber.
Every attempt is made to smother them. It is not surprising that such creatures
should appear deficient in intellect.
Their moral principles also suffer. They are never cultivated.
They are early suppressed. While young, the little tyrants of their master’s
family rule over them with rigour. No benevolent tie can exist between
them. The slave, as soon as he can exercise his judgment, observes laws
to protect the life, the liberty and the property of his master; but no
law to procure these for him. He is private property. His master’s will
is his rule of duty. We have no right to expect morality or virtue from
such an education and such examples.
3. Another evil consequence is the encouragement of licentiousness
and debauchery.
The situation of the blacks is such as to afford every
encouragement to a criminal intercourse. This is not confined to the blacks
themselves, but frequently and shamefully exists between them and their
masters. The lust of the master may be gratified and strengthened by intercourse
with the slave, without fear of prosecution for the support of the offspring,
or the character of the mother. The situation of these women admits of
few guards to their chastity. Their education does not strengthen it. In
the Southern States, illicit connection with a negro or mulatto woman is
spoken of as quite a common thing. No reluctance, delicacy or shame appear
about the matter. The number of mulattoes in the Northern States prove
that this evil is also prevalent among their inhabitants, It is usually
a concomitant of slavery.
4. This leads to a fourth lamentable consequence—the destruction
of natural affection.
An irregular intercourse renders it difficult for the
father to ascertain his proper offspring. Among the slaves themselves marriage
is a slender tie. The master sells the husband to a distance from his wife,
and the mother is separated from her infant children. This is a common
thing. It must destroy, in a great measure, natural affection. Nor is the
evil confined to the slaves. Their master, in this instance, exceeds them
in hardness of heart. He sees his slave nursing an infant resembling himself
in colour and in features. Probably it is his child, his nephew, or his
grand-child. He beholds such, however, not as relatives, but as slaves,
and rejoices in the same manner that he doer, in viewing the increase of
his cows or his horses.[7]
5. Domestic tyranny, which exists as a correlative to
domestic slavery, is a nursery for civil tyrants. Powerful must be the
force of other principles, and singular the combination of circumstances,
which can render an advocate for domestic slavery a sincere friend of civil
liberty. Is it possible? If he can buy, sell, and enslave for life, any
individual of the human race, for no reason but self-interest, I should
be unwilling to trust him with the affairs of a nation, Had he it in his
power to do it with impunity, and did it appear conducive to his interest,
or gratifying to his ambition, he would become as really a despot as the
most arbitrary monarch.
6. This practice is calculated to bring down the judgments
of God on societies and individuals.
The toleration of slavery is a national evil. It is the
worst of robberies sanctioned by law. It is treason against Heaven—a conspiracy
against the liberties of his subjects. If the Judge of all the earth shall
do right, he cannot but punish the guilty.
Nations, as such, have no existence in a future state:
they must expect national judgments in the present. Distributive justice
will measure their punishment according to their criminality. O America,
what hast thou to account for on the head of slavery! Thou alone, of all
the nations now on the earth, didst commission thy delegates, in peace,
and in security from the over-awing menaces of a tyrant, or of factions,
to form thy Constitution. Thou didst possess, in a peculiar sense, the
light of reason, of science, of revelation, of past argumentation, and
of past experience. Thou hadst thyself formerly condemned the principle,
and, in the most solemn manner, made an appeal to heaven for the justice
of thy cause. Heaven heard, and answered agreeably to thy wishes. Yet thou
didst contradict a principle so solemnly asserted. Thou hast made provision
for increasing the number and continuing the bondage of thy slaves. Thy
judgments may tarry, but they will assuredly come.[8]
Individuals are also in danger. Those who live "without God in the world"
may have temporal judgments inflicted upon them for the part they have
acted in the encouragement of slavery; but the time of retribution is in
the world to come. Even real Christians, the guilt of whose sins is removed
through the atonement of Jesus, but who have learned the way of the heathen
so far as to confirm to the wicked practice of buying, selling, and retaining
slaves, have a right to expect severe corrections. Psalm 89:30-32. In proportion
as they have an opportunity of ascertaining duty, will their danger increase,
unless they cheerfully sacrifice interest to it. He who knows his master’s
will, and doeth it not, shall be beaten with many stripes. Luke 12:47.
I speak to you who parley with this temptation—you who, in defiance of
conviction, are determined to go on in the paths of self-interest. In this
very path you may meet correction. Your treasures are not secure. There
is a God; and while godliness continues to have the promise of the life
which now is, as well as that which is to come,[9]
those who continue to practise on the system of slavery may expect
to suffer loss. Watch them close: they may one day elude your vigilance,
and escape with your treasure. The enslaved Hebrews were allowed to escape
with the jewels of the Egyptians. You may lose, in a similar manner, as
much of your property as you have withheld from them of their earnings
whom you retain in bondage. If not, God has it in his power to send mildew
and blasting upon your crops—murrain and pestilence among your herds—until
you sustain a greater loss than you would have suffered by giving liberty
to your slaves. I should think it a favourable evidence, though not a conclusive
argument, that God has a regard for you, if you are thus chastised for
your oppression of your brethren. But if ye be without chastisement,
whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.[10]
I have now finished what I designed to say in confirmation
of the doctrine of the proposition, and shall proceed,
II. To refute objections offered to the principle I have
been defending.
It is not to be expected that every objection shall now
occur. Some that are made probably I never heard; and some which I have
heard may have escaped my recollection. I shall not, however, designedly
evade any that has the appearance of argument. I shall examine each in
order to ascertain its full value.
OBJECTION I. "Nature has made a distinction
between man and man. One has stronger intellectual powers than another.
As physical strength prevails in the subordinate ranks of creation, let
superiority of intellect preside among intelligent creatures. The Europeans
and their descendants are superior in this respect to the Africans. These
latter are, moreover, in their own country, miserable. Their state is not
rendered worse by being enslaved. It is just for the more intelligent to
rule over the more ignorant, and to make use of their services."
ANSWER. The distinctions which nature
makes between man and man are probably not so great as those which owe
their existence to adventitious circumstances.
The inferiority of the blacks to the whites has been greatly
exaggerated.[11] Let the fact,
however, be granted, and yet the inference which is the principle of the
objection will not follow. It is the essence of tyranny. It is founded
in false notions concerning the nature of man. You say, "a greater proportion
of intellect gives a right to rule over the less intelligent." But you
are to observe that man is not only a creature capable of intellectual
exertion, but also one who possesses moral sentiments, and a free
agent. He has a right, from the constitution given him by the Author of
Nature, to dispose of himself, and be his own master in all respects, except
in violating the will of Heaven. He naturally acts agreeably to the motives
presented to him, with a liberty of choice respecting them. He who argues
a right to rule from natural endowments must have more than a superior
understanding to show. He must evidence a superiority of moral excellence,
and an investiture with authority; otherwise he can have no right to set
aside the principle of self-government, and act in opposition to that freedom
which is necessarily implied in personal responsibility to the Supreme
Moral Governor. Consider the consequences which the objection, if granted,
would involve. He who could, by cunning contrivance, reduce his innocent
and more simple neighbour under his power, would be justifiable in enslaving
him and, his offspring for ever. All the usurpation of men of genius without
virtue, from the days of Pharaoh to those of Bonaparte, would be justifiable
on this principle.
As for the circumstance of the Africans being wretched
while at their own disposal, you are not accountable for it. Friendship
for them is not well shown in the slave-trade. Your wicked traffic has
already rendered them more wicked and wretched even in Africa. If you have
ameliorated the condition of one, you have rendered more painful the condition
of thousands.[12]
OBJECTION II. "The negroes are a
different race of people from us. Their capacities, their shape, their
colour, and their smell, indicate their procedure originally from a different
pair. They are inferior to the white people in all these respects. This
gives a right to the superior race to rule over them as really as nature
gives a right to the use of the other subordinate ranks of animated being."
ANSWER. This goes upon the footing
of discrediting scripture authority. In a discourse to professed Christians
I might reject it without consideration. There may, however, be in my hearing
a slave-holder who is an unbeliever of revelation. I would reason
even with him, that, if possible, I may serve the cause of justice, of
liberty, and of man. The use of sound reason and philosophy Christianity
by no means discards.
The principle of your argument is inadmissible; and, if
it were not, it would not serve your purpose.
1. It is inadmissible. Among the individuals of every
species there is a difference. No more causes than are sufficient to account
for any phenomenon are required by the rules of philosophising. The action
of the elements on the human body, the diet and the manners of men, are
causes sufficient to account for that change in the organization of bodies
which gives them a tendency to absorb the rays of light, to perspire more
freely, and to put on that shape which is peculiar to the inhabitants of
Guinea and their descendants. A single century will make a forcible distinction
between the inhabitants of a northern and a southern climate, when the
diet and manners are similar. A difference in these can make a distinction
in the same latitude. It is impossible to prove that twenty or thirty centuries,
during which successive generations did not mingle with a foreign race,
could not give to the African negro that peculiarity of bodily appearance
which so stubbornly adheres to him when translated into another clime.
A few years of a hot sun may produce a swarthiness of complexion which
the mildest climate cannot, for years, exchange for a rosy cheek. According
to the laws for propagating the species, the offspring resembles, the parent.
It is not to be expected that a very apparent change should be wrought
on the complexion of the offspring of negroes already in this country.
Ten times the number of years which have passed over the heads of the successive
generations on the coast of Guinea, may be necessary, before the negroes
can retrace the steps by which they have proceeded from a fair countenance
to their present shining black. The causes of bodily variety in the human
species which I have stated are known to exist.[13]
It is highly unphilosophical to have recourse to others which are only
conjectural. Enmity to revelation makes many one drink himself a philosopher.
But,
2. If the principle were just it would be invalid: it
would not answer your purpose. If you adopt the hypothesis of several original
and distinct pairs, by whom the earth was peopled, you cannot determine
where to stop. The different nations of Europe and of Asia, and the different
tribes of America, may have had different original parents, all upon the
footing of subordination one to the other.[14]
If the principle of your objection were admissible, it would prove too
much, lead to absurdity, and is therefore capable of proving nothing. Each
nation might claim a superiority of rank over the other. Right would be
opposed to right, and cunning and violence would be the only umpires. Involve
not yourself in such inextricable difficulties in advocating a practice
truly indefensible.
OBJECTION III. "I firmly believe
the scriptures. All the families of the earth are brethren. They are originally
descended from Adam, and secondarily from Noah. But the blacks are the
descendants of Ham. They are trader a curse, and a right is given to their
brethren to rule over them. We have a divine grant, in Gen. 9:25-27, to
enslave the negroes."
ANSWER. This threatening may have
extended to all the descendants of Ham. It is, however, to be noticed,
that it is directed to Canaan, the son of Ham. In order to justify negro
slavery from this prophecy, it will be necessary to prove four things.
1. That all the posterity of Canaan were devoted to suffer slavery. 2.
That African negroes are really descended of Canaan. 3. That each of the
descendants of Shem and Japheth has a moral right to reduce any of them
to servitude. 4. That every slave-holder is really descended from Shem
or Japheth. Want of proof in any one of these particulars will invalidate
the whole objection. In a practice so contrary to the general principles
of the divine law, a very express grant from the supreme authority is the
only sanction to us. But not one of the four facts specified as necessary
can be supported with unquestionable documents. On each of them, however,
we may spend a thought.
1. The threatening is general. It does not imply particular
personal servitude as much as political inferiority and national degradation.
It does not imply that every individual of that race should of right be
kept in a state of slavery.
2. It is possible the negroes are descended from Ham.
It is even probable. But it is almost certain that they are not the offspring
of Canaan. The boundaries of their habitation are defined. Gen. 9:19. The
Canaanitish territory is generally known from subsequent history.
3. The supposition, however, that the curse fell on the
negroes, may be granted with safety to the cause of those who are opposed
to the system by which they are enslaved. It will not serve as a warrant
for this practice. It is not to be considered as a rule of duty, but as
the prediction of a future event. God has, in his providence, given many
men over to slavery, to hardships, and to death. But this does not justify
the tyrant and the murderer. Had it been predicted, in so many words, that
the Americans should, in the beginning of the nineteenth century, be in
possession of African slaves, we might argue from the fact the truth of
the prophecy, but not the propriety of the slave-holder’s conduct. It was
foretold that Israel should be in bondage in Egypt. Gen. 15:13. This did
not justify the cruelty of Pharaoh. He was a vessel of wrath. Jesus, our
God and Redeemer, was the subject of many predictions. According to ancient
prophecy, and to satisfy divine justice, he was put to death. The characters
who fulfilled this prediction were wicked to an extreme. Acts 2:23.
4. Slave-holders are probably the descendants of Japheth,
although it cannot be legally ascertained. And they may be fulfilling the
threatening on Canaan, although they are not innocent. Be not afraid, my
friends; prophecy shall be fulfilled, although you should liberate your
slaves. This prediction has had its accomplishment three thousand years
ago. The descendants of Shem did, by divine direction, under the conduct
of Joshua, subjugate the offspring of Canaan, when they took possession
of the promised land.
This naturally leads us to consider another objection—the
most plausible argument that can possibly he offered in defence of the
unhallowed practice of holding our fellow men in perpetual bondage.
OBJECTION IV. "God permitted the
ancient Israelites to hold their fellow creatures in servitude. Men and
women were bought and sold among them. The bond servant is called his master’s
money. Exod. 21:21. Had it been wrong in its nature to enslave any human
being, God could not have granted the Hebrews a permission to do it. Negro
slavery, stripped of some accidental cruelties, is not necessarily wicked."
ANSWER. This objection requires minute
attention. The fact is granted. Heaven did permit the Hebrews to purchase
some of the human race for servitude. The general principle deduced front
this fact is also granted. It is, in certain cases, lawful to enslave our
fellow creatures. The application of it to justify the practice of modern
nations is by no means admissible.
God is the Lord of the universe. As the Supreme Governor,
he does what is right. His subjects have violated his law, abused their
liberty, and rebelled against the majesty of Heaven. They have forfeited
to his justice the liberty and the life he gave them. These they must yield.
They will, at the time appointed by the Judge, be enclosed in the grave.
The sovereign has also a right to the use of whatever instrument he chooses
in the execution of the sentence. He may choose the famine or the pestilence,
the winds or the waves, wild beasts or human beings, to be the executioners.
Again:
Civil society has certain laws, to which its members,
voluntarily claiming its privileges, have assented. A violation of these
is the violation of a contract, and the penalty stipulated must be paid
by the offender. When, by a person’s licentiousness, justice is violated,
or society endangered, it is just and necessary to enslave the criminal,
and make his services, if possible, useful to society. This much I cheerfully
grant; and shall now proceed to show that the objection does not apply
to the doctrine which I have been endeavouring to establish.
You cannot argue conclusively, in defence of negro slavery,
from the practice of the ancient Hebrews, unless you can prove, 1st. That
the slavery into which they were permitted to reduce their fellow creatures
was similar to that in which the negroes are held: and, 2dly, That you
have, the same permission which they had, extended to you. If proof fails
in either of these, the objection is invalid, and I undertake to
show that both are without proof.
I. The servitude into which the Hebrews were permitted
to reduce their fellow men was attended with such restrictions as rendered
it essentially different from the negro slave-trade. It may be considered,
1. With reference to their brethren; 2. As it respected strangers.
1. A natural descendant of Abraham might, in two cases,
be sold by the magistrates into servitude. These were theft and insolvency.
And so great was the regard for freedom which their code of laws discovered,
that even the thief could not be enslaved while he had property sufficient
to answer the demands of the law for the theft. Exod. 22.:1-4. If a
man shall steal an ox or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it, he shall restore
five oxen for the ox, and four sheep for the sheep. If a thief have nothing,
then he shall be sold for his theft. The servitude into which the debtor
was sold for the benefit of the creditor was not severe. Lev. 25:39-43.
If thy brother that dwelleth with thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto
thee, thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bond servant, but as an hired
servant and as a sojourner he shall be with thee. Thou shalt not rule over
him with rigour, but shalt fear thy God. In both cases the duration
of this species of slavery was limited to six years. On the seventh
he shall go out free for nothing. Exod. 21:2. And it was required,
in the case of the debtor, that his master should give him some stock on
which he might again begin business for the support of his family. Deut.
15:12-15. When thou sendest him out free, thou shalt furnish him liberally
of thy flock, thy floor, and thy wine-press.
Both these laws evidence the greatest care of the liberties
of individuals which is consistent with the real interest of the nation.
They are strong motives to industry, and guard against burdensome taxation
for the support of prisons.
2. There were two classes of aliens with respect to which
the Israelitish law gave directions—those who belonged to any of the neighbouring
Canaanitish tribes in particular, and such as belonged to other nations
in general. With respect to the latter, the law was exactly the same as
to the Hebrews themselves. Lev. 24:20. Ye shall have one manner of law
as well for the stranger as for one of your own country. Verse 35,
next chapter. If thy brother be waxen poor, then thou shalt relieve
him—yea, though he be a stranger or a sojourner. But there are particular
exceptions from this general law, which guaranteed from invasion the life,
the liberty, and the property of aliens. These exceptions refer to the
remains of the conquered tribes living among the Israelites, or to such
of the nations of Canaan as were around them. Lev. 25:44,45. Of the
heathen that are round about you, shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Of
the children of the strangers that sojourn among you, shall ye buy, and
of the families which they begat in your land. This permission was
merciful. The descendants of Abraham were expressly appointed the executioners
of the divine sentence against the tribes of Canaan. Extermination was
the command; but on their voluntary subjection they were only reduced into
a state of servitude. The Israelites were forbidden to use them harshly.
Exod. 21:26. Accordingly, the Gibeonites, when they craftily obtained the
safety of their lives, were reduced into the situation of bond servants.
Joshua 9. When Saul treated them with cruelty, God was offended, and even
punished David because he did not avenge that cruelty on the house of Saul,
at an early part of his reign. 2 Sam. 21:1. I proceed,
II. To prove that this example is not for our imitation.
The Israelites themselves had no right to fit out their ships with their
implements of cruelty, in order to steal, buy, stow away, and chain men
of other nations, living, without injury to them, at a distance from their
shores. Had they done so, no future traffic could have rendered their prizes
legitimate. They were officially employed by Heaven to punish the iniquity
of the nations which they vanquished. They were ordered to subdue, destroy
or enslave the descendants of Canaan, and take possession of the land covenanted
to their father Abraham, As a peculiar people, they were to be kept distinct
until Messiah should come. The remains of foreign nations could not, therefore,
be admitted to the rights of citizenship. The wall of partition is now
broken down. All mankind are our brethren. There is no similarity of Circumstances
between us and the ancient Hebrews—no divine permission that can justify
us in holding slaves. Although the slavery were exactly the same with that
into which the blacks are reduced, the practice of modern nations would
remain unjustifiable.
The descendants of Shem have, in the Hebrew nation, reduced
Canaan into a state of servitude; and the offspring of Japheth have supplanted
those of Shem in both spiritual and temporal privileges.
OBJECTION V. "Slavery was tolerated,
in the primitive ages of Christianity, by the Roman laws. It is not condemned
by Christ or his Apostles. They have given directions for the conduct of
master and slave. 1 Tim. 6:1. They have not intimated that the practice
of keeping men in slavery was sinful."
ANSWER. What you have asserted is
not correct, and, if it had been, it would be no objection to the principles
for which I contend. The New Testament does condemn the slave-trade. 1
Tim. 1:10. Man-stealing is here reprobated, together with every
practice which is contrary to sound doctrine and the spirit of the
glorious gospel 1 Cor. 7:21. If thou mayest be made free, use
it rather. It is recommended to the slave, if he is able, to procure
his liberty. If he has no fair means of obtaining it, it is his duty patiently
to continue in bondage.[15] The
gospel hope comforts him. The New Testament says (Col. 4:1), Masters,
give unto your servants that which is just and equal. Treat them justly;
use them-mercifully; pay them lawful wages; give them an equivalent for
their services. But, supposing the scriptures had been silent on this subject,
the objector could not justify negro slavery from that silence. If it prove
any thing it will prove too much. It will prove the justice of the worst
of tyranny, the most dreadful cruelty, because Nero is not specified as
an infamous tyrant in the New Testament. It will prove that you have a
right to sell your own children as slaves[16]—to
kidnap your neighbour, your countryman and your friend. You need not, therefore,
confine your traffic in human flesh to the African race. You may extend
it even to your own children. But if such practices are not formally mentioned
and condemned in the New Testament, the principles from which they proceed
are reprobated in the strongest terms. The whole system of slavery is opposite
to the spirit of that religion which is righteousness and peace.
True religion cheers the heart both of the subject of a tyrant and the
slave of a master. It teaches them their duty as men, as social beings,
as citizens of the world; while it reprobates the character who holds them
in durance, anti condemns the tenor upon which he holds his authority.
It does not alter the external condition, of the believer, unless it reaches
the heart of those who are in power. It teaches him faithfulness and sobriety,
patience and resignation, until God, in his providence, affords him an
opportunity of being more usefully active in the restoration of moral order
to society.
OBJECTION VI. "I abhor the principle.
The practice of importing and selling men is detestable. But here they
are. We found them slaves. We are not obliged, at the expense of our property,
to set them at liberty. The community in general will not consent to it.
They will therefore be slaves. I want a servant. I may purchase and hold
a slave. His condition will not be rendered worse by serving me. I am bound
to treat him mercifully: but, as matters are now situated, there can be
no evil in my keeping him in bondage."
ANSWER. If men were not strongly
influenced by interested motives, they could not impose so far on their
own understandings as to give indulgence to the principle contained in
this objection. A long continuance of evil-doing will change the nature
of wrong unto right. If so, there is an end to the distinction between
virtue and vice. Your fathers left the negroes in bondage, as an inheritance
to you. Does this justify you in retaining them? No. If the first stealer
and the first buyer acted contrary to justice, the constant retainer cannot
be guiltless. You condemn the principle, but justify the practice. Act
consistently, I beseech you, Touch not, taste not, handle not the unclean
thing. Let me call your attention to another fact. You have a slave
of thirty years of age in your possession. He was born in your house. By
natural laws, and according to the first principles of civil liberty, he
was born equally free with your son. Who has, upon him, committed the robbery
by which he has been deprived of his natural rights? Yourself. Lay not
the blame on your parents, for you imitate their example. The text applies
to you directly. You have stolen from his connections, from himself, a
man born in your house. Have you purchased him? You have countenanced an
impious commerce; the best reparation you can make is to set your slave
at liberty. You cannot afford to perform acts of such extensive benevolence.
Do justice, however. Deal mercifully with your servant. When the wages
which he might have annually earned shall have amounted to the purchase
money, and lawful interest, set him immediately at liberty from your controul.
If you are a worthy character, he shall afterwards voluntarily serve you,
unless he be ungrateful indeed, provided you give him due wages. After
confessing the system to be indefensible, it is to be hoped you will not
give your suffrages to render it permanent.—I shall proceed,
III. To make some improvement.
In his walk of faith, the Christian considers himself
bound to the practice of every known duty. By the test of obedience, the
nature of his love to God is tried. This is the love of Gods that ye
keep his commandments, and his commandments are not grievous.[17]
This disposition inclines and fits him for making a practical improvement
of just theory. And the view we have now had of the evils of the slave-trade
may be improved for several uses.
1. We should lament over the distressing sufferings of
our brethren in bondage. True piety does not blunt the feelings of benevolence.
Commiseration with the wretched is strongly inculcated. Weep with those
that weep. Evangelic principle forms the soul to it. For these things
I weep; mine eye, mine eye, runneth down with tears.[18]
The situation of the African is miserable. In his native country he
is in darkness. He has no vision, no well-grounded hope—the inhabitant
of a waste wilderness, without God in the world. He becomes acquainted
with foreigners on whom a Christian education has been bestowed. They profess
the religion which breathes peace and good will towards men. He knows them
to his sorrow. New occasions for war are afforded, and new and terrible
instruments for prosecuting war provided, for the already ferocious tribes
of the wilderness. He is taken captive, and is sold for a bauble. He is
chained in the suffocating dungeon of a floating prison. He is brought
into a strange country. The whip is brandished over his head. With its
lash his back is furrowed. In a land boasting of civilization, and enlightened
by the gospel luminary, he is doomed to ignorance, to rudeness and wretchedness.
There is power on the side of the oppressor, but on his side there is
no power.[19] His genius
is cramped; the energies of his mind are suppressed; his moral feelings
are eradicated; his soul, his immortal soul, is left to perish without
the knowledge of Jesus. "Oh, slavery, thou art a bitter draught!" Miserable
African, we lament over your condition. We are sensible of your sufferings.
We sympathise with you. We recognise you as a brother. We recommend you
to the protection of our Heavenly Father. We consign you to the arms of
our dear Redeemer. God of mercy! Let the sighing of the prisoner come
before thee: according to the greatness of thy power, preserve thou those
that are appointed to die.[20]
2. We may improve the view we have taken of the negro
slave-trade, in order to stimulate us to present duty.
The benevolence of the Christian is not like the sensibility
of a writer of romance, ready to be exercised on imaginary objects, but
blind to objects of reality. While we drop the tear of compassion over
the slave, let us inquire whether or no we can do any thing to alleviate
his sorrows. Cannot your agency diminish the number of slaves, and your
behaviour be an example to others to contribute their influence to the
same desirable end?
I cannot demand of you, my brethren, to sacrifice your
property imprudently in purchasing the liberty of your neighbour’s slaves;
but justice, your religion, requires that you should cease to be slave-holders
yourselves. With respect to the young, arrangements may be made, to defray,
by their services, the expense of their support and their education, before
they are emancipated. To this you have a right, and to no more. The middle-aged
has already repaid your expenditures. If he has been purchased, charity
would recommend it to you, nevertheless, to set him at liberty: and justice
demands that you should retain him in bondage no longer than is sufficient
to recompence you for your trouble and expense. With reference to the old,
the inactive and the infirm, godly wisdom will direct the conscientious
to such measures as may be best calculated to secure their advantage, and
enable you to maintain an honourable testimony against this abominable
usurpation. Be merciful to them. Cultivate their understandings. Make them
feel themselves to be men. Raise them to the rank which God has assigned
them. Teach them the doctrines of the gospel. Give them habits of industry.
Pray for them. Sacrifice the property, which the civil law gives you in
them, on the altar of religion. Seek for a recompence from on high. Heaven
can reward you. Godliness is profitable unto all things. It has the
promise of the life which now is, and of that which is to come.[21]
3. The preceding discussion may be improved for discovering
the duty of gospel ministers.
These occupy an important office in the house of God.
They are ambassadors for Jesus Christ. They are commissioned not so much
to please as to teach. The volume of revelation contains their instructions.
In negociating a treaty between heaven and earth, they are not to neglect
its directions. It contains no useless articles to be expunged or neglected.
Much prudence, much prayer, and large communications of the divine spirit,
are indeed necessary to constitute fallible man a wise steward of the manifold
grace of God. This is promised; and he faithful who promised, and able
to perform.[22] Mankind
have no right to be offended at ministers for directing them on the head
of slavery. My text is in the Bible. I have an undoubted right to discuss
it. Is the discussion scriptural, and is it well timed? are the only questions
men have a right to ask. My brethren in the ministry, if you lament over
this evil, let your voice be raised aloud against it. The subject is important,
To handle it rashly may be dangerous. Offence may be undesignedly given,
and unjustly taken, which may mar the peace of the church, and hinder the
propagation of the gospel. Offences must come. Woe to him by whom
they are introduced. This should make you vigilant, but not silent. Some,
indeed, have pushed their opposition to political evils too far. This may
have had an influence in deterring others from going as far as duty directed.
There is a timidity natural to some characters, which detains them from
prosecuting public subjects. Some, who are traitors to their Master’s cause,
neglect some articles in their instructions, while negociating in his name;
and there is a meekness and diffidence cherished by true piety, which render
ministers more disposed to evangelic discussions than to inveigh against
public immoralities. But remember, brethren, that in preaching the gospel
you are not to neglect the law. It is to be used as a schoolmaster to
lead men to Christ, who is the end of the law for righteousness to every
one who believeth. And you are also to teach, that the gospel is designed
to establish the law, and dispose men to obey its dictates. You may comfort
yourselves, probably, while neglecting your duty upon such subjects, by
classing yourselves with an apostle, in desiring to know nothing but
Jesus, and him crucified. Be assured, however, that the resolution
of that inspired writer was not recorded with a view to militate against
the express precept of our arisen Lord. He commanded his ambassadors not
only to preach the gospel to all nations, but also to teach them
all things whatsoever he commanded.[23]
Considering the guilt and the danger accompanying the practice of holding
our brethren in perpetual slavery, it will be serving God in your generation
prudently to exercise the right of giving public warning against it. Let
us do our duty, leaving the consequences to God.
4. The view we have taken of this subject also affords
a practical lesson to our legislators and statesmen. To you belongs the
maintenance of justice and order in society. Your influence, your authority,
your wisdom, can be of signal service to the nation, if they are all exerted
in the cause of righteousness. Engage yourselves speedily in rectifying
this evil practice of holding your brethren in slavery. It is inconsistent
with the natural rights of man; it is condemned by the scriptures;
it is at war with your republican institutions; it ruins the minds and
the morals of thousands; and it leaves you exposed to the wrath of heaven.
It is easy to see tint, although it supports indolence and the pride of
families, it is truly detrimental to the wealth, the industry, the population
and the safety of the commonwealth.[24]
It may be difficult to point out a safe mode of redressing the evil. Every
plan is accompanied with difficulties. To export them to Africa would be
cruel. To establish them in a separate colony would be dangerous. To give
them their liberty, and incorporate them with the whites, would be more
so, The sins of the fathers, it is to be feared, will be visited on their
children. But it is more safe to adopt any one of those plans than continue
the evil. By a national repenting and forsaking, we may find mercy. Providence
can dispose of all things in our favour. We have a right to expect that
he will ward off or mitigate the threatening consequences, if the nation
would venture upon his kindness to do their duty.
It must appear ridiculous to Europeans "to hear of an
American patriot signing with one hand declarations of independency, and
with the other brandishing a whip over an affrighted slave." Can you be
sincere friends to liberty and order, and tolerate this dreadful traffic?
From repeated and accurate calculations it has been found
that slavery is unfavourable to the wealth of nations.
Listen to the remarks of a writer of observation and eminence.
"With what execration should the statesman be loaded, who, permitting one
half of the citizens thus to trample on the rights of the other, transforms
those into despots, and these into enemies—destroys the morals of the one
part, and the amor patriae, of the other! With the morals
of the people, their industry also is destroyed. Of the proprietors of
slaves a small proportion is ever seen to labour, And can the liberties
of a nation be thought secure, when we have removed their only firm basis,
a conviction in the minds of the public that their liberties are the gift
of God? that they are not to be violated but with his wrath? indeed, I
tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just that his justice
cannot sleep for ever—that an exchange of situation is among possible events—that
it may become probable by supernatural interference."[25]
You will find it true, that righteousness exalteth a nation, and that
sin is a reproach to any people.[26]
In concluding this discourse, let me warn my hearers to
consider the evil hand they may have in the system of slavery, and especially
that they are by nature in the worst of slavery themselves. Come for deliverance
from the bondage of sin into the Son of God: for, whom the Son makes
free, shall be free indeed. Standing fast in this liberty, use it in
the service of God and of man. You are no more your own; ye are bought
with a price: Glorify God in your bodies and spirits which are his. Amen.
By punctual attention to this principle, the friends of
truth may consistently and successfully combat those who would rob man
of his rights, or would unduly extend them. From this double battery, by
maintaining a well-directed fire, they may defeat the supporters of civil
and religious usurpation on the one side, and the propagators of licentiousness
in politics and religion on the other. [back]
[2] Mark 12:31. [back]
[3] Matthew 7:12. [back]
[4] Ephesians 2:3. [back]
[5] Frequent attendance in the slaughter-house
is supposed calculated to blunt the feelings of humanity. By the laws of
England, a butcher is not admitted to sit on a jury, lest he should not
be sufficiently delicate in cases of life and death. [back]
[6] Jefferson’s Notes, Query
18. [back]
[7] "It is far from being uncommon to
see a southern gentleman at dinner, and his reputed offspring, a slave,
waiting at the table. ‘I myself,’ says a gentleman of observation, ‘saw
two instances of this kind; and the company would very facetiously trace
the features of the father and mother in the child, and very accurately
point out their more characteristic resemblances. The fathers, neither
of them blushed, nor seemed disconcerted. They were called men of worth,
politeness and humanity. The Africans are said to be inferior, in point
of sentiment and feeling, to white people. The African labours night and
day to collect a small pittance to purchase the freedom of his child. The
white man begets his likeness, and, with much indifference, sees his offspring
in bondage and misery, and makes not one effort to redeem his own blood."—Morse’s
Universal Geography, p. 66. [back]
[8] The Declaration of Independence
has these words: "We hold these truths to be self-evident—that all men
are created equal—that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
rights—that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—that
to secure these rights governments are instituted among men." The negroes
are created equal with the whites according to this instrument. Their liberty
is an unalienable right. But this nation has taken away this unalienable
right from them. And although the nation declares that government is instituted
to preserve this right, the government still continues to deprive them
of it. The United States, according to the late census, taken in 1801,
hold 875,626 of the human race in slavery. They have, even in the Constitution
of the general government, twelve years after the Declaration of Independence,
made provision for the increase of the number. Art. 1 Sect. 9 "The migration
or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing
shall think proper to admit, shall nor be prohibited by the Congress prior
to the year 1808." They have thus, inconsistently, constitutionally authorised
a continuance of the worst of robberies. Very few of the States have made
any adequate provision for the emancipation of their slaves. But the State
of South-Carolina has exceeded her sister States in endeavours to perpetuate
this impious practice. What language can express the political inconsistency
of a people who have inserted in a republican constitution of government
the following section? Constitution of South-Carolina, Art. 1. Sect. 6.
"No person shall be eligible to a seat in the House of Representatives
unless he is a free white man. If a resident in the election district,
be shall not be eligible to a seat in the House of Representatives unless
he be legally seized and possessed, in iris own right, of a settled freehold
estate of five hundred acres of land, and TEN NEGROES."
To tolerate slavery is an evil of no small magnitude; to give it a national
recommendation is still more inexcusable; but to render it a condition
without which no man can represent, in the legislature, the district in
which he lives, exceeds any thing on record in the annals of nations. This
Constitution was adopted as late as the year 1790. [back]
[9] 1 Timothy 4:8. [back]
[10] Hebrews 12:8. [back]
[11] There is no reason to suppose
the blacks destitute of mental powers. In some settlements in this State,
particularly along the Mohawk, and in Scoharie, the negroes, although slaves,
are admitted to the privilege of consultation with their masters about
the manner of conducting their labour. They live, comparatively, at ease
and in plenty. They consult about the management of the farm, and frequently
convey the produce to the markets. The negroes, in these places, are as
intelligent and active as their masters, unless the latter have had signal
advantages from education, and associating with superior company.
The courage and skill of the negroes in war will no longer
be disputed, after their transactions in St. Domingo and Guadaloupe are
known. And great must be his prejudice who can deny to the black Toussaint
the qualifications of a warrior and a statesman.
The writings of Phillis Wheatly evince that negroes
are not destitute of poetic genius; and the letters of Ignatius Sancho
discover their possession of talents for prose composition. The observations
of the Rev. Samuel Miller, of New-York, on the negro school of that city,
and those of Anthony Benezet on the school in Philadelphia, confirm this
truth. But if any person desires more documents to corroborate the
position that the talents of the negroes are not inferior to those of the
whites. I refer him to Clarkson’s Essay, and to Dr. Beattie’s refutation
of Hume’s assertions with respect to African capacity. There he will find
satisfaction. [back]
[12] The nations called civilized,
upon accurate calculation, are found to export annually from Africa one
hundred thousand slaves. Fifty thousand of these are obtained by kidnapping.
In order to supply the other half, whole villages are at once depopulated,
by order of the Princes under European influence, and wars entered into
expressly for the purpose of making slaves of the prisoners. These causes
produce constant quarrels, and render the country miserable. It is supposed
that 60,000 lives perish annually in these wars. Of the number shipped
from Africa, 25,000 perish on the passage, by pestilence, insurrection,
Shipwreck, despair, &c. 25,000 more perish in seasoning to the
climate of the West-Indies. The remaining 50,000 linger out a life of wretched
existence. Another fact will ascertain the havoc which famine, fatigue
and cruelty make among those who are seasoned to the climate. Ten thousand
people, under fair advantages, should produce, in a century, 160,000. In
one of the colonies 650,000 slaves were imported in one century. The offspring
of these, at the expiration of a hundred years, amounted to 140,000. According
to this estimate, population was impeded in the proportion of seventy-four
to one. In their own country they would have produced ten millions in that
time. Thus it appears that upwards of 100,000 lives are annually sacrificed.
This estimate is founded upon the testimony of witnesses by no means partial
to the Africans—the testimonies of Smyth, Bosman, and Moore, agents to
the factories established in Africa—and the records of Jamaica and St.
Domingo. In Part 3 of Clarkson’s Essay, a history of the slave-trade
is given, and many tales of woe related. If the accuracy of this estimate
is doubted, that excellent work maybe consulted. [back]
[13] The author embraces this opportunity
of recommending "An Inquiry into the Causes of Variety in the Human Complexions,"
by Dr. Smith, President of the College of New-Jersey. His admirable criticisms
on Lord Kaimes, by far the most able advocate of the doctrine of a plurality
of distinct original pairs, deserve the perusal of the philosophic inquirer.
[back]
[14] Mr. Miller eloquently expresses
himself on this subject:—"Pride, indeed, may contend that these unhappy
subjects of our oppression are an inferior race of beings; and are, therefore,
assigned, by the strictest justice, to a depressed and servile station
in society. But in what does this inferiority consist? In a difference
of complexion and figure? Let the narrow and illiberal mind, who
can advance such an argument, recollect whither it will carry him. In traversing
the various regions of the earth, from the equator to the pole, we find
an infinite diversity of shades in the complexion of men, from the darkest
to the fairest hues. If, then, the proper station of the African is that
of servitude and depression, we must also contend that every Portuguese
and Spaniard is, though in a less degree, inferior to us, and should be
subject to a measure of the same degradation. Nay, if the tints of colour
be considered the test of human dignity, we may justly assume a haughty
superiority over our southern brethren of this continent, and devise their
subjugation. In short, upon this principle, where shall liberty end? or
where shall slavery begin? at what grade is it that the ties of blood are
to cease? and how many shades must we descend still lower in the scale,
before mercy is to vanish with them?" Discourse to the Manumission Society
of New York. p. 12,13. [back]
[15] Commerce in the human species
is of a very early date. Moses informs us that Joseph was sold as a slave,
and disposed of in Egypt as such by the purchasers. Gen. 37:30,36 Homer
informs us, that in the time of the Trojan war Egypt and Cyprus were markets
for slaves. Antinous threatens to send Ulysses to one of those places.
Odys. lib. 17 v.448. Mh taxa
pikrhn Aigupton
kai Kupron idhai.
Tyre and Sidon were notorious for prosecuting the slave-trade. This custom
travelled over all Asia; spread through the Grecian and Roman world; and
was practised among the barbarous nations which overturned the Roman Empire.
The abolition of the slave-trade among the European nations has been falsely
attributed to the feudal system. The prevalence of Christianity was the
real cause of it The charters which were granted, in those days, for the
freedom of slaves, were expressly, pro amore Dei, pro mercede animo;
"that they might procure the favour of the Deity, which they conceived
themselves to have forfeited by the subjugation of those whom they found
to be the objects of divine benevolence." These effects were produced as
the nations were converted, and procured a general liberty through Europe
before the close of the twelfth century. In the commencement of this century
slaves were a capital article in the domestic and foreign trade of England.
When any person had more children than he could maintain, he sold them
to a merchant. In the Council held at St. Peters, Westminster, A.D. 1102
this practice was prohibited. In the great Council of Armagh, A.D. 1171,
the clergy of Ireland decreed that all the English slaves should be immediately
emancipated. (Henry’s England, vol. vi. p. 267, 8vo edit.) It had
not yet been discovered that the New Testament authorised slavery. No.
Wherever this religion prevails, it will be found to be the "perfect
law of liberty."
The instance of Onesimus has been very unhappily selected
by the advocates of slavery to support their system. It does not appear
certainly that he had been a slave to Philemon. He had been, indeed, a
servant. But, if a slave, he was to be so no longer. Phil. 16. Paul had,
right to demand his liberty. Phil. 8. He knows, however, that to request
it would be sufficient. Phil. 9. It appears Onesimus had wronged his master.
Phil. 18. Notwithstanding, Paul might lawfully have retained him without
a recompence. Phil. 13. But, confiding in Philemon’s integrity, leaves
the matter to his own option, and. becomes security for Onesimus. Phil.
15. It appears that this Onesimus was no longer slave or servant, lie was
more probably afterwards a minister of the gospel, and colleague with Tychicus
in Collosse. He is said to have been afterwards pastor at Ephesus. [back]
[16] The immoralities practised in
the Roman Empire, under the sanction of law, were numerous and aggravated.
It would be an unreasonable mode of compiling a system of ethics, to sustain
as moral every ancient usage of the Grecians and Romans which are not,
expressly condemned in the New Testament. [back]
[17] Romans 12:15. [back]
[18] Lamentation 1:16. [back]
[19] Eccles. 4:1. [back]
[20] Psalm 79:11. [back]
[21] 1 Timothy 4:8. [back]
[22] Hebrews 10:2,3. Romans 4:21. [back]
[23] Matthew 28:19,20. [back]
[24] "From repeated and accurate calculations,
it has been found that the expense of maintaining a slave, if we include
the purchase-money, is much greater than that of maintaining a free man;
and the labour of the free man, influenced by the powerful motive of gain,
is at least twice as profitable to the employer as that of the slave. Besides,
slavery is the bane of industry. It renders labour among the whites not
only unfashionable, but disreputable. Industry is the offspring of necessity
rather than of choice. Slavery precludes this necessity, and indolence,
which strikes at the root of all social and political happiness, is the
consequence." Morse’s Geography, p. 65.
If these observations be just, it appears that slavery
is impolitic as well as immoral; and they will hold true except in cases
in which the negroes are treated in some degree as men, and in which they
enjoy considerable portion of freedom: and even where this is the case,
there is a great disadvantage accompanying negro slavery. It renders service
of any kind disreputable. All the white people cannot be masters, and yet
even the poor are very unwilling to serve. When they do engage in service
it is difficult to deal with them. If you assume an authority over them
they resent it; if you have work to do which is disagreeable, your hired
man or woman spurn at the thought of being more meanly employed than yourself;
nay, they will not be called servants, for this would be reducing them
to a level with the blacks. This is prevalent throughout the country, except
in those places in which different customs have introduced different ideas.
The want of subordination and faithfulness in the white servants in America,
has long been a subject of remark to Europeans. In the slavery of the blacks
we see the cause of it—a cause more powerful than even mistaken notions
of liberty. [back]
[25] Jefferson’s Notes. [back]
[26] Proverbs 14:34. [back]
NEW-YORK:
GOD is omnipotent. His omnipotence is
necessary, and independent of every other being. He is the source from
which all power flows. Whatever physical force can be exerted by man, is
derived from his Maker. In the exercise of natural power man is under a
law to God. He is indeed a free agent; but the divine law circumscribes
his sphere of action, and marks out boundaries which he cannot pass with
impunity. To exert his natural powers under the direction of law is right:
to exercise any powers derived from God, contrary to his declared will,
is wrong. Whatever is included in the grant God has made to the human family,
is one of the rights of man; and beyond this grant, contrary to
God’s law, man cannot claim a right, until he shakes off his dependency,
and elevates his own authority until it become paramount to that which
is exercised by Jehovah. Whosoever attempts to deprive any of the human
family of the former, or put him in possession of the latter, is guilty
of treason against Heaven, unless he is expressly commissioned, in this
particular instance, to contradict the general principles of law, by the
same great authority from which the law derives its binding force. He who,
without this authority, breaks over the barriers of law, and, with physical
force, deprives his neighbour of liberty or property, is an enemy to God
and to man; much more so he who commences an unprovoked attack on any of
his fellow men, and, with lawless power, steals him from his connections,
barters him for some other commodity, or forces him to labour for the benefit
of another, and that other an enemy, who has committed, or countenanced
the commission of the theft.
[1] The author
of "Political Justice" maintains that the rights of man are all negative—that
man had no rights. His reasoning is ingenious, and is certainly
less absurd than that which would introduce blasphemy and vice among the
rights of man. Both sentiments are, however, absurd, and the absurdity
proceeds from the same source. Man is considered in relation to man only.
The interest of truth requires this error to be detected and exposed. Before
man is considered in relation to man, his relation to God must be understood.
This is the primary one. It is that by which all others must be regulated.
Consider man as a creature of God, and depending upon his bounty, and you
see him receiving certain privileges from that Lord who has a necessary
and absolute property in all things. These are the rights of man. They
are not inherent, but derived. Consider man as a creature, and you see
him under a law to God. His possessions are completely circumscribed. Beyond
this he has no right. All the rights of man are derived from God, and
agreeable to his law.
[ Top | Eschatology | Bible Studies | Classics | Articles | Other Articles | Sermons | Apologetics | F.A.Q. | Forum ]