AN ESSAY ON THE SLAVERY AND COMMERCE OF THE HUMAN SPECIES, PARTICULARLY THE AFRICAN, TRANSLATED FROM A LATIN DISSERTATION, WHICH WAS HONOURED WITHTHE FIRST PRIZE IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE, FOR THE YEAR 1785, WITH ADDITIONS. 

 * * * * *

_Neque premendo alium me extulisse velim_. --LIVY. 

M. DCC. LXXXVI. 

 * * * * *

TO THERIGHT HONOURABLEWILLIAM CHARLES COLYEAR, EARL OF PORTMORE, VISCOUNT MILSINTOWN. 

MY LORD, The dignity of the subject of this little Treatise, not any persuasionof its merits as a literary composition, encourages me to offer it toyour Lordship's patronage. The cause of freedom has always been foundsufficient, in every age and country, to attract the notice of thegenerous and humane; and it is therefore, in a more peculiar manner, worthy of the attention and favour of a personage, who holds adistinguished rank in that illustrious island, the very air of which hasbeen determined, upon a late investigation of its laws, to be anantidote against slavery. I feel a satisfaction in the opportunity, which the publication of this treatise affords me, of acknowledging yourLordship's civilities, which can only be equalled by the respect, withwhich I am, Your Lordship's, much obliged, and obedient servant, THOMAS CLARKSON. 

 * * * * *

Books Printed and Sold by J. PHILLIPS, ESSAY on the TREATMENT and CONVERSION ofAFRICAN SLAVES in the BRITISH Sugar Colonies. By the Rev. J. RAMSAY, Vicar of Teston inKent, who resided many Years in the West-Indies. In One Volume, Octavo. Price 5s bound, or 4s in Boards. 

An INQUIRY into the Effects of putting a Stopto the African Slave Trade, and of granting Libertyto the Slaves in the British Sugar Colonies. By J. RAMSAY. Price 6d. 

A REPLY to the Personal Invectives and Objectionscontained in two Answers, published bycertain anonymous Persons, to an Essay on theTreatment and Conversion of African Slaves, inthe British Colonies. By JAMES RAMSAY. Price 2s. 

A LETTER from Capt. J. S. SMITH, to theRev. Mr. HILL, on the State of the Negroe Slaves;to which are added an Introduction, and Remarkson Free Negroes, &c. By J. RAMSAY. Price 6d. 

THOUGHTS on the Slavery of the Negroes. Price 4d. 

The CASE of our Fellow-Creatures, the OppressedAfricans, respectfully recommended to the seriousConsideration of the Legislature of Great-Britain, by the People called Quakers. Price 2d. 

A SERIOUS ADDRESS to the Rulers of America, on the Inconsistency of their Conduct respectingSlavery. Price 3d. 

A CAUTION to GREAT BRITAIN and herColonies, in a short Representation of the calamitousState of the enslaved Negroes in the BritishDominions. By ANTHONY BENEZET. Price 6d. 

A Description of Guinea, its Situation, Produce, and the general Disposition of its Inhabitants; withan Inquiry into the Rise and Progress of the SlaveTrade, &c. By ANTHONY BENEZET. Bound 2s. 6d. 

 * * * * *

THE PREFACE. 

As the subject of the following work has fortunately become of late atopick of conversation, I cannot begin the preface in a manner moresatisfactory to the feelings of the benevolent reader, than by giving anaccount of those humane and worthy persons, who have endeavoured to drawupon it that share of the publick attention which it has obtained. 

Among the well disposed individuals, of different nations and ages, whohave humanely exerted themselves to suppress the abject personal slavery, introduced in the original cultivation of the _European_ coloniesin the western world, _Bartholomew de las Casas_, the pious bishopof _Chiapa_, in the fifteenth century, seems to have been thefirst. This amiable man, during his residence in _Spanish America_, was so sensibly affected at the treatment which the miserable Indiansunderwent that he returned to _Spain_, to make a publick remonstrancebefore the celebrated emperor _Charles_ the fifth, declaring, thatheaven would one day call him to an account for those cruelties, whichhe then had it in his power to prevent. The speech which he made on theoccasion, is now extant, and is a most perfect picture of benevolenceand piety. 

But his intreaties, by opposition of avarice, were rendered ineffectual:and I do not find by any books which I have read upon the subject, thatany other person interfered till the last century, when _MorganGodwyn_, a _British_ clergyman, distinguished himself in thecause. 

The present age has also produced some zealous and able opposers of the_colonial_ slavery. For about the middle of the present century, _JohnWoolman_ and _Anthony Benezet_, two respectable members of thereligious society called Quakers, devoted much of their time to thesubject. The former travelled through most parts of _North America_on foot, to hold conversations with the members of his own sect, on theimpiety of retaining those in a state of involuntary servitude, who hadnever given them offence. The latter kept a free school at_Philadelphia_, for the education of black people. He took everyopportunity of pleading in their behalf. He published several treatisesagainst slavery, [001] and gave an hearty proof of his attachment to thecause, by leaving the whole of his fortune in support of that school, towhich he had so generously devoted his time and attention when alive. 

Till this time it does not appear, that any bodies of men, hadcollectively interested themselves in endeavouring to remedy the evil. But in the year 1754, the religious society, called Quakers, publicklytestified their sentiments upon the subject, [002] declaring, that "tolive in ease and plenty by the toil of those, whom fraud and violencehad put into their power, was neither consistent with Christianity norcommon justice. "

Impressed with these sentiments, many of this society immediatelyliberated their slaves; and though such a measure appeared to beattended with considerable loss to the benevolent individuals, whounconditionally presented them with their freedom, yet they adopted itwith pleasure: nobly considering, that to possess a little, in anhonourable way, was better than to possess much, through the medium ofinjustice. Their example was gradually followed by the rest. A generalemancipation of the slaves in the possession of Quakers, at length tookplace; and so effectually did they serve the cause which they hadundertaken, that they denied the claim of membership in their religiouscommunity, to all such as should hereafter oppose the suggestions ofjustice in this particular, either by retaining slaves in theirpossession, or by being in any manner concerned in the slave trade: andit is a fact, that through the vast tract of North America, there is notat this day a single slave in the possession of an acknowledged Quaker. 

But though this measure appeared, as has been observed before, to beattended with considerable loss to the benevolent individuals whoadopted it, yet, as virtue seldom fails of obtaining its reward, itbecame ultimately beneficial. Most of the slaves, who were thusunconditionally freed, returned without any solicitation to their formermasters, to serve them, at stated wages; as free men. The work, whichthey now did, was found to better done than before. It was found also, that, a greater quantity was done in the same time. Hence less than theformer number of labourers was sufficient. From these, and a variety ofcircumstances, it appeared, that their plantations were considerablymore profitable when worked by free men, than when worked, as before, byslaves; and that they derived therefore, contrary to their expectations, a considerable advantage from their benevolence. 

Animated by the example of the Quakers, the members of other sects beganto deliberate about adopting the same measure. Some of those of thechurch of England, of the Roman Catholicks, and of the Presbyterians andIndependants, freed their slaves; and there happened but one instance, where the matter was debated, where it was not immediately put in force. This was in _Pennsylvania_. It was agitated in the synod of thePresbyterians there, to oblige their members to liberate their slaves. The question was negatived by a majority of but one person; and thisopposition seemed to arise rather from a dislike to the attempt offorcing such a measure upon the members of that community, than from anyother consideration. I have the pleasure of being credibly informed, that the manumission of slaves, or the employment of free men in theplantations, is now daily gaining ground in North America. Shouldslavery be abolished there, (and it is an event, which, from thesecircumstances, we may reasonably expect to be produced in time) let itbe remembered, that the Quakers will have had the merit of itsabolition. 

Nor have their brethren here been less assiduous in the cause. As thereare happily no slaves in this country, so they have not had the sameopportunity of shewing their benevolence by a general emancipation. Theyhave not however omitted to shew it as far as they have been able. Attheir religious meetings they have regularly inquired if any of theirmembers are concerned in the iniquitous _African_ trade. They haveappointed a committee for obtaining every kind of information on thesubject, with a view to its suppression, and, about three or four yearsago, petitioned parliament on the occasion for their interference andsupport. I am sorry to add, that their benevolent application wasineffectual, and that the reformation of an evil, productive ofconsequences equally impolitick and immoral, and generally acknowledgedto have long disgraced our national character, is yet left to theunsupported efforts of piety morality and justice, against interestviolence and oppression; and these, I blush to acknowledge, too stronglycountenanced by the legislative authority of a country, the basis ofwhose government is _liberty_. 

Nothing can be more clearly shewn, than that an inexhaustible mine ofwealth is neglected in _Africa_, for prosecution of this impioustraffick; that, if proper measures were taken, the revenue of thiscountry might be greatly improved, its naval strength increased, itscolonies in a more flourishing situation, the planters richer, and atrade, which is now a scene of blood and desolation, converted into one, which might be prosecuted with _advantage_ and _honour_. 

Such have been the exertions of the Quakers in the cause of humanityand virtue. They are still prosecuting, as far as they are able, theirbenevolent design; and I should stop here and praise them for thuscontinuing their humane endeavours, but that I conceive it to beunnecessary. They are acting consistently with the principles ofreligion. They will find a reward in their own consciences; and theywill receive more real pleasure from a single reflection on theirconduct, than they can possibly experience from the praises of an hostof writers. 

In giving this short account of those humane and worthy persons, whohave endeavoured to restore to their fellow creatures the rights ofnature, of which they had been unjustly deprived, I would feel myselfunjust, were I to omit two zealous opposers of the _colonial_ tyranny, conspicuous at the present day. 

The first is Mr. _Granville Sharp_. This Gentleman has particularlydistinguished himself in the cause of freedom. It is a notorious fact, that, but a few years since, many of the unfortunate black people, whohad been brought from the colonies into this country, were sold in themetropolis to merchants and others, when their masters had no fartheroccasion for their services; though it was always understood that everyperson was free, as soon as he landed on the British shore. Inconsequence of this notion, these unfortunate black people, refused togo to the new masters, to whom they were consigned. They were howeverseized, and forcibly conveyed, under cover of the night, to ships thenlying in the _Thames_, to be retransported to the colonies, and to bedelivered again to the planters as merchantable goods. The humane Mr. _Sharpe_, was the means of putting a stop to this iniquitous traffick. Whenever he gained information of people in such a situation, he causedthem to be brought on shore. At a considerable expence he undertooktheir cause, and was instrumental in obtaining the famous decree in thecase of _Somersett_, that as soon as any person whatever set his foot inthis country, he came under the protection of the _British_ laws, and wasconsequently free. Nor did he interfere less honourably in that crueland disgraceful case, in the summer of the year 1781, when _an hundredand thirty two_ negroes, in their passage to the colonies, were throwninto the sea alive, to defraud the underwriters; but his piousendeavours were by no means attended with the same success. To enumeratehis many laudable endeavours in the extirpation of tyranny andoppression, would be to swell the preface into a volume: suffice it tosay, that he has written several books on the subject, and oneparticularly, which he distinguishes by the title of "_A Limitation ofSlavery_. "

The second is the _Rev. James Ramsay_. This gentleman resided formany years in the _West-Indies_, in the clerical office. He perusedall the colonial codes of law, with a view to find if there were anyfavourable clauses, by which the grievances of slaves could beredressed; but he was severely disappointed in his pursuits. Hepublished a treatise, since his return to England, called _An Essay onthe Treatment and Conversion of African Slaves in the British SugarColonies_, which I recommend to the perusal of the humane reader. This work reflects great praise upon the author, since, in order to beof service to this singularly oppressed part of the human species, hecompiled it at the expence of forfeiting that friendship, which he hadcontracted with many in those parts, during a series of years, and atthe hazard, as I am credibly informed, of suffering much, in his privateproperty, as well as of subjecting himself to the ill will andpersecution of numerous individuals. 

This Essay _on the Treatment and Conversion of African Slaves_, contains so many important truths on the colonial slavery, and has comeso home to the planters, (being written by a person who has a thoroughknowledge of the subject) as to have occasioned a considerable alarm. Within the last eight months, two publications have expressly appearedagainst it. One of them is intitled "_Cursory Remarks_ on Mr. Ramsay's Essay;" the other an "_Apology for Negroe Slavery_. " Oneach of these I am bound, as writing on the subject, to make a fewremarks. 

The _cursory remarker_ insinuates, that Mr. Ramsay's account of thetreatment is greatly exaggerated, if not wholly false. To this I shallmake the following reply. I have the honour of knowing severaldisinterested gentlemen, who have been acquainted with the West Indianislands for years. I call them disinterested, because they have neitherhad a concern in the _African_ trade, nor in the _colonial_slavery: and I have heard these unanimously assert, that Mr. _Ramsay's_ account is so far from being exaggerated, or taken fromthe most dreary pictures that he could find, that it is absolutely belowthe truth; that he must have omitted many instances of cruelty, which hehad seen himself; and that they only wondered, how he could have writtenwith so much moderation upon the subject. They allow the _CursoryRemarks_ to be excellent as a composition, but declare that it isperfectly devoid of truth. 

But the _cursory remarker_ does not depend so much on thecircumstances which he has advanced, (nor can he, since they have noother existence than in his own, brain) as on the instrument_detraction_. This he has used with the utmost virulence throughthe whole of his publication, artfully supposing, that if he could bringMr. _Ramsay's_ reputation into dispute, his work would fall ofcourse, as of no authenticity. I submit this simple question to thereader. When a writer, in attempting to silence a publication, attacksthe character of its author, rather than the principles of the workitself, is it not a proof that the work itself is unquestionable, andthat this writer is at a loss to find an argument against it?

But there is something so very ungenerous in this mode of replication, as to require farther notice. For if this is the mode to be adopted inliterary disputes, what writer can be safe? Or who is there, that willnot be deterred from taking up his pen in the cause of virtue? There arecircumstances in every person's life, which, if given to the publick ina malevolent manner, and without explanation, might essentially injurehim in the eyes of the world; though, were they explained, they would beeven reputable. The _cursory remarker_ has adopted this method ofdispute; but Mr. _Ramsay_ has explained himself to the satisfactionof all parties, and has refuted him in every point. The name of this_cursory remarker_ is _Tobin_: a name, which I feel myselfobliged to hand down with detestation, as far as I am able; and with anhint to future writers, that they will do themselves more credit, andserve more effectually the cause which they undertake, if on suchoccasions they attack the work, rather than the character of the writer, who affords them a subject for their lucubrations. 

Nor is this the only circumstance, which induces me to take suchparticular notice of the _Cursory Remarks_. I feel it incumbentupon me to rescue an injured person from the cruel aspersions that havebeen thrown upon him, as I have been repeatedly informed by those, whohave the pleasure of his acquaintance, that his character isirreproachable. I am also interested myself. For if such detraction ispassed over in silence, my own reputation, and not my work, may beattacked by an anonymous hireling in the cause of slavery. 

The _Apology for Negroe Slavery_ is almost too despicable acomposition to merit a reply. I have only therefore to observe, (as isfrequently the case in a bad cause, or where writers do not confinethemselves to truth) that the work refutes itself. This writer, speakingof the slave-trade, asserts, that people are never kidnapped on thecoast of _Africa_. In speaking of the treatment of slaves, heasserts again, that it is of the very mildest nature, and that they livein the most comfortable and happy manner imaginable. To prove each ofhis assertions, he proposes the following regulations. That the_stealing_ of slaves from _Africa_ should be felony. That the_premeditated murder_ of a slave by any person on board, shouldcome under the same denomination. That when slaves arrive in thecolonies, lands should be allotted for their provisions, _inproportion to their number_, or commissioners should see that a_sufficient_ quantity of _sound wholesome_ provisions ispurchased. That they should not work on _Sundays_ and _other_holy-days. That extra labour, or _night-work, out of crop_, shouldbe prohibited. That a _limited number_ of stripes should beinflicted upon them. That they should have _annually_ a suit ofclothes. That old infirm slaves should be _properly cared for_, &c. --Now it can hardly be conceived, that if this author had tried toinjure his cause, or contradict himself, he could not have done it in amore effectual manner, than by this proposal of these salutaryregulations. For to say that slaves are honourably obtained on thecoast; to say that their treatment is of the mildest nature, and yet topropose the above-mentioned regulations as necessary, is to refutehimself more clearly, than I confess myself to be able to do it: and Ihave only to request, that the regulations proposed by this writer, inthe defence of slavery, may be considered as so many proofs of theassertions contained in my own work. 

I shall close my account with an observation, which is of greatimportance in the present case. Of all the publications in favour of theslave-trade, or the subsequent slavery in the colonies, there is notone, which has not been written, either by a chaplain to the Africanfactories, or by a merchant, or by a planter, or by a person whoseinterest has been connected in the cause which he has taken upon him todefend. Of this description are Mr. _Tobin_, and the _Apologistfor Negroe Slavery_. While on the other hand those, who have had ascompetent a knowledge of the subject, but not the _same interest_as themselves, have unanimously condemned it; and many of them havewritten their sentiments upon it, at the hazard of creating aninnumerable host of enemies, and of being subjected to the mostmalignant opposition. Now, which of these are we to believe on theoccasion? Are we to believe those, who are parties concerned, who areinterested in the practice?--But the question does not admit of adispute. 

Concerning my own work, it seems proper to observe, that when, theoriginal Latin Dissertation, as the title page expresses, was honouredby the University of Cambridge with the first of their annual prizes forthe year 1785, I was waited upon by some gentlemen of respectability andconsequence, who requested me to publish it in English. The onlyobjection which occurred to me was this; that having been prevented, byan attention to other studies, from obtaining that critical knowledge ofmy own language, which was necessary for an English composition, I wasfearful of appearing before the publick eye: but that, as they flatteredme with the hope, that the publication of it might be of use, I wouldcertainly engage to publish it, if they would allow me to postpone itfor a little time, till I was more in the habit of writing. Theyreplied, that as the publick attention was now excited to the case ofthe unfortunate _Africans_, it would be serving the cause withdouble the effect, if it were to be published within a few months. Thisargument prevailed. Nothing but this circumstance could have induced meto offer an English composition to the inspection of an host ofcriticks: and I trust therefore that this circumstance will plead muchwith the benevolent reader, in favour of those faults, which he may findin the present work. 

Having thus promised to publish it, I was for some time doubtful fromwhich of the copies to translate. There were two, the original, and anabridgement. The latter (as these academical compositions are generallyof a certain length) was that which was sent down to Cambridge, andhonoured with the prize. I was determined however, upon consulting withmy friends, to translate from the former. This has been faithfully donewith but few[003] additions. The reader will probably perceive the Latinidiom in several passages of the work, though I have endeavoured, as faras I have been able, to avoid it. And I am so sensible of thedisadvantages under which it must yet lie, as a translation, that I wishI had written upon the subject, without any reference at all to theoriginal copy. 

It will perhaps be asked, from what authority I have collected thosefacts, which relate to the colonial slavery. I reply, that I have hadthe means of the very best of information on the subject; having thepleasure of being acquainted with many, both in the naval and militarydepartments, as well as with several others, who have been longacquainted with _America_ and the _West-Indian_ islands. Thefacts therefore which I have related, are compiled from thedisinterested accounts of these gentlemen, all of whom, I have thehappiness to say, have coincided, in the minutest manner, in theirdescriptions. It mud be remarked too, that they were compiled, not fromwhat these gentlemen heard, while they were resident in those parts, butfrom what they actually _saw_. Nor has a single instance been takenfrom any book whatever upon the subject, except that which is mentionedin the 235th page; and this book was published in _France_, in theyear 1777, by _authority_. 

I have now the pleasure to say, that the accounts of these disinterestedgentlemen, whom I consulted on the occasion, are confirmed by all thebooks which I have ever perused upon slavery, except those which havebeen written by _merchants, planters, &c_. They are confirmed bySir _Hans Sloane's_ Voyage to Barbadoes; _Griffith Hughes's_History of the same island, printed 1750; an Account of North America, by _Thomas Jeffries_, 1761; all _Benezet's_ works, &c. &c. Andparticularly by Mr. _Ramsay's_ Essay on the Treatment andConversion of the African Slaves in the British Sugar Colonies; a workwhich is now firmly established; and, I may add in a very extraordinarymanner, in consequence of the controversy which this gentleman hassustained with the _Cursory Remarker_, by which several facts whichwere mentioned in the original copy of my own work, before thecontroversy began, and which had never appeared in any work upon thesubject, have been brought to light. Nor has it received less supportfrom a letter, published only last week, from Capt. J. S. Smith, of theRoyal Navy, to the Rev. Mr. Hill; on the former of whom too highencomiums cannot be bestowed, for standing forth in that noble anddisinterested manner, in behalf of an injured character. 

I have now only to solicit the reader again, that he will make afavourable allowance for the present work, not only from thosecircumstances which I have mentioned, but from the consideration, thatonly two months are allowed by the University for these their annualcompositions. Should he however be unpropitious to my request, I mustconsole myself with the reflection, (a reflection that will alwaysafford me pleasure, even amidst the censures of the great, ) that byundertaking the cause of the unfortunate _Africans_, I haveundertaken, as far as my abilities would permit, the cause of injuredinnocence. 

London, June 1st 1786. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 001: A Description of Guinea, with an Inquiry into the Riseand Progress of the Slave Trade, &c. --A Caution to Great Britain and herColonies, in a short Representation of the calamitous State of theenslaved Negroes in the British Dominions. Besides several smallerpieces. ]

[Footnote 002: They had censured the _African Trade_ in the year1727, but had taken no publick notice of the _colonial_ slaverytill this time. ]

[Footnote 003: The instance of the _Dutch_ colonists at the Cape, in the first part of the Essay; the description of an African battle, inthe second; and the poetry of a negroe girl in the third, are the onlyconsiderable additions that have been made. ]

 * * * * *

CONTENTS. 

 * * * * *

PART I. 

The History of Slavery. 

 CHAP. I. Introduction. --Division of slavery into voluntary and involuntary. --The latter the subject of the present work. --Chap. II. The first class of involuntary slaves among the ancients, from war. --Conjecture concerning their antiquity. --Chap. III. The second class from piracy. --Short history of piracy. --The dance carpoea. --Considerations from hence on the former topick. --Three orders of involuntary slaves among the ancients. --Chap. IV. Their personal treatment. --Exception in Ægypt. --Exception at Athens. --Chap. V. The causes of such treatment among the ancients in general. --Additional causes among the Greeks and Romans. --A refutation of their principles. --Remarks on the writings of Æsop. --Chap. VI. The ancient slave-trade. --Its antiquity. --Ægypt the first market recorded for this species of traffick. --Cyprus the second. --The agreement of the writings of Moses and Homer on the subject. --The universal prevalence of the trade. --Chap. VII. The decline of this commerce and slavery in Europe. --The causes of their decline. --Chap. VIII. Their revival in Africa. --Short history of their revival. --Five classes of involuntary slaves among the moderns. --Cruel instance of the Dutch colonists at the Cape. 

 * * * * *

PART II. 

The African Commerce or Slave-Trade. 

 CHAP. I. The history of mankind from their first situation to a state of government. --Chap. II. An account of the first governments. --Chap. III. Liberty a natural right. --That of government adventitious. --Government, its nature. --Its end. --Chap. IV. Mankind cannot be considered as property. --An objection answered. --Chap. V. Division of the commerce into two parts, as it relates to those who sell, and those who purchase the human species into slavery. --The right of the sellers examined with respect to the two orders of African slaves, "of those who are publickly seized by virtue of the authority of their prince, and of those, who are kidnapped by individuals. "--Chap. VI. Their right with respect to convicts. --From the proportion of the punishment to the offence. --From its object and end. --Chap. VII. Their right with respect to prisoners of war. --The jus captivitatis, or right of capture explained. --Its injustice. --Farther explication of the right of capture, in answer to some supposed objections. --Chap. VIII. Additional remarks on the two orders that were first mentioned. --The number which they annually contain. --A description of an African battle. --Additional remarks on prisoners of war. --On convicts. --Chap. IX. The right of the purchasers examined. --Conclusion. 

 * * * * *

PART III. 

The Slavery of the Africans in the EuropeanColonies. 

 CHAP. I. Imaginary scene in Africa. --Imaginary conversation with an African. --His ideas of Christianity. --A Description of a body of slaves going to the ships. --Their embarkation. --Chap. II. Their treatment on board. --The number that annually perish in the voyage. --Horrid instance at sea. --Their debarkation in the colonies. --Horrid instance on the shore. --Chap. III. The condition of their posterity in the colonies. --The lex nativitatis explained. --Its injustice. --Chap. IV. The seasoning in the colonies. --The number that annually die in the seasoning. --The employment of the survivors. --The colonial discipline. --Its tendency to produce cruelty. --Horrid instance of this effect. --Immoderate labour, and its consequences. --Want of food and its consequences. --Severity and its consequences. --The forlorn situation of slaves. --An appeal to the memory of Alfred. --Chap. V. The contents of the two preceding chapters denied by the purchasers. --Their first argument refuted. --Their second refuted. --Their third refuted. --Chap. VI. Three arguments, which they bring in vindication of their treatment, refuted. --Chap. VII. The argument, that the Africans are an inferiour link of the chain of nature, as far as it relates to their genius, refuted. --The causes of this apparent inferiority. --Short dissertation on African genius. --Poetry of an African girl. --Chap. VIII. The argument, that they are an inferiour link of the chain of nature, as far as it relates to colour, &c. Refuted. --Examination of the divine writings in this particular. --Dissertation on the colour. --Chap. IX. Other arguments of the purchasers examined. --Their comparisons unjust. --Their assertions, with respect to the happy situation of the Africans in the colonies, without foundation. --Their happiness examined with respect to manumission. --With respect to holy-days. --Dances, &c. --An estimate made at St. Domingo. --Chap. X. The right of the purchasers over their slaves refuted upon their own principles. --Chap. XI. Dreadful arguments against this commerce and slavery of the human species. --How the Deity seems already to punish us for this inhuman violation of his laws. --Conclusion. 

 * * * * *

ERRATA. 

 For _Dominique_, (Footnote 107) read _Domingue_. 

 N. B. In page 18 a Latin note has been inserted by mistake, under the quotation of Diodorus Siculus. The reader will find the original Greek of the same signification, in the same author, at page 49. Editio Stephani. 

 * * * * *

AN ESSAY

ON THE SLAVERY and COMMERCE

OF THE HUMAN SPECIES. 

IN THREE PARTS. 

 * * * * *

PART I. 

THE HISTORY OF SLAVERY. 

 * * * * *

CHAP. I. 

When civilized, as well as barbarous nations, have been found, through along succession of ages, uniformly to concur in the same customs, thereseems to arise a presumption, that such customs are not only eminentlyuseful, but are founded also on the principles of justice. Such is thecase with respect to _Slavery_: it has had the concurrence of allthe nations, which history has recorded, and the repeated practice ofages from the remotest antiquity, in its favour. Here then is anargument, deduced from the general consent and agreement of mankind, infavour of the proposed subject: but alas! when we reflect that thepeople, thus reduced to a state of servitude, have had the same feelingswith ourselves; when we reflect that they have had the same propensitiesto pleasure, and the same aversions from pain; another argument seemsimmediately to arise in opposition to the former, deduced from our ownfeelings and that divine sympathy, which nature has implanted in ourbreasts, for the most useful and generous of purposes. To ascertain thetruth therefore, where two such opposite sources of argument occur;where the force of custom pleads strongly on the one hand, and thefeelings of humanity on the other; is a matter of much importance, asthe dignity of human nature is concerned, and the rights and libertiesof mankind will be involved in its discussion. 

It will be necessary, before this point can be determined, to consultthe History of Slavery, and to lay before the reader, in as concise amanner as possible, a general view of it from its earliest appearance tothe present day. 

The first, whom we shall mention here to have been reduced to a state ofservitude, may be comprehended in that class, which is usuallydenominated the _Mercenary_. It consisted of free-born citizens, who, from the various contingencies of fortune, had become so poor, asto have recourse for their support to the service of the rich. Of thiskind were those, both among the Egyptians and the Jews, who are recordedin the sacred writings. [004] The Grecian _Thetes_[005] also were ofthis description, as well as those among the Romans, from whom the classreceives its appellation, the [006]_Mercenarii_. 

We may observe of the above-mentioned, that their situation was in manyinstances similar to that of our own servants. There was an expresscontract between the parties; they could, most of them, demand theirdischarge, if they were ill used by their respective masters; and theywere treated therefore with more humanity than those, whom we usuallydistinguish in our language by the appellation of _Slaves_. 

As this class of servants was composed of men, who had been reduced tosuch a situation by the contingencies of fortune, and not by their ownmisconduct; so there was another among the ancients, composed entirelyof those, who had suffered the loss of liberty from their ownimprudence. To this class may be reduced the Grecian _Prodigals_, who were detained in the service of their creditors, till the fruits oftheir labour were equivalent to their debts; the _delinquents_, whowere sentenced to the oar; and the German _enthusiasts_, asmentioned by Tacitus, who were so immoderately charmed with gaming, as, when every thing else was gone, to have staked their liberty and theirvery selves. "The loser, " says he, "goes into a voluntary servitude, andthough younger and stronger than the person with whom he played, patiently suffers himself to be bound and sold. Their perseverance inso bad a custom is stiled honour. The slaves, thus obtained, areimmediately exchanged away in commerce, that the winner may get rid ofthe scandal of his victory. "

To enumerate other instances, would be unnecessary; it will besufficient to observe, that the servants of this class were in a farmore wretched situation, than those of the former; their drudgery wasmore intense; their treatment more severe; and there was no retreat atpleasure, from the frowns and lashes of their despotick masters. 

Having premised this, we may now proceed to a general division ofslavery, into _voluntary_ and _involuntary_. The _voluntary_will comprehend the two classes, which we have already mentioned;for, in the first instance, there was a _contract_, foundedon _consent_; and, in the second, there was a _choice_ ofengaging or not in those practices, the known consequences of whichwere servitude. The _involuntary_; on the other hand, willcomprehend those, who were forced, without any such _condition_ or_choice_, into a situation, which as it tended to degrade a part ofthe human species, and to class it with the brutal, must have been, ofall human situations, the most wretched and insupportable. These arethey, whom we shall consider solely in the present work. We shalltherefore take our leave of the former, as they were mentioned only, that we might state the question with greater accuracy, and, be thebetter enabled to reduce it to its proper limits. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 004: Genesis, Ch. 47. Leviticus XXV. V. 39, 40. ]

[Footnote 005: The _Thetes_ appear very early in the GrecianHistory. --kai tines auto kouroi epont'Ithakes exairetoi; he eoi autouthentes te Dmoes(?) te; Od. Homer. D. 642. They were afterwards so muchin use that, "Murioi depou apedidonto eautous ose douleuein katasungraphen, " till Solon suppressed the custom in Athens. ]

[Footnote 006: The mention of these is frequent among the classics; theywere called in general _mercenarii_, from the circumstances oftheir _hire_, as "quibus, non malè præcipiunt, qui ita jubent uti, ut _mercenariis_, operam exigendam, justa proebenda. Cicero deoff. " But they are sometimes mentioned in the law books by the name of_liberi_, from the circumstances of their _birth_, to distinguishthem from the _alieni_, or foreigners, as Justinian. D. 7. 8. 4. --Id. 21. 1. 25. &c. &c. &c. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. II. 

The first that will be mentioned, of the _involuntary_, were_prisoners of war_. [007] "It was a law, established from timeimmemorial among the nations of antiquity, to oblige those to undergothe severities of servitude, whom victory had thrown into their hands. "Conformably with this, we find all the Eastern nations unanimous in thepractice. The same custom prevailed among the people of the West; for asthe Helots became the slaves of the Spartans, from the right of conquestonly, so prisoners of war were reduced to the same situation by the restof the inhabitants of Greece. By the same principles that actuatedthese, were the Romans also influenced. Their History will confirm thefact: for how many cities are recorded to have been taken; how manyarmies to have been vanquished in the field, and the wretched survivors, in both instances, to have been doomed to servitude? It remains only nowto observe, in shewing this custom to have been universal, that allthose nations which assisted in overturning the Roman Empire, thoughmany and various, adopted the same measures; for we find it a generalmaxim in their polity, that whoever should fall into their hands as aprisoner of war, should immediately be reduced to the condition of aslave. 

It may here, perhaps, be not unworthy of remark, that the_involuntary_ were of greater antiquity than the _voluntary_slaves. The latter are first mentioned in the time of Pharaoh: theycould have arisen only in a state of society; when property, after itsdivision, had become so unequal, as to multiply the wants ofindividuals; and when government, after its establishment, had givensecurity to the possessor by the punishment of crimes. Whereas theformer seem to be dated with more propriety from the days of Nimrod; whogave rise probably to that inseparable idea of _victory_ and_servitude_, which we find among the nations of antiquity, andwhich has existed uniformly since, in one country or another, to thepresent day. [008]

Add to this, that they might have arisen even in a state of nature, andhave been coequal with the quarrels of mankind. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 007: "Nomos en pasin anthropois aidios esin, otan polemountonpolis alo, ton elonton einai kai ta somata ton en te poleis, kai tachremata. " Xenoph. Kyrou Paid. L. 7. Fin. ]

[Footnote 008:

"Proud Nimrod first the bloody chace began, A mighty hunter, and his prey was man. "

--POPE. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. III. 

But it was not victory alone, or any presupposed right, founded in thedamages of war, that afforded a pretence for invading the liberties ofmankind: the honourable light, in which _piracy_ was considered inthe uncivilized ages of the world, contributed not a little to the_slavery_ of the human species. Piracy had a very early beginning. "The Grecians, "[009] says Thucydides, "in their primitive state, as wellas the contemporary barbarians, who inhabited the sea coasts andislands, gave themselves wholly to it; it was, in short, their onlyprofession and support. " The writings of Homer are sufficient ofthemselves to establish this account. They shew it to have been a commonpractice at so early a period as that of the Trojan war; and abound withmany lively descriptions of it; which, had they been as groundless asthey are beautiful, would have frequently spared the sigh of the readerof sensibility and reflection. 

The piracies, which were thus practised in the early ages, may beconsidered as _publick_ or _private_. In the former, wholecrews embarked for the benefit[010] of their respective tribes. Theymade descents on the sea coasts, carried off cattle, surprized wholevillages, put many of the inhabitants to the sword, and carried othersinto slavery. 

In the latter, individuals only were concerned, and the emolument wastheir own. These landed from their ships, and, going up into thecountry, concealed themselves in the woods and thickets; where theywaited every opportunity of catching the unfortunate shepherd orhusbandman alone. In this situation they sallied out upon him, draggedhim on board, conveyed him to a foreign market, and sold him for aslave. 

To this kind of piracy Ulysses alludes, in opposition to the former, which he had been just before mentioning, in his question to Eumoeus. 

"Did pirates wait, till all thy friends were gone, To catch thee singly with thy flocks alone;Say, did they force thee from thy fleecy care, And from thy fields transport and sell thee here?"[011]

But no picture, perhaps, of this mode of depredation, is equal to that, with which[012] Xenophon presents us in the simple narrative of a dance. He informs us that the Grecian army had concluded a peace with thePaphlagonians, and that they entertained their embassadors inconsequence with a banquet, and the exhibition of various feats ofactivity. "When the Thracians, " says he, "had performed the partsallotted them in this entertainment, some Aenianian and Magnetiansoldiers rose up, and, accoutred in their proper arms, exhibited thatdance, which is called _Karpoea_. The figure of it is thus. One ofthem, in the character of an husbandman, is seen to till his land, andis observed, as he drives his plough, to look frequently behind him, asif apprehensive of danger. Another immediately appears in fight, inthe character of a robber. The husbandman, having seen him previouslyadvancing, snatches up his arms. A battle ensues before the plough. Thewhole of this performance is kept in perfect time with the musick of theflute. At length the robber, having got the better of the husbandman, binds him, and drives him off with his team. Sometimes it happens thatthe husbandman subdues the robber: in this case the scene is onlyreversed, as the latter is then bound and driven, off by the former. "

It is scarcely necessary to observe, that this dance was arepresentation of the general manners of men, in the more uncivilizedages of the world; shewing that the husbandman and shepherd lived incontinual alarm, and that there were people in those ages, who derivedtheir pleasures and fortunes from _kidnapping_ and _enslaving_their fellow creatures. 

We may now take notice of a circumstance in this narration, which willlead us to a review of our first assertion on this point, "that thehonourable light, in which _piracy_ was considered in the times ofbarbarism, contributed not a little to the _slavery_ of the humanspecies. " The robber is represented here as frequently defeated in hisattempts, and as reduced to that deplorable situation, to which he wasendeavouring to bring another. This shews the frequent difficulty anddanger of his undertakings: people would not tamely resign their livesor liberties, without a struggle. They were sometimes prepared; weresuperior often, in many points of view, to these invaders of theirliberty; there were an hundred accidental circumstances frequently intheir favour. These adventures therefore required all the skill, strength, agility, valour, and every thing, in short, that may besupposed to constitute heroism, to conduct them with success. Upon thisidea piratical expeditions first came into repute, and their frequencyafterwards, together with the danger and fortitude, that wereinseparably connected with them, brought them into such credit among thebarbarous nations of antiquity, that of all human professions, piracywas the most honourable. [013]

The notions then, which were thus annexed to piratical expeditions, didnot fail to produce those consequences, which we have mentioned before. They afforded an opportunity to the views of avarice and ambition, toconceal themselves under the mask of virtue. They excited a spirit ofenterprize, of all others the most irresistible, as it subsisted on thestrongest principles of action, emolument and honour. Thus could thevilest of passions be gratified with impunity. People were robbed, stolen, murdered, under the pretended idea that these were reputableadventures: every enormity in short was committed, and dressed up in thehabiliments of honour. 

But as the notions of men in the less barbarous ages, which followed, became more corrected and refined, the practice of piracy begangradually to disappear. It had hitherto been supported on the grandcolumns of _emolument_ and _honour_. When the latter thereforewas removed, it received a considerable shock; but, alas! it had still apillar for its support! _avarice_, which exists in all states, andwhich is ready to turn every invention to its own ends, strained hardfor its preservation. It had been produced in the ages of barbarism; ithad been pointed out in those ages as lucrative, and under this notionit was continued. People were still stolen; many were intercepted (some, in their pursuits of pleasure, others, in the discharge of their severaloccupations) by their own countrymen; who previously laid in wait forthem, and sold them afterwards for slaves; while others seized bymerchants, who traded on the different coasts, were torn from theirfriends and connections, and carried into slavery. The merchants ofThessaly, if we can credit Aristophanes[014] who never spared the vicesof the times, were particularly infamous for the latter kind ofdepredation; the Athenians were notorious for the former; for they hadpractised these robberies to such an alarming degree of danger toindividuals, that it was found necessary to enact a law[015], whichpunished kidnappers with death. --But this is sufficient for our presentpurpose; it will enable us to assert, that there were two classes of_involuntary_ slaves among the ancients, "of those who were takenpublickly in a state of war, and of those who were privately stolen ina state of innocence and peace. " We may now add, that the children anddescendents of these composed a third. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 009: Thucydides. L. 1. Sub initio. ]

[Footnote 010: Idem. --"the strongest, " says he, "engaging in theseadventures, Kerdous tou spheterou auton eneka kai tois asthenesi trophes. "]

[Footnote 011: Homer. Odyss. L. 15. 385. ]

[Footnote 012: Xenoph. Kyrou Anab. L. 6. Sub initio. ]

[Footnote 013: ouk echontos po Aischynen toutou tou ergou pherontos deti kai Doxes mallon. Thucydides, L. 1. Sub initio. Kai euklees toutooi Kilikes enomizon. Sextus Empiricus. Ouk adoxon all'endoxon touto. Schol. &c. &c. ]

[Footnote 014: Aristoph. Plut. Act. 2. Scene 5. ]

[Footnote 015: Zenoph. Apomnemon, L. 1. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. IV. 

It will be proper to say something here concerning the situation of theunfortunate men, who were thus doomed to a life of servitude. Toenumerate their various employments, and to describe the miseries whichthey endured in consequence, either from the severity, or the long andconstant application of their labour, would exceed the bounds we haveproposed to the present work. We shall confine ourselves to their_personal treatment_, as depending on the power of their masters, andthe protection of the law. Their treatment, if considered in this light, will equally excite our pity and abhorrence. They were beaten, starved, tortured, murdered at discretion: they were dead in a civil sense; theyhad neither name nor tribe; were incapable of a judicial process; werein short without appeal. Poor unfortunate men! to be deprived of allpossible protection! to suffer the bitterest of injuries without thepossibility of redress! to be condemned unheard! to be murdered withimpunity! to be considered as dead in that state, the very members ofwhich they were supporting by their labours!

Yet such was their general situation: there were two places however, where their condition, if considered in this point of view, was moretolerable. The Ægyptian slave, though perhaps of all others the greatestdrudge, yet if he had time to reach the temple[016] of Hercules, found acertain retreat from the persecution of his master; and he receivedadditional comfort from the reflection, that his life, whether he couldreach it or not, could not be taken with impunity. Wise and salutarylaw![017] how often must it have curbed the insolence of power, andstopped those passions in their progress, which had otherwise beendestructive to the slave!

But though the persons of slaves were thus greatly secured in Ægypt, yetthere was no place so favourable to them as Athens. They were allowed agreater liberty of speech;[018] they had their convivial meetings, theiramours, their hours of relaxation, pleasantry, and mirth; they weretreated, in short, with so much humanity in general, as to occasion thatobservation of Demosthenes, in his second Philippick, "that thecondition of a slave, at Athens, was preferable to that of a freecitizen, in many other countries. " But if any exception happened (whichwas sometimes the case) from the general treatment described; ifpersecution took the place of lenity, and made the fangs of servitudemore pointed than before, [019] they had then their temple, like theÆgyptian, for refuge; where the legislature was so attentive, as toexamine their complaints, and to order them, if they were founded injustice, to be sold to another master. Nor was this all: they had aprivilege infinitely greater than the whole of these. They were allowedan opportunity of working for themselves, and if their diligence hadprocured them a sum equivalent with their ransom, they couldimmediately, on paying it down, [020] demand their freedom for ever. Thislaw was, of all others, the most important; as the prospect of liberty, which it afforded, must have been a continual source of the mostpleasing reflections, and have greatly sweetened the draught, even ofthe most bitter slavery. 

Thus then, to the eternal honour of Ægypt and Athens, they were the onlyplaces that we can find, where slaves were considered with any humanityat all. The rest of the world seemed to vie with each other, in thedebasement and oppression of these unfortunate people. They used themwith as much severity as they chose; they measured their treatment onlyby their own passion and caprice; and, by leaving them on everyoccasion, without the possibility of an appeal, they rendered theirsituation the most melancholy and intolerable, that can possibly beconceived. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 016: Herodotus. L. 2. 113. ]

[Footnote 017: "Apud Ægyptios, si quis servum sponte occiderat, eummorte damnari æque ac si liberum occidisset, jubebant leges &c. "Diodorus Sic. L. 1. ]

[Footnote 018:

"Atq id ne vos miremini, Homines servulosPotare, amare, atq ad coenam condicere. Licet hoc Athenis. Plautus. Sticho. "]

[Footnote 019:"Be me kratison esin eis to TheseionDramein, ekei d'eos an eurombou prasinmenein" Aristoph. Horæ. 

Kaka toiade paskousin oude prasinAitousin. Eupolis. Poleis. ]

[Footnote 020: To this privilege Plautus alludes in his _Casina_, where he introduces a slave, speaking in the following manner. 

"Quid tu me verò libertate territas?Quod si tu nolis, siliusque etiam tuusVobis _invitis_, atq amborum _ingratiis_, _Una libella liber possum fieri_. "]

 * * * * *

CHAP. V. 

As we have mentioned the barbarous and inhuman treatment that generallyfell to the lot of slaves, it may not be amiss to inquire into thevarious circumstances by which it was produced. 

The first circumstance, from whence it originated, was the_commerce_: for if men could be considered as _possessions_;if, like _cattle_, they could be _bought_ and _sold_, itwill not be difficult to suppose, that they could be held in the sameconsideration, or treated in the same manner. The commerce therefore, which was begun in the primitive ages of the world, by classing themwith the brutal species, and by habituating the mind to consider theterms of _brute_ and _slave_ as _synonimous_, soon causedthem to be viewed in a low and despicable light, and as greatlyinferiour to the human species. Hence proceeded that treatment, whichmight not unreasonably be supposed to arise from so low an estimation. They were tamed, like beasts, by the stings of hunger and the lash, andtheir education was directed to the same end, to make them commodiousinstruments of labour for their possessors. 

This _treatment_, which thus proceeded in the ages of barbarism, from the low estimation, in which slaves were unfortunately held fromthe circumstances of the commerce, did not fail of producing, in thesame instant, its _own_ effect. It depressed their minds; it numbedtheir faculties; and, by preventing those sparks of genius from blazingforth, which had otherwise been conspicuous; it gave them the appearanceof being endued with inferiour capacities than the rest of mankind. Thiseffect of the _treatment_ had made so considerable a progress, asto have been a matter of observation in the days of Homer. 

For half _his_ senses Jove conveys away, _Whom_ once he dooms to see the _servile_ day. [021]

Thus then did the _commerce_, by classing them originally with_brutes_, and the consequent _treatment_, by cramping their_abilities_, and hindering them from becoming _conspicuous_, give to these unfortunate people, at a very early period, the mostunfavourable _appearance_. The rising generations, who receivedboth the commerce and treatment from their ancestors, and who had alwaysbeen accustomed to behold their _effects_, did not consider these_effects_ as _incidental_: they judged only from what theysaw; they believed the _appearances_ to be _real_; and hencearose the combined principle, that slaves were an _inferiour_ orderof men, and perfectly void of _understanding_. Upon this_principle_ it was, that the former treatment began to be fullyconfirmed and established; and as this _principle_ was handed downand disseminated, so it became, in succeeding ages, an _excuse_ forany severity, that despotism might suggest. 

We may observe here, that as all nations had this excuse in common, asarising from the _circumstances_ above-mentioned, so the Greeksfirst, and the Romans afterwards, had an _additional excuse_, asarising from their own _vanity_. 

The former having conquered Troy, and having united themselves under onecommon name and interest, began, from that period, to distinguish therest of the world by the title of _barbarians_; inferring by suchan appellation, "that they were men who were only noble in their owncountry; that they had no right, from their _nature_, to authorityor command; that, on the contrary, so low were their capacities, theywere _destined_ by nature _to obey_, and to live in a state ofperpetual drudgery and subjugation. "[022] Conformable with this opinionwas the treatment, which was accordingly prescribed to a_barbarian_. The philosopher Aristotle himself, in the advice whichhe gave to his pupil Alexander, before he went upon his Asiatickexpedition, intreated him to "use the Greeks, as it became a_general_, but the _barbarians_, as it became a _master_;consider, says he, the former as _friends_ and _domesticks_;but the latter, as _brutes_ and _plants_;"[023] inferring thatthe Greeks, from the superiority of their capacities, had a_natural_ right to dominion, and that the rest of the world, fromthe inferiority of their own, were to be considered and treated as the_irrational_ part of the creation. 

Now, if we consider that this was the treatment, which they judged to beabsolutely proper for people of this description, and that their slaveswere uniformly those, whom they termed _barbarians_; beinggenerally such, as were either kidnapped from _Barbary_, orpurchased from the _barbarian_ conquerors in their wars with oneanother; we shall immediately see, with what an additional excuse theirown vanity had furnished them for the sallies of caprice and passion. 

To refute these cruel sentiments of the ancients, and to shew that theirslaves were by no means an inferiour order of beings than themselves, may perhaps be considered as an unnecessary task; particularly, ashaving shewn, that the causes of this inferiour appearance were_incidental_, arising, on the one hand, from the combined effectsof the _treatment_ and _commerce_, and, on the other, from_vanity_ and _pride_, we seem to have refuted them already. But we trust that some few observations, in vindication of theseunfortunate people, will neither be unacceptable nor improper. 

How then shall we begin the refutation? Shall we say with Seneca, whosaw many of the slaves in question, "What is a _knight_, or a_libertine_, or a _slave_? Are they not names, assumed eitherfrom _injury_ or _ambition_?" Or, shall we say with him onanother occasion, "Let us consider that he, whom we call our slave, isborn in the same manner as ourselves; that he enjoys the same sky, withall its heavenly luminaries; that he breathes, that he lives, in thesame manner as ourselves, and, in the same manner, that he expires. "These considerations, we confess, would furnish us with a plentifulsource of arguments in the case before us; but we decline theirassistance. How then shall we begin? Shall we enumerate the manyinstances of fidelity, patience, or valour, that are recorded of the_servile_ race? Shall we enumerate the many important services, that they rendered both to the individuals and the community, under whomthey lived? Here would be a second source, from whence we could collectsufficient materials to shew, that there was no inferiority in theirnature. But we decline to use them. We shall content ourselves with somefew instances, that relate to the _genius_ only: we shall mentionthe names of those of a _servile_ condition, whose writings, havingescaped the wreck of time, and having been handed down even to thepresent age, are now to be seen, as so many living monuments, thatneither the Grecian, nor Roman genius, was superiour to their own. 

The first, whom we shall mention here, is the famous Æsop. He was aPhrygian by birth, and lived in the time of Croesus, king of Lydia, towhom he dedicated his fables. The writings of this great man, inwhatever light we consider them, will be equally entitled to ouradmiration. But we are well aware, that the very mention of him as awriter of fables, may depreciate him in the eyes of some. To such weshall propose a question, "Whether this species of writing has not beenmore beneficial to mankind; or whether it has not produced moreimportant events, than any other?"

With respect to the first consideration, it is evident that thesefables, as consisting of plain and simple transactions, are particularlyeasy to be understood; as conveyed in images, they please and seduce themind; and, as containing a _moral_, easily deducible on the side ofvirtue; that they afford, at the same time, the most weighty precepts ofphilosophy. Here then are the two grand points of composition, "a mannerof expression to be apprehended by the lowest capacities, and, (what isconsidered as a victory in the art) an happy conjunction of utility andpleasure. "[024] Hence Quintilian recommends them, as singularly useful, and as admirably adapted, to the puerile age; as a just gradationbetween the language of the nurse and the preceptor, and as furnishingmaxims of prudence and virtue, at a time when the speculative principlesof philosophy are too difficult to be understood. Hence also having beenintroduced by most civilized nations into their system of education, they have produced that general benefit, to which we at first alluded. Nor have they been of less consequence in maturity; but particularly tothose of inferiour capacities, or little erudition, whom they havefrequently served as a guide to conduct them in life, and as a medium, through which an explanation might be made, on many and importantoccasions. 

With respect to the latter consideration, which is easily deducible fromhence, we shall only appeal to the wonderful effect, which the fable, pronounced by Demosthenes against Philip of Macedon, produced among hishearers; or to the fable, which was spoken by Menenius Agrippa to theRoman populace; by which an illiterate multitude were brought back totheir duty as citizens, when no other species of oratory could prevail. 

To these truly _ingenious_, and _philosophical_ works of Æsop, we shall add those of his imitator Phoedrus, which in purity andelegance of style, are inferiour to none. We shall add also the Lyrick_Poetry_ of Alcman, which is no _servile_ composition; thesublime _Morals_ of Epictetus, and the incomparable _comedies_of Terence. 

Thus then does it appear, that the _excuse_ which was uniformlystarted in defence of the _treatment_ of slaves, had no foundationwhatever either in truth or justice. The instances that we havementioned above, are sufficient to shew, that there was no inferiority, either in their _nature_, or their understandings: and at the sametime that they refute the principles of the ancients, they afford avaluable lesson to those, who have been accustomed to form tooprecipitate a judgment on the abilities of men: for, alas! how often has_secret anguish_ depressed the spirits of those, whom they havefrequently censured, from their gloomy and dejected appearance! and howoften, on the other hand, has their judgment resulted from their own_vanity_ and _pride_!

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 021: Homer. Odys. P. 322. In the latest edition of Homer, theword, which we have translated _senses_, is _Aretae_, or_virtue_, but the old and proper reading is _Noos_, as appearsfrom Plato de Legibus, ch. 6, where he quotes it on a similar occasion. ]

[Footnote 022: Aristotle. Polit. Ch. 2. Et inseq. ]

[Footnote 023: Ellesin hegemonikos, tois de Barbarois despotikos krastharkai ton men os philon kai oikeion epimeleisthai, tois de oszoois he phytois prospheresthai. Plutarch. De Fortun. Alexand. Orat. 1. ]

[Footnote 024: Omne tulit punctum, qui miscuit utile dulci. Horace. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. VI. 

We proceed now to the consideration of the _commerce_: inconsequence of which, people, endued with the same feelings andfaculties as ourselves, were made subject to the laws and limitations of_possession_. 

This commerce of the human species was of a very early date. It wasfounded on the idea that men were _property_; and, as this idea wascoeval with the first order of _involuntary_ slaves, it must havearisen, (if the date, which we previously affixed to that order, beright) in the first practices of barter. The Story of Joseph, asrecorded in the sacred writings, whom his brothers sold from an envioussuspicion of his future greatness, is an ample testimony of the truth ofthis conjecture. It shews that there were men, even at that earlyperiod, who travelled up and down as merchants, collecting not onlybalm, myrrh, spicery, and other wares, but the human species also, forthe purposes of traffick. The instant determination of the brothers, onthe first sight of the merchants, _to sell him_, and the immediateacquiescence of these, who purchased him for a foreign market, provethat this commerce had been then established, not only in that part ofthe country, where this transaction happened, but in that also, whitherthe merchants were then travelling with their camels, namely, Ægypt: andthey shew farther, that, as all customs require time for theirestablishment, so it must have existed in the ages, previous to that ofPharaoh; that is, in those ages, in which we fixed the first date of_involuntary_ servitude. This commerce then, as appears by thepresent instance, existed in the earliest practices of barter, and haddescended to the Ægyptians, through as long a period of time, as wassufficient to have made it, in the times alluded to, an establishedcustom. Thus was Ægypt, in those days, the place of the greatest resort;the grand emporium of trade, to which people were driving theirmerchandize, as to a centre; and thus did it afford, among otheropportunities of traffick, the _first market_ that is recorded, forthe sale of the human species. 

This market, which was thus supplied by the constant concourse ofmerchants, who resorted to it from various parts, could not fail, bythese means, to have been considerable. It received, afterwards, anadditional supply from those piracies, which we mentioned to haveexisted in the uncivilized ages of the world, and which, in fact, itgreatly promoted and encouraged; and it became, from these unitedcircumstances, so famous, as to have been known, within a few centuriesfrom the time of Pharaoh, both to the Grecian colonies in Asia, and theGrecian islands. Homer mentions Cyprus and Ægypt as the common marketsfor slaves, about the times of the Trojan war. Thus Antinous, offendedwith Ulysses, threatens to send him to one of these places, if he doesnot instantly depart from his table. [025] The same poet also, in hishymn to Bacchus[026], mentions them again, but in a more unequivocalmanner, as the common markets for slaves. He takes occasion, in thathymn, to describe the pirates method of scouring the coast, from thecircumstance of their having kidnapped Bacchus, as a noble youth, forwhom they expected an immense ransom. The captain of the vessel, havingdragged him on board, is represented as addressing himself thus, to thesteersman:

"Haul in the tackle, hoist aloft the sail, Then take your helm, and watch the doubtful gale!To mind the captive prey, be our's the care, While you to _Ægypt_ or to _Cyprus_ steer;There shall he go, unless his friends he'll tell, Whose ransom-gifts will pay us full as well. "

It may not perhaps be considered as a digression, to mention in fewwords, by itself, the wonderful concordance of the writings of Moses andHomer with the case before us: not that the former, from their divineauthority, want additional support, but because it cannot be unpleasantto see them confirmed by a person, who, being one of the earliestwriters, and living in a very remote age, was the first that couldafford us any additional proof of the circumstances above-mentioned. Ægypt is represented, in the first book of the sacred writings, as amarket for slaves, and, in the [027]second, as famous for the severityof its servitude. [028]The same line, which we have already cited fromHomer, conveys to us the same ideas. It points it out as a market forthe human species, and by the epithet of "_bitter_ Ægypt, "([029]which epithet is peculiarly annexed to it on this occasion)alludes in the strongest manner to that severity and rigour, of whichthe sacred historian transmitted us the first account. 

But, to return. Though Ægypt was the first market recorded for thisspecies of traffick; and though Ægypt, and Cyprus afterwards, wereparticularly distinguished for it, in the times of the Trojan war; yetthey were not the only places, even at that period, where men werebought and sold. The Odyssey of Homer shews that it was then practisedin many of the islands of the Ægean sea; and the Iliad, that it hadtaken place among those Grecians on the continent of Europe, who hadembarked from thence on the Trojan expedition. This appears particularlyat the end of the seventh book. A fleet is described there, as havingjust arrived from Lemnos, with a supply of wine for the Grecian camp. The merchants are described also, as immediately exposing it to sale, and as receiving in exchange, among other articles of barter, "_anumber of slaves_. "

It will now be sufficient to observe, that, as other states arose, andas circumstances contributed to make them known, this custom isdiscovered to have existed among them; that it travelled over all Asia;that it spread through the Grecian and Roman world; was in use among thebarbarous nations, which overturned the Roman empire; and was practisedtherefore, at the same period, throughout all Europe. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 025: me tacha pikren Aigypton kai Kypron idnai. Hom. Odyss. L. 17. 448. ]

[Footnote 026: L. 26. ]

[Footnote 027: Exodus. Ch. 1. ]

[Footnote 028: Vide note 1st. (Here shown as footnote 025). ]

[Footnote 029: This strikes us the more forcibly, as it is stiled_eurreiten_ and _perikallea_, "_beautiful and well watered_, "in all other passages where it is mentioned, but this. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. VII. 

This _slavery_ and _commerce_, which had continued for so longa time, and which was thus practised in Europe at so late a period asthat, which succeeded the grand revolutions in the western world, began, as the northern nations were settled in their conquests, to decline, and, on their full establishment, were abolished. A difference ofopinion has arisen respecting the cause of their abolition; some havingasserted, that they were the necessary consequences of the _feudalsystem_; while others, superiour both in number and in argument, havemaintained that they were the natural effects of _Christianity_. The mode of argument, which the former adopt on this occasion, is asfollows. "The multitude of little states, which sprang up from one greatone at this Æra, occasioned infinite bickerings and matter forcontention. There was not a state or seignory, which did not want allthe hands they could muster, either to defend their own right, or todispute that of their neighbours. Thus every man was taken into theservice: whom they armed they must trust: and there could be no trustbut in free men. Thus the barrier between the two natures was throwndown, and _slavery_ was no more heard of, in the _west_. "

That this was not the _necessary_ consequence of such a situation, is apparent. The political state of Greece, in its early history, wasthe same as that of Europe, when divided, by the feudal system, into aninfinite number of small and independent kingdoms. There was the samematter therefore for contention, and the same call for all the handsthat could be mustered: the Grecians, in short, in _heroick_, werein the same situation in these respects as the _feudal barons_ inthe _Gothick_ times. Had this therefore been a _necessary_effect, there had been a cessation of servitude in Greece, in thoseages, in which we have already shewn that it existed. 

But with respect to _Christianity_, many and great are thearguments, that it occasioned so desirable an event. It taught, "thatall men were originally equal; that the Deity was no respecter ofpersons, and that, as all men were to give an account of their actionshereafter, it was necessary that they should be free. " These doctrinescould not fail of having their proper influence on those, who firstembraced _Christianity_, from a _conviction_ of its truth; andon those of their descendents afterwards, who, by engaging in the_crusades_, and hazarding their lives and fortunes there, shewed, at least, an _attachment_ to that religion. We find themaccordingly actuated by these principles: we have a positive proof, thatthe _feudal system_ had no share in the honour of suppressingslavery, but that _Christianity_ was the only cause; for thegreatest part of the _charters_ which were granted for the freedomof slaves in those times (many of which are still extant) were granted, "_pro amore Dei, pro mercede animæ_. " They were founded, in short, on religious considerations, "that they might procure the favour of theDeity, which they conceived themselves to have forfeited, by thesubjugation of those, whom they found to be the objects of the divinebenevolence and attention equally with themselves. "

These considerations, which had thus their first origin in_Christianity_, began to produce their effects, as the differentnations were converted; and procured that general liberty at last, which, at the close of the twelfth century, was conspicuous in the westof Europe. What a glorious and important change! Those, who would havehad otherwise no hopes, but that their miseries would be terminated bydeath, were then freed from their servile condition; those, who, by thelaws of war, would have had otherwise an immediate prospect of servitudefrom the hands of their imperious conquerors, were then_exchanged_; a custom, which has happily descended to the presentday. Thus, "a numerous class of men, who formerly had no politicalexistence, and were employed merely as instruments of labour, becameuseful citizens, and contributed towards augmenting the force or richesof the society, which adopted them as members;" and thus did the greaterpart of the Europeans, by their conduct on this occasion, assert notonly liberty for themselves, but for their fellow-creatures also. 

 * * * * *

CHAP. VIII. 

But if men therefore, at a time when under the influence of religionthey exercised their serious thoughts, abolished slavery, how impiousmust they appear, who revived it; and what arguments will not presentthemselves against their conduct![030] The Portuguese, within twocenturies after its suppression in Europe, in imitation of those_piracies_, which we have shewn to have existed in the _uncivilized_ages of the world, made their descents on Africa, and committingdepredations on the coast, [031] _first_ carried the wretchedinhabitants into slavery. 

This practice, however trifling and partial it might appear at first, soon became serious and general. A melancholy instance of the depravityof human nature; as it shews, that neither the laws nor religion of anycountry, however excellent the forms of each, are sufficient to bind theconsciences of some; but that there are always men, of every age, country, and persuasion, who are ready to sacrifice their dearestprinciples at the shrine of gain. Our own ancestors, together with theSpaniards, French, and most of the maritime powers of Europe, soonfollowed the _piratical_ example; and thus did the Europeans, to theireternal infamy, renew a custom, which their _own_ ancestors had solately exploded, from a _conscientiousness_ of its _impiety_. 

The unfortunate Africans, terrified at these repeated depredations, fledin confusion from the coast, and sought, in the interiour parts of thecountry, a retreat from the persecution of their invaders. But, alas, they were miserably disappointed! There are few retreats, that canescape the penetrating eye of avarice. The Europeans still pursued them;they entered their rivers; sailed up into the heart of the country;surprized the unfortunate Africans again; and carried them into slavery. 

But this conduct, though successful at first, defeated afterwards itsown ends. It created a more general alarm, and pointed out, at the sameinstant, the best method of security from future depredations. The banksof the rivers were accordingly deserted, as the coasts had been before;and thus were the _Christian_ invaders left without a prospect oftheir prey. 

In this situation however, expedients were not wanting. They now formedto themselves the resolution of settling in the country; of securingthemselves by fortified ports; of changing their system of force intothat of pretended liberality; and of opening, by every species ofbribery and corruption, a communication with the natives. These planswere put into immediate execution. The Europeans erected theirforts[032]; landed their merchandize; and endeavoured, by a peaceabledeportment, by presents, and by every appearance of munificence, toseduce the attachment and confidence of the Africans. These schemes hadthe desired effect. The gaudy trappings of European art, not only caughttheir attention, but excited their curiosity: they dazzled the eyes andbewitched the senses, not only of those, to whom they were given, but ofthose, to whom they were shewn. Thus followed a speedy intercourse witheach other, and a confidence, highly favourable to the views of avariceor ambition. 

It was now time for the Europeans to embrace the opportunity, which thisintercourse had thus afforded them, of carrying their schemes intoexecution, and of fixing them on such a permanent foundation, as shouldsecure them future success. They had already discovered, in thedifferent interviews obtained, the chiefs of the African tribes. Theypaid their court therefore to these, and so compleatly intoxicated theirsenses with the luxuries, which they brought from home, as to be able toseduce them to their designs. A treaty of peace and commerce wasimmediately concluded: it was agreed, that the kings, on their part, should, from this period, sentence _prisoners of war_ and _convicts_to _European servitude_; and that the Europeans should supply them, inreturn, with the luxuries of the north. This agreement immediately tookplace; and thus begun that _commerce_, which makes so considerable afigure at the present day. 

But happy had the Africans been, if those only, who had been justlyconvicted of crimes, or taken in a just war, had been sentenced to theseverities of servitude! How many of those miseries, which afterwardsattended them, had been never known; and how would their history havesaved those sighs and emotions of pity, which must now ever accompanyits perusal. The Europeans, on the establishment of their westerncolonies, required a greater number of slaves than a strict adherence tothe treaty could produce. The princes therefore had only the choice ofrelinquishing the commerce, or of consenting to become unjust. They hadlong experienced the emoluments of the trade; they had acquired a tastefor the luxuries it afforded; and they now beheld an opportunity ofgratifying it, but in a more extentive manner. _Avarice_ therefore, which was too powerful for _justice_ on this occasion, immediatelyturned the scale: not only those, who were fairly convicted of offences, were now sentenced to servitude, but even those who were _suspected_. New crimes were invented, that new punishments might succeed. Thus wasevery appearance soon construed into reality; every shadow into asubstance; and often virtue into a crime. 

Such also was the case with respect to prisoners of war. Not only thosewere now delivered into slavery, who were taken in a state of publickenmity and injustice, but those also, who, conscious of no injurywhatever, were taken in the _arbitrary_ skirmishes of these _venal_sovereigns. War was now made, not as formerly, from the motives ofretaliation and defence, but for the sake of obtaining prisoners alone, and the advantages resulting from their sale. If a ship from Europe camebut into sight, it was now considered as a sufficient motive for a war, and as a signal only for an instantaneous commencement of hostilities. 

But if the African kings could be capable of such injustice, what vicesare there, that their consciences would restrain, or what enormities, that we might not expect to be committed? When men once consent to beunjust, they lose, at the same instant with their virtue, a considerableportion of that sense of shame, which, till then, had been found asuccessful protector against the sallies of vice. From that awfulperiod, almost every expectation is forlorn: the heart is leftunguarded: its great protector is no more: the vices therefore, which solong encompassed it in vain, obtain an easy victory: in crouds they pourinto the defenceless avenues, and take possession of the soul: there isnothing now too vile for them to meditate, too impious to perform. Suchwas the situation of the despotick sovereigns of Africa. They had onceventured to pass the bounds of virtue, and they soon proceeded toenormity. This was particularly conspicuous in that general conduct, which they uniformly observed, after any unsuccessful conflict. Influenced only by the venal motives of European traffick, they firstmade war upon the neighbouring tribes, contrary to every principle ofjustice; and if, by the flight of the enemy, or by other contingencies, they were disappointed of their prey, they made no hesitation ofimmediately turning their arms against their own subjects. The firstvillages they came to, were always marked on this occasion, as the firstobjects of their avarice. They were immediately surrounded, wereafterwards set on fire, and the wretched inhabitants seized, as theywere escaping from the flames. These, consisting of whole families, fathers, brothers, husbands, wives, and children, were instantly drivenin chains to the merchants, and consigned to slavery. 

To these calamities, which thus arose from the tyranny of the kings, wemay now subjoin those, which arose from the avarice of private persons. Many were kidnapped by their own countrymen, who, encouraged by themerchants of Europe, previously lay in wait for them, and sold themafterwards for slaves; while the seamen of the different ships, by everypossible artifice, enticed others on board, and transported them to theregions of servitude. 

As these practices are in full force at the present day, it appears thatthere are four orders of _involuntary_ slaves on the Africancontinent; of [033]_convicts_; of _prisoners of war_; ofthose, who are publickly seized by virtue of the _authority_ oftheir prince; and of those, who are privately _kidnapped_ byindividuals. 

It remains only to observe on this head, that in the sale and purchaseof these the African commerce or _Slave Trade_ consists; that theyare delivered to the merchants of Europe in exchange for their variouscommodities; that these transport them to their colonies in the west, where their _slavery_ takes place; and that a fifth order arisesthere, composed of all such as are born to the native Africans, aftertheir transportation and slavery have commenced. 

Having thus explained as much of the history of modern servitude, as issufficient for the prosecution of our design, we should have closed ouraccount here, but that a work, just published, has furnished us with asingular anecdote of the colonists of a neighbouring nation, which wecannot but relate. The learned [034]author, having described the methodwhich the Dutch colonists at the Cape make use of to take the Hottentotsand enslave them, takes occasion, in many subsequent parts of the work, to mention the dreadful effects of the practice of slavery; which, as hejustly remarks, "leads to all manner of misdemeanours and wickedness. Pregnant women, " says he, "and children in their tenderest years, werenot at this time, neither indeed are they ever, exempt from the effectsof the hatred and spirit of vengeance constantly harboured by thecolonists, with respect to the [035]Boshies-man nation; _excepting suchindeed as are marked out to be carried away into bondage_. 

"Does a colonist at any time get sight of a Boshies-man, he takes fireimmediately, and spirits up his horse and dogs, in order to hunt himwith more ardour and fury than he would a wolf, or any other wild beast?On an open plain, a few colonists on horseback are always sure to getthe better of the greatest number of Boshies-men that can be broughttogether; as the former always keep at the distance of about an hundred, or an hundred and fifty paces (just as they find it convenient) andcharging their heavy fire-arms with a very large kind of shot, jump offtheir horses, and rest their pieces in their usual manner on theirramrods, in order that they may shoot with the greater certainty; sothat the balls discharged by them will sometimes, as I have beenassured, go through the bodies of six, seven, or eight of the enemy at atime, especially as these latter know no better than to keep closetogether in a body. "--

"And not only is the capture of the Hottentots considered by them merelyas a party of pleasure, but in cold blood they destroy the bands whichnature has knit between their husbands, and their wives and children, &c. "

With what horrour do these passages seem to strike us! What indignationdo they seem to raise in our breasts, when we reflect, that a part ofthe human species are considered as _game_, and that _parties ofpleasure_ are made for their _destruction_! The lion does notimbrue his claws in blood, unless called upon by hunger, or provoked byinterruption; whereas the merciless Dutch, more savage than the brutesthemselves, not only murder their fellow-creatures without anyprovocation or necessity, but even make a diversion of their sufferings, and enjoy their pain. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 030: The following short history of the African servitude, istaken from Astley's Collection of Voyages, and from the unitedtestimonies of Smyth, Adanson, Bosman, Moore, and others, who wereagents to the different factories established there; who resided manyyears in the country; and published their respective histories at theirreturn. These writers, if they are partial at all, may be considered asfavourable rather to their own countrymen, than the unfortunateAfricans. ]

[Footnote 031: We would not wish to be understood, that slavery wasunknown in Africa before the _piratical_ expeditions of the_Portuguese_, as it appears from the _Nubian's Geography_, that both the slavery and commerce had been established among thenatives with one another. We mean only to assert, that the_Portuguese_ were the first of the _Europeans_, who made their_piratical_ expeditions, and shewed the way to that _slavery_, which now makes so disgraceful a figure in the western colonies of the_Europeans_. In the term "Europeans, " wherever it shall occur inthe remaining part of this first dissertation, we include the_Portuguese_, and _those nations only_, who followed theirexample. ]

[Footnote 032: The _Portuguese_ erected their first fort at_D'Elmina_, in the year 1481, about forty years after AlonzoGonzales had pointed the Southern Africans out to his countrymenas articles of commerce. ]

[Footnote 033: In the ancient servitude, we reckoned _convicts_among the _voluntary_ slaves, because they had it in their power, by a virtuous conduct, to have avoided so melancholy a situation; in the_African_, we include them in the _involuntary_, because, asvirtues are frequently construed into crimes, from the venal motives ofthe traffick, no person whatever possesses such a _power_ or_choice_. ]

[Footnote 034: Andrew Sparrman, M. D. Professor of Physick at Stockholm, fellow of the Royal Academy of Sciences in Sweden, and inspector of itscabinet of natural history, whose voyage was translated into English, and published in 1785. ]

[Footnote 035: Boshies-man, or _wild Hottentot_. ]

 * * * * *

End of the First Part. 

 * * * * *

PART II. 

THE AFRICAN COMMERCE, OR

SLAVE TRADE. 

 * * * * *

CHAP. I. 

As we explained the History of Slavery in the first part of this Essay, as far as it was necessary for our purpose, we shall now take thequestion into consideration, which we proposed at first as the subjectof our inquiry, viz. How far the commerce and slavery of the humanspecies, as revived by some of the nations of Europe in the persons ofthe unfortunate Africans, and as revived, in a great measure, on theprinciples of antiquity, are consistent with the laws of nature, or thecommon notions of equity, as established among men. 

This question resolves itself into two separate parts for discussion, into _the African commerce (as explained in the history ofslavery)_ and _the subsequent slavery in the colonies, as foundedon the equity of the commerce_. The former, of course, will be firstexamined. For this purpose we shall inquire into the rise, nature, anddesign of government. Such an inquiry will be particularly useful in thepresent place; it will afford us that general knowledge of subordinationand liberty, which is necessary in the case before us, and will befound, as it were, a source, to which we may frequently refer for manyand valuable arguments. 

It appears that mankind were originally free, and that they possessed anequal right to the soil and produce of the earth. For proof of this, weneed only appeal to the _divine_ writings; to the _golden age_of the poets, which, like other fables of the times, had its origin intruth; and to the institution of the _Saturnalia_, and of othersimilar festivals; all of which are so many monuments of this originalequality of men. Hence then there was no rank, no distinction, nosuperiour. Every man wandered where he chose, changing his residence, asa spot attracted his fancy, or suited his convenience, uncontrouled byhis neighbour, unconnected with any but his family. Hence also (as everything was common) he collected what he chose without injury, and enjoyedwithout injury what he had collected. Such was the first situation ofmankind; [036]a state of _dissociation_ and _independence_. 

In this dissociated state it is impossible that men could have longcontinued. The dangers to which they must have frequently been exposed, by the attacks of fierce and rapacious beasts, by the proedatoryattempts of their own species, and by the disputes of contiguous andindependent families; these, together with their inability to defend, themselves, on many such occasions, must have incited them to unite. Hence then was _society_ formed on the grand principles ofpreservation and defence: and as these principles began to operate, inthe different parts of the earth, where the different families hadroamed, a great number of these _societies_ began to be formed andestablished; which, taking to themselves particular names fromparticular occurrences, began to be perfectly distinct from one another. 

As the individuals, of whom these societies were composed, hadassociated only for their defence, so they experienced, at first, nochange in their condition. They were still independent and free; theywere still without discipline or laws; they had every thing still incommon; they pursued the same, manner of life; wandering only, in_herds_, as the earth gave them or refused them sustenance, anddoing, as a _publick body_, what they had been accustomed to do as_individuals_ before. This was the exact situation of the Getæ andScythians[037], of the Lybians and Goetulians[038], of the ItalianAborigines[039], and of the Huns and Alans[040]. They had left theiroriginal state of _dissociation_, and had stepped into that, whichhas been just described. Thus was the second situation of men a state of_independent society_. 

Having thus joined themselves together, and having formed themselvesinto several large and distinct bodies, they could not fail ofsubmitting soon to a more considerable change. Their numbers must haverapidly increased, and their societies, in process of time, have becomeso populous, as frequently to have experienced the want of subsistence, and many of the commotions and tumults of intestine strife. For theseinconveniences however there were remedies to be found. _Agriculture_ would furnish them with that subsistence and support, which the earth, from the rapid increase of its inhabitants, had becomeunable spontaneously to produce. An _assignation_ of _property_would not only enforce an application, but excite an emulation, to labour; and _government_ would at once afford a securityto the acquisitions of the industrious, and heal the intestinedisorders of the community, by the introduction of laws. 

Such then were the remedies, that were gradually applied. The_societies_, which had hitherto seen their members, undistinguishedeither by authority or rank, admitted now of magistratical pre-eminence. They were divided into tribes; to every tribe was allotted a particulardistrict for its support, and to every individual his particular spot. The Germans[041], who consisted of many and various nations, wereexactly in this situation. They had advanced a step beyond theScythians, Goetulians, and those, whom we described before; and thus wasthe third situation of mankind a state of _subordinate society_. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 036: This conclusion concerning the dissociated state ofmankind, is confirmed by all the early writers, with whose descriptionsof primitive times no other conclusion is reconcileable. ]

[Footnote 037: Justin. L. 2. C. 2. ]

[Footnote 038: Sallust. Bell. Jug. ]

[Footnote 039: Sallust. Bell. Catil. ]

[Footnote 040: Ammianus Marcellinus. L. 31. C. 2. Et. Inseq. ]

[Footnote 041: Agri pro Numero Cultorum ab universis per vicosoccupantur, quos mox inter se secundum dignationem partiuntur. Tacitus. C. 26. De Mor. Germ. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. II. 

As we have thus traced the situation of man from unbounded liberty tosubordination, it will be proper to carry our inquiries farther, and toconsider, who first obtained the pre-eminence in these _primoevalsocieties_, and by what particular methods it was obtained. 

There were only two ways, by which such an event could have beenproduced, by _compulsion_ or _consent_. When mankind first sawthe necessity of government, it is probable that many had conceived thedesire of ruling. To be placed in a new situation, to be taken from thecommon herd, to be the first, distinguished among men, were thoughts, that must have had their charms. Let us suppose then, that thesethoughts had worked so unusually on the passions of any particularindividual, as to have driven him to the extravagant design of obtainingthe preeminence by force. How could his design have been accomplished?How could he forcibly have usurped the jurisdiction at a time, when, allbeing equally free, there was not a single person, whose assistance hecould command? Add to this, that, in a state of universal liberty, forcehad been repaid by force, and the attempt had been fatal to the usurper. 

As _empire_ then could never have been gained at first by_compulsion_, so it could only have been obtained by _consent_;and as men were then going to make an important sacrifice, for the sake of their _mutual_ happiness, so he alone couldhave obtained it, (not whose _ambition_ had greatly distinguishedhim from the rest) but in whose _wisdom, justice, prudence_, and _virtue_, the whole community could confide. 

To confirm this reasoning, we shall appeal, as before, to facts; andshall consult therefore the history of those nations, which having justleft their former state of _independent society_, were the verypeople that established _subordination_ and _government_. 

The commentaries of Cæsar afford us the following accounts of theancient Gauls. When any of their kings, either by death, or deposition, made a vacancy in the regal office, the whole nation was immediatelyconvened for the appointment of a successor. In these nationalconventions were the regal offices conferred. Every individual had avoice on the occasion, and every individual was free. The person uponwhom the general approbation appeared to fall, was immediately advancedto pre-eminence in the state. He was uniformly one, whose actions hadmade him eminent; whose conduct had gained him previous applause; whosevalour the very assembly, that elected him, had themselves witnessed inthe field; whose prudence, wisdom and justice, having rendered himsignally serviceable, had endeared him to his tribe. For this reason, their kingdoms were not hereditary; the son did not always inherit thevirtues of the sire; and they were determined that he alone shouldpossess authority, in whose virtues they could confide. Nor was thisall. So sensible were they of the important sacrifice they had made; soextremely jealous even of the name of superiority and power, that theylimited, by a variety of laws, the authority of the very person, whomthey had just elected, from a confidence of his integrity; Ambiorixhimself confessing, "that his people had as much power over him, as hecould possibly have over his people. "

The same custom, as appears from Tacitus, prevailed also among theGermans. They had their national councils, like the Gauls; in which theregal and ducal offices were confirmed according to the majority ofvoices. They elected also, on these occasions, those only, whom theirvirtue, by repeated trial, had unequivocally distinguished from therest; and they limited their authority so far, as neither to leave themthe power of inflicting imprisonment or stripes, nor of exercising anypenal jurisdiction. But as punishment was necessary in a state of civilsociety, "it was permitted to the priests alone, that it might appear tohave been inflicted, by the order of the gods, and not by any superiourauthority in man. "

The accounts which we have thus given of the ancient Germans and Gauls, will be found also to be equally true of those people, which had arrivedat the same state of subordinate society. We might appeal, for atestimony of this, to the history of the Goths; to the history of theFranks and Saxons; to, the history, in short, of all those nations, fromwhich the different governments, now conspicuous in Europe, haveundeniably sprung. And we might appeal, as a farther proof, to theAmericans, who are represented by many of the moderns, from their ownocular testimony, as observing the same customs at the present day. 

It remains only to observe, that as these customs prevailed among thedifferent nations described, in their early state of subordinatesociety, and as they were moreover the customs of their respectiveancestors, it appears that they must have been handed down, both bytradition and use, from the first introduction of _government_. 

 * * * * *

CHAP. III. 

We may now deduce those general maxims concerning _subordination_, and _liberty_, which we mentioned to have been essentiallyconnected with the subject, and which some, from speculation only, andwithout any allusion to facts, have been bold enough to deny. 

It appears first, that _liberty_ is a _natural_, and_government_ an _adventitious_ right, because all men wereoriginally free. 

It appears secondly, that government is a [042]_contract_ because, in these primeval subordinate societies, we have seen it voluntarilyconferred on the one hand, and accepted on the other. We have seen itsubject to various restrictions. We have seen its articles, which couldthen only be written by tradition and use, as perfect and binding asthose, which are now committed to letters. We have seen it, in short, partaking of the _federal_ nature, as much as it could in a state, which wanted the means of recording its transactions. 

It appear thirdly, that the grand object of the _contrast_, is the_happiness_ of the people; because they gave the supremacy to himalone, who had been conspicuous for the splendour of his abilities, orthe integrity of his life: that the power of the multitude beingdirected by the _wisdom_ and _justice_ of the prince, theymight experience the most effectual protection from injury, the highestadvantages of society, the greatest possible _happiness_. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 042: The author has lately read a work, intitled Paley's Moraland Political Philosophy, which, in this one respect, favours thosewhich have been hinted at, as it denies that government was a contract. "No social compact was ever made in fact, "--"it is to suppose itpossible to call savages out of caves and deserts, to deliberate upontopicks, which the experience and studies, and the refinements of civillife alone suggest. Therefore no government in the universe begun fromthis original. " But there are no grounds for so absurd a supposition;for government, and of course the social compact, does not appear tohave been introduced at the time, when families coming out of theircaves and deserts, or, in other words, quitting their former_dissociated_ state, joined themselves together. They had lived aconsiderable time in _society_, like the Lybians and Gætuliansbefore-mentioned, and had felt many of the disadvantages of a want ofdiscipline and laws, before government was introduced at all. The authorof this Essay, before he took into consideration the origin ofgovernment, was determined, in a matter of such importance, to bebiassed by no opinion whatever, and much less to indulge himself inspeculation. He was determined solely to adhere to fact, and, by lookinginto the accounts left us of those governments which were in theirinfancy, and, of course in the least complicated state, to attempt todiscover their foundation: he cannot say therefore, that upon a veryminute perusal of the excellent work before quoted, he has been so farconvinced, as to retract in the least from his sentiments on this head, and to give up maxims, which are drawn from historical facts, for those, which are the result of speculation. He may observe here, that whethergovernment was a _contract_ or not, it will not affect thereasoning of the present Essay; since where ever the contract isafterwards mentioned, it is inferred only that its object was "the_happiness of the people_, " which is confessedly the end ofgovernment. Notwithstanding this, he is under the necessity of insertingthis little note, though he almost feels himself ungrateful incontradicting a work, which has afforded him so much entertainment. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. IV. 

Having now collected the materials that are necessary for theprosecution of our design, we shall immediately enter upon thediscussion. 

If any man had originally been endued with power, as with otherfaculties, so that the rest of mankind had discovered in themselves an_innate necessity_ of obeying this particular person; it is evidentthat he and his descendants, from the superiority of their nature, wouldhave had a claim upon men for obedience, and a natural right to command:but as the right to empire is _adventitious_; as all wereoriginally free; as nature made every man's body and mind _hisown_; it is evident that no just man can be consigned to_slavery_, without his own _consent_. 

Neither can men, by the same principles, be considered as lands, goods, or houses, among _possessions_. It is necessary that all_property_ should be inferiour to its _possessor_. But howdoes the _slave_ differ from his _master_, but by _chance_?For though the mark, with which the latter is pleased tobrand him, shews, at the first sight, the difference of their_fortune_; what mark can be found in his _nature_, that canwarrant a distinction?

To this consideration we shall add the following, that if men can justlybecome the property of each other, their children, like the offspring ofcattle, must inherit their _paternal_ lot. Now, as the actions ofthe father and the child must be thus at the sole disposal of theircommon master, it is evident, that the _authority_ of the one, as a_parent_, and the _duty_ of the other, as a _child_, mustbe instantly annihilated; rights and obligations, which, as they aresounded in nature, are implanted in our feelings, and are established bythe voice of God, must contain in their annihilation a solid argument toprove, that there cannot be any _property_ whatever in the _humanspecies_. 

We may consider also, as a farther confirmation, that it is impossible, in the nature of things, that _liberty_ can be _bought_ or_sold_! It is neither _saleable_, nor _purchasable_. Forif any one man can have an absolute property in the liberty of another, or, in other words, if he, who is called a _master_, can have a_just_ right to command the actions of him, who is called a_slave_, it is evident that the latter cannot be accountable forthose crimes, which the former may order him to commit. Now as everyreasonable being is accountable for his actions, it is evident, thatsuch a right cannot _justly_ exist, and that human liberty, ofcourse, is beyond the possibility either of _sale_ or _purchase_. Add to this, that, whenever you sell the liberty of a man, you have the power only of alluding to the _body_: the _mind_cannot be confined or bound: it will be free, though itsmansion be beset with chains. But if, in every sale of the _humanspecies_, you are under the necessity of considering your slave inthis abstracted light; of alluding only to the body, and of making noallusion to the mind; you are under the necessity also of treating him, in the same moment, as a _brute_, and of abusing therefore thatnature, which cannot otherwise be considered, than in the doublecapacity of _soul_ and _body_. 

But some person, perhaps, will make an objection to one of the formerarguments. "If men, from _superiority_ of their nature, cannot beconsidered, like lands, goods, or houses, among possessions, so neithercan cattle: for being endued with life, motion, and sensibility, theyare evidently _superiour_ to these. " But this objection willreceive its answer from those observations which have been already made;and will discover the true reason, why cattle are justly to be estimatedas property. For first, the right to empire over brutes, is_natural_, and not _adventitious_, like the right to empireover men. There are, secondly, many and evident signs of the_inferiority_ of their nature; and thirdly, their liberty can bebought and sold, because, being void of reason, they cannot be_accountable_ for their actions. 

We might stop here for a considerable time, and deduce many valuablelessons from the remarks that have been made, but that such acircumstance might be considered as a digression. There is one, however, which, as it is so intimately connected with the subject, we cannot butdeduce. We are taught to treat men in a different manner from brutes, because they are so manifestly superiour in their nature; we are taughtto treat brutes in a different manner from stones, for the same reason;and thus, by giving to every created thing its due respect, to answerthe views of Providence, which did not create a variety of natureswithout a purpose or design. 

But if these things are so, how evidently against reason, nature, andevery thing human and divine, must they act, who not only force men into_slavery_, against their own _consent_; but treat them altogetheras _brutes_, and make the _natural liberty_ of man an articleof publick commerce! and by what arguments can they possiblydefend that commerce, which cannot be carried on, in any singleinstance, without a flagrant violation of the laws of nature and of God?

 * * * * *

CHAP. V. 

That we may the more accurately examine the arguments that are advancedon this occasion, it will be proper to divide the _commerce_ intotwo parts; first, as it relates to those who _sell_, and secondly, as it relates to those who _purchase_, the _human species_into slavery. To the former part of which, having given every previousand necessary information in the history of servitude, we shallimmediately proceed. 

Let us inquire first, by what particular right the _liberties_ ofthe harmless people are invaded by the _prince_. "By the _rightof empire_, " it will be answered; "because he possesses dominion andpower by their own approbation and consent. " But subjects, though underthe dominion, are not the _property_, of the prince. They cannot beconsidered as his _possessions_. Their _natures_ are both thesame; they are both born in the same manner; are subject to the samedisorders; must apply to the same remedies for a cure; are equallypartakers of the grave: an _incidental_ distinction accompaniesthem through life, and this--is all. 

We may add to this, that though the prince possesses dominion and power, by the consent and approbation of his subjects, he possesses it only forthe most _salutary_ ends. He may tyrannize, if he can: he may alterthe _form_ of his government: he cannot, however, alter its_nature_ and _end_. These will be immutably the same, thoughthe whole system of its administration should be changed; and he will bestill bound to _defend_ the lives and properties of his subjects, and to make them _happy_. 

Does he defend those therefore, whom he invades at discretion with thesword? Does he protect the property of those, whose houses and effectshe consigns at discretion to the flames? Does he make those happy, whomhe seizes, as they are trying to escape the general devastation, andcompels with their wives and families to a wretched _servitude?_ Heacts surely, as if the use of empire consisted in violence andoppression; as if he, that was most exalted, ought, of necessity, to bemost unjust. Here then the voice of _nature_ and _justice_ isagainst him. He breaks that law of _nature_, which ordains, "that nojust man shall be given into slavery, against his own _consent_:"he violates the first law of _justice_, as established among men, "that no person shall do harm to another without a previous andsufficient _provocation_;" and he violates also the sacredcondition of _empire_, made with his ancestors, and necessarilyunderstood in every species of government, "that, the power of themultitude being given up to the wisdom and justice of the prince, theymay experience, in return, the most effectual protection from injury, the highest advantages of society, the greatest possible_happiness_. "

But if kings then, to whom their own people have granted dominion andpower, are unable to invade the liberties of their harmless subjects, without the highest _injustice_; how can those private persons bejustified, who treacherously lie in wait for their fellow-creatures, andsell them into slavery? What arguments can they possibly bring intheir defence? What treaty of empire can they produce, by which theirinnocent victims ever resigned to them the least portion of their_liberty_? In vain will they plead the _antiquity_ of thecustom: in vain will the _honourable_ light, in which _piracy_was considered in the ages of barbarism, afford them an excuse. Impiousand abandoned men! ye invade the liberties of those, who, (with respectto your impious selves) are in a state of _nature_, in a state oforiginal _dissociation_, perfectly _independent_, perfectly_free_. 

It appears then, that the two orders of slaves, which have beenmentioned in the history of the African servitude, "of those who arepublickly seized by virtue of the authority of their prince; and ofthose, who are privately kidnapped by individuals, " are collected bymeans of violence and oppression; by means, repugnant to _nature_, the principles of _government_, and the common notions of_equity_, as established among men. 

 * * * * *

CHAP. VI. 

We come now to the third order of _involuntary_ slaves, "toconvicts. " The only argument that the sellers advance here, is this, "that they have been found guilty of offences, and that the punishmentis just. " But before the equity of the sentence can be allowed twoquestions must be decided, whether the punishment is _proportioned_to the offence, and what is its particular _object_ and _end_?

To decide the first, we may previously observe, that the Africanservitude comprehends _banishment_, a _deprivation_ of _liberty_, and many _corporal_ sufferings. 

On _banishment_, the following observations will suffice. Mankindhave their _local_ attachments. They have a particular regard forthe spot, in which they were born and nurtured. Here it was, that theyfirst drew their infant-breath: here, that they were cherished andsupported: here, that they passed those scenes of childhood, which, freefrom care and anxiety, are the happiest in the life of man; scenes, which accompany them through life; which throw themselves frequentlyinto their thoughts, and produce the most agreeable sensations. Thesethen are weighty considerations; and how great this regard is, may beevidenced from our own feelings; from the testimony of some, who, whenremote from their country, and, in the hour of danger and distress, havefound their thoughts unusually directed, by some impulse or other, totheir native spot; and from the example of others, who, having bravedthe storms and adversities of life, either repair to it for theremainder of their days, or desire even to be conveyed to it, whenexistence is no more. 

But separately from these their _local_, they have also their_personal_ attachments; their regard for particular men. There areties of blood; there are ties of friendship. In the former case, theymust of necessity be attached: the constitution of their nature demandsit. In the latter, it is impossible to be otherwise, since friendship isfounded on an harmony of temper, on a concordance of sentiments andmanners, on habits of confidence, and a mutual exchange of favours. 

We may now mention, as perfectly distinct both from their _local_and_ personal_, the _national_ attachments of mankind, theirregard for the whole body of the people, among whom they were born andeducated. This regard is particularly conspicuous in the conduct ofsuch, as, being thus _nationally_ connected, reside in foreignparts. How anxiously do they meet together! how much do they enjoy thefight of others of their countrymen, whom fortune places in their way!what an eagerness do they show to serve them, though not born on thesame particular spot, though not connected by consanguinity orfriendship, though unknown to them before! Neither is this affectionwonderful, since they are creatures of the same education; of the sameprinciples; of the same manners and habits; cast, as it were, in thesame mould; and marked with the same impression. 

If men therefore are thus separately attached to the several objectsdescribed, it is evident that a separate exclusion from either mustafford them considerable pain. What then must be their sufferings, to beforced for ever from their country, which includes them all? Whichcontains the _spot_, in which they were born and nurtured; whichcontains their _relations_ and _friends_; which contains thewhole body of the _people_, among whom they were bred and educated. In these sufferings, which arise to men, both in bidding, and in havingbid, adieu to all that they esteem as dear and valuable, _banishment_ consists in part; and we may agree therefore with theancients, without adding other melancholy circumstances to the account, that it is no inconsiderable punishment of itself. 

With respect to the _loss_ of _liberty_, which is the secondconsideration in the punishment, it is evident that men bear nothingworse; that there is nothing, that they lay more at heart; and that theyhave shewn, by many and memorable instances, that even death is to bepreferred. How many could be named here, who, having suffered the_loss_ of _liberty_, have put a period to their existence! Howmany, that have willingly undergone the hazard of their lives to destroya tyrant! How many, that have even gloried to perish in the attempt! Howmany bloody and publick wars have been undertaken (not to mention thenumerous _servile_ insurrections, with which history is stained)for the cause of _freedom_!

But if nothing is dearer than _liberty_ to men, with which, thebarren rock is able to afford its joys, and without which, the gloriousfun shines upon them but in vain, and all the sweets and delicacies oflife are tasteless and unenjoyed; what punishment can be more severethan the loss of so great a blessing? But if to this _deprivation_of _liberty_, we add the agonizing pangs of _banishment_; andif to the complicated stings of both, we add the incessant _stripes, wounds_, and _miseries_, which are undergone by those, who aresold into this horrid _servitude_; what crime can we possiblyimagine to be so enormous, as to be worthy of so great a punishment?

How contrary then to reason, justice, and nature, must those act, whoapply this, the severest of human punishments, to the most insignificantoffence! yet such is the custom with the Africans: for, from the time, in which the Europeans first intoxicated the African princes with theirforeign draughts, no crime has been committed, no shadow of a crimedevised, that has not immediately been punished with _servitude_. 

But for what purpose is the punishment applied? Is it applied to amendthe manners of the criminal, and thus render him a better subject? No, for if you banish him, he can no longer be a subject, and you can nolonger therefore be solicitous for his morals. Add to this, that if youbanish him to a place, where he is to experience the hardships of wantand hunger (so powerfully does hunger compel men to the perpetration ofcrimes) you force him rather to corrupt, than amend his manners, and tobe wicked, when he might otherwise be just. 

Is it applied then, that others may be deterred from the sameproceedings, and that crimes may become less frequent? No, but that_avarice_ may be gratified; that the prince may experience theemoluments of the sale: for, horrid and melancholy thought! the morecrimes his subjects commit, the richer is he made; the more_abandoned_ the subject, the _happier_ is the prince!

Neither can we allow that the punishment thus applied, tends in anydegree to answer _publick happiness_; for if men can be sentencedto slavery, right or wrong; if shadows can be turned into substances, and virtues into crimes; it is evident that none can be happy, becausenone can be secure. 

But if the punishment is infinitely greater than the offence, (which hasbeen shewn before) and if it is inflicted, neither to amend thecriminal, nor to deter others from the same proceedings, nor to advance, in any degree, the happiness of the publick, it is scarce necessary toobserve, that it is totally unjust, since it is repugnant to_reason_, the dictates of _nature_, and the very principles of_government_. 

 * * * * *

CHAP. VII. 

We come now to the fourth and last order of slaves, to _prisoners ofwar_. As the _sellers_ lay a particular stress on this order ofmen, and infer much, from its _antiquity_, in support of thejustice of their cause, we shall examine the principle, on which itsubsisted among the ancients. But as this principle was the same amongall nations, and as a citation from many of their histories would not beless tedious than unnecessary, we shall select the example of the Romansfor the consideration of the case. 

The law, by which prisoners of war were said to be sentenced toservitude, was the _law of nations_[043]. It was so called from theuniversal concurrence of nations in the custom. It had two points inview, the _persons_ of the _captured_, and their _effects_; bothof which it immediately sentenced, without any of the usualforms of law, to be the property of the _captors_. 

The principle, on which the law was established, was the _right ofcapture_. When any of the contending parties had overcome theiropponents, and were about to destroy them, the right was considered tocommence; a right, which the victors conceived themselves to have, torecall their swords, and, from the consideration of having saved thelives of the vanquished, when they could have taken them by the laws ofwar, to commute _blood_ for _service_. Hence the Roman lawyer, Pomponius, deduces the etymology of _slave_ in the Roman language. "They were called _servi_[044], says he, from the followingcircumstance. It was usual with our commanders to take them prisoners, and sell them: now this circumstance implies, that they must have beenpreviously _preserved_, and hence the name. " Such then was the_right of capture_. It was a right, which the circumstance of_taking_ the vanquished, that is, of _preserving_ them alive, gave the conquerors to their persons. By this right, as always includingthe idea of a previous preservation from death, the vanquished were said_to be slaves_[045]; and, "as all slaves, " says Justinian, "arethemselves in the power of others, and of course can have nothing oftheir own, so their effects followed the condition of their persons, andbecame the property of the captors. "

To examine this right, by which the vanquished were said to be slaves, we shall use the words of a celebrated Roman author, and apply them tothe present case[046]. "If it is lawful, " says he, "to deprive a man ofhis life, it is certainly not inconsistent with nature to rob him;" torob him of his liberty. We admit the conclusion to be just, if thesupposition be the same: we allow, if men have a right to commit that, which is considered as a greater crime, that they have a right, at thesame instant, to commit that, which is considered as a less. But whatshall we say to the _hypothesis_? We deny it to be true. The voiceof nature is against it. It is not lawful to kill, but on_necessity_. Had there been a necessity, where had the wretchedcaptive survived to be broken with chains and servitude? The very act ofsaving his life is an argument to prove, that no such necessity existed. The _conclusion_ is therefore false. The captors had no right tothe _lives_ of the captured, and of course none to their_liberty_: they had no right to their _blood_, and of coursenone to their _service_. Their right therefore had no foundation injustice. It was founded on a principle, contrary to the law of nature, and of course contrary to that law, which people, under differentgovernments, are bound to observe to one another. 

It is scarce necessary to observe, as a farther testimony of theinjustice of the measure, that the Europeans, after the introduction ofChristianity, exploded this principle of the ancients, as frivolous andfalse; that they spared the lives of the vanquished, not from the sordidmotives of _avarice_, but from a conscientiousness, that homicidecould only be justified by _necessity_; that they introduced an_exchange_ of prisoners, and, by many and wise regulations, deprived war of many of its former horrours. 

But the advocates for slavery, unable to defend themselves against thesearguments, have fled to other resources, and, ignorant of history, havedenied that the _right of capture_ was the true principle, on whichslavery subsisted among the ancients. They reason thus. "The learnedGrotius, and others, have considered slavery as the just consequence ofa private war, (supposing the war to be just and the opponents in astate of nature), upon the principles of _reparation_ and_punishment_. Now as the law of nature, which is the rule ofconduct to individuals in such a situation, is applicable to members ofa different community, there is reason to presume, that these principleswere applied by the ancients to their prisoners of war; that their_effects_ were confiscated by the right of _reparation_, andtheir _persons_ by the right of _punishment_. "--

But, such a presumption is false. The _right of capture_ was theonly argument, that the ancients adduced in their defence. HencePolybius; "What must they, (the Mantinenses) suffer, to receive thepunishment they deserve? Perhaps it will be said, _that they must besold, when they are taken, with their wives and children intoslavery_: But this is not to be considered as a punishment, sinceeven those suffer it, by the laws of war, who have done nothing that isbase. " The truth is, that both the _offending_ and the _offended_parties, whenever they were victorious, inflicted slaveryalike. But if the _offending_ party inflicted slavery onthe persons of the vanquished, by what right did they inflict it? Itmust be answered from the presumption before-mentioned, "by the right of_reparation_, or of _punishment:_" an answer plainly absurdand contradictory, as it supposes the _aggressor_ to have a_right_, which the _injured_ only could possess. 

Neither is the argument less fallacious than the presumption, inapplying these principles, which in a _publick_ war could belong tothe _publick_ only, to the persons of the _individuals_ thatwere taken. This calls us again to the history of the ancients, and, asthe rights of reparation and punishment could extend to those only, whohad been injured, to select a particular instance for the considerationof the case. 

As the Romans had been injured without a previous provocation by theconduct of Hannibal at Saguntum, we may take the treaty intoconsideration, which they made with the Carthaginians, when the latter, defeated at Zama, sued for peace. It consisted of three articles[047]. By the first, the Carthaginians were to be free, and to enjoy their ownconstitution and laws. By the second, they were to pay a considerablesum of money, as a reparation for the damages and expence of war: and, by the third, they were to deliver up their elephants and ships of war, and to be subject to various restrictions, as a punishment. With theseterms they complied, and the war was finished. 

Thus then did the Romans make that distinction between _private_and _publick_ war, which was necessary to be made, and which theargument is fallacious in not supposing. The treasury of the vanquishedwas marked as the means of _reparation_; and as this treasury wassupplied, in a great measure, by the imposition of taxes, and was, wholly, the property of the _publick_, so the _publick_ madethe reparation that was due. The _elephants_ also, and _ships ofwar_, which were marked as the means of _punishment_, were_publick_ property; and as they were considerable instruments ofsecurity and defence to their possessors, and of annoyance to an enemy, so their loss, added to the restrictions of the treaty, operated as agreat and _publick_ punishment. But with respect to theCarthaginian prisoners, who had been taken in the war, they wereretained in _servitude:_ not upon the principles of _reparation_and _punishment_, because the Romans had already received, by their own confession in the treaty, a sufficient satisfaction:not upon these principles, because they were inapplicableto _individuals:_ the legionary soldier in the service of theinjured, who took his prisoner, was not the person, to whom the_injury had been done_, any more than the soldier in the service ofthe aggressors, who was taken, was the person, who had _committed theoffence:_ but they were retained in servitude by the _right ofcapture_; because, when both parties had sent their military into thefield to determine the dispute, it was at the _private_ choice ofthe legionary soldier before-mentioned, whether he would spare the lifeof his conquered opponent, when he was thought to be entitled to takeit, if he had chosen, by the laws of war. 

To produce more instances, as an illustration of the subject, or to gofarther into the argument, would be to trespass upon the patience, aswell as understanding of the reader. In _a state of nature_, wherea man is supposed to commit an injury, and to be unconnected with therest of the world, the act is _private_, and the right, which theinjured acquires, can extend only to _himself:_ but in _a stateof society_, where any member or members of a particular communitygive offence to those of another, and they are patronized by the state, to which they belong, the case is altered; the act becomes immediately_publick_, and the _publick_ alone are to experience theconsequences of their injustice. For as no particular member of thecommunity, if considered as an individual, is guilty, except the person, by whom the injury was done, it would be contrary to reason and justice, to apply the principles of _reparation_ and _punishment_, which belong to the people as a collective body, to any individual ofthe community, who should happen to be taken. Now, as the principles of_reparation_ and _punishment_ are thus inapplicable to theprisoners, taken in a _publick_ war, and as the _right ofcapture_, as we have shewn before, is insufficient to intitle thevictors to the _service_ of the vanquished, it is evident that_slavery_ cannot justly exist at all, since there are no othermaxims, on which it can be founded, even in the most equitable wars. 

But if these things are so; if slavery cannot be defended even in themost _equitable_ wars, what arguments will not be found againstthat servitude, which arises from those, that are _unjust?_ Whicharises from those African wars, that relate to the present subject? TheAfrican princes, corrupted by the merchants of Europe, seek everyopportunity of quarrelling with one another. Every spark is blown into aflame; and war is undertaken from no other consideration, than that_of procuring slaves:_ while the Europeans, on the other hand, happy in the quarrels which they have thus excited, supply them witharms and ammunition for the accomplishment of their horrid purpose. Thushas Africa, for the space of two hundred years, been the scene of themost iniquitous and bloody wars; and thus have many thousands of men, inthe most iniquitous manner, been sent into servitude. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 043: _Jure Gentium_ servi nostri sunt, qui ab hostibuscapiuntur. Justinian, L. 1. 5. 5. 1. ]

[Footnote 044: _Serverum_ appellatio ex eo fluxit, quod imperatoresnostri captivos vendere, ac per hoc _servare_, nec occideresolent. ]

[Footnote 045: Nam sive victoribus _jure captivitatis_ servissent, &c. Justin, L. 4. 3. Et passim apud scriptores antiquos. ]

[Footnote 046: Neque est contra naturam spoliare eum, si possis, quemhonestum est necare. Cicero de officiis. L. 3. 6. ]

[Footnote 047: 1. Ut liberi suis legibus viverent. Livy, L. 30. 37. 2. Decem millia talentum argenti descripta pensionibus æquis in annosquinquaginta solverent. Ibid. 3. Et naves rostratas, præter decemtriremes, traderent, elephantosque, quos haberent domitos; nequedomarent alios; Bellum neve in Africa, neve extra Africam, injussu P. R. Gererent, &c. Ibid. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. VIII. 

We shall beg leave, before we proceed to the arguments of the_purchasers_, to add the following observations to the substance ofthe three preceding chapters. 

As the two orders of men, of those who are privately kidnapped byindividuals, and of those who are publickly seized by virtue of theauthority of their prince, compose together, at least[048], nine tenthsof the African slaves, they cannot contain, upon a moderate computation, less than ninety thousand men annually transported: an immense number, but easily to be credited, when we reflect that thousands are employedfor the purpose of stealing the unwary, and that these diabolicalpractices are in force, so far has European _injustice_ beenspread, at the distance of a thousand miles from the factories on thecoast. The _slave merchants_, among whom a quantity of Europeangoods is previously divided, travel into the heart of the country tothis amazing distance. Some of them attend the various markets, that areestablished through so large an extent of territory, to purchase thekidnapped people, whom the _slave-hunters_ are continually bringingin; while the rest, subdividing their merchandize among the pettysovereigns with whom they deal, receive, by an immediate exertion offraud and violence, the stipulated number. 

Now, will any man assert, in opposition to the arguments beforeadvanced, that out of this immense body of men, thus annually collectedand transported, there is even _one_, over whom the original orsubsequent seller can have any power or right? Whoever asserts this, inthe first instance, must, contradict his own feelings, and must consider_himself_ as a just object of prey, whenever any daring invadershall think it proper to attack _him_. And, in the second instance, the very idea which the African princes entertain of their villages, as_parks_ or _reservoirs_, stocked only for their own convenience, and of their subjects, as _wild beasts_, whom they may pursueand take at pleasure, is so shocking, that it need only bementioned, to be instantly reprobated by the reader. 

The order of slaves, which is next to the former in respect to thenumber of people whom it contains, is that of prisoners of war. Thisorder, if the former statement be true, is more inconsiderable than isgenerally imagined; but whoever reflects on the prodigious slaughterthat is constantly made in every African skirmish, cannot be otherwisethan of this opinion: he will find, that where _ten_ are taken, hehas every reason to presume that an _hundred_ perish. In some ofthese skirmishes, though they have been begun for the express purpose of_procuring slaves_, the conquerors have suffered but few of thevanquished to escape the fury of the sword; and there have not beenwanting instances, where they have been so incensed at the resistancethey have found, that their spirit of vengeance has entirely got thebetter of their avarice, and they have murdered, in cool blood, everyindividual, without discrimination, either of age or sex. 

The following[049] is an account of one of these skirmishes, asdescribed by a person, who was witness to the scene. "I was sent, withseveral others, in a small sloop up the river Niger, to purchase slaves:we had some free negroes with us in the practice; and as the vessels areliable to frequent attacks from the negroes on one side of the river, orthe Moors on the other, they are all armed. As we rode at anchor a longway up the river, we observed a large number of negroes in huts by theriver's side, and for our own safety kept a wary eye on them. Early nextmorning we saw from our masthead a numerous body approaching, withapparently but little order, but in close array. They approached veryfast, and fell furiously on the inhabitants of the town, who seemed tobe quite _surprized_, but nevertheless, as soon as they could gettogether, fought stoutly. They had some fire-arms, but made very littleuse of them, as they came directly to close fighting with their spears, lances, and sabres. Many of the invaders were mounted on small horses;and both parties fought for about half an hour with the fiercestanimosity, exerting much more courage and perseverance than I had everbefore been witness to amongst them. The women and children of the townclustered together to the water's edge, running shrieking up and downwith terrour, waiting the event of the combat, till their party gaveway and took to the water, to endeavour to swim over to the Barbaryside. They were closely pursued even into the river by the victors, who, though they came for the purpose of _getting slaves_, gave noquarter, _their cruelty even prevailing over their avarice_. Theymade no prisoners, but put all to the sword without mercy. Horribleindeed was the carnage of the vanquished on this occasion, and as wewere within two or three hundred yards of them, their cries and shrieksaffected us extremely. We had got up our anchor at the beginning of thefray, and now stood close in to the spot, where the victors havingfollowed the vanquished into the water, were continually dragging outand murdering those, whom by reason of their wounds they easilyovertook. The very children, whom they took in great numbers, did notescape the massacre. Enraged at their barbarity, we fired our gunsloaden with grape shot, and a volley of small arms among them, whicheffectually checked their ardour, and obliged them to retire to adistance from the shore; from whence a few round cannon shot soonremoved them into the woods. The whole river was black over with theheads of the fugitives, who were swimming for their lives. These poorwretches, fearing _us_ as much as their conquerors, dived when wefired, and cried most lamentably for mercy. Having now effectuallyfavoured their retreat, we stood backwards and forwards, and took upseveral that were wounded and tired. All whose wounds had disabled themfrom swimming, were either butchered or drowned, before we got up tothem. With a justice and generosity, _never I believe before heard ofamong slavers_, we gave those their liberty whom we had taken up, setting them on shore on the Barbary side, among the poor residue oftheir companions, who had survived the slaughter of the morning. "

We shall make but two remarks on this horrid instance of Africancruelty. It adds, first, a considerable weight to the statements thathave been made; and confirms, secondly, the conclusions that were drawnin the preceding chapter. For if we even allow the right of capture to bejust, and the principles of reparation and punishment to be applicableto the individuals of a community, yet would the former be unjust, andthe latter inapplicable, in the present case. Every African war is arobbery; and we may add, to our former expression, when we said, "thatthus have many thousands of men, in the most iniquitous manner, beensent into servitude, " that we believe there are few of this order, whoare not as much the examples of injustice, as the people that have beenkidnapped; and who do not additionally convey, when we consider them asprisoners of war, an idea of the most complicated scene of murder. 

The order of _convicts_, as it exists almost solely among thoseprinces, whose dominions are contiguous to the European factories, isfrom this circumstance so inconsiderable, when compared with either ofthe preceding, that we should not have mentioned it again, but that wewere unwilling to omit any additional argument that occurred against it. 

It has been shewn already, that the punishment of slavery is inflictedfrom no other motive, than that of gratifying the _avarice_ of theprince, a confederation so detestable, as to be sufficient of itself toprove it to be unjust; and that it is so disproportionate, from its_nature_, to the offence, as to afford an additional proof of itsinjustice. We shall add now, as a second argument, its disproportionfrom its _continuance:_ and we shall derive a third from theconsideration, that, in civil society, every violation of the laws ofthe community is an offence against the _state_[050]. 

Let us suppose then an African prince, disdaining for once the idea ofemolument: let us suppose him for once inflamed with the love of hiscountry, and resolving to punish from this principle alone, "that byexhibiting an example of terrour, he may preserve that _happiness ofthe publick_, which he is bound to secure and defend by the verynature of his contract; or, in other words, that he may answer the endof government. " If actuated then by this principle, he should adjudgeslavery to an offender, as a just punishment for his offence, for whosebenefit must the convict labour? If it be answered, "for the benefit ofthe state, " we allow that the punishment, in whatever light it isconsidered, will be found to be equitable: but if it be answered, "forthe benefit of any _individual whom he pleases to appoint_, " wedeny it to be just. The state[051] alone is considered to have beeninjured, and as _injuries cannot possibly be transferred_, thestate alone can justly receive the advantages of his labour. But if theAfrican prince, when he thus condemns him to labour for the benefit ofan _unoffended individual_, should at the same time sentence him tobecome his _property_; that is, if he should make the person andlife of the convict at the absolute disposal of him, for whom he hassentenced him to labour; it is evident that, in addition to his formerinjustice, he is usurping a power, which no ruler or rulers of a statecan possess, and which the great Creator of the universe never yet gaveto any order whatever of created beings. 

That this reasoning is true, and that civilized nations have consideredit as such, will be best testified by their practice. We may appeal hereto that _slavery_, which is now adjudged to delinquents, as apunishment, among many of the states of Europe. These delinquents aresentenced to labour at the _oar_, to work in _mines_, and on_fortifications_, to cut and clear _rivers_, to make andrepair _roads_, and to perform other works of national utility. They are employed, in short, in the _publick_ work; because, as thecrimes they have committed are considered to have been crimes againstthe publick, no individual can justly receive the emoluments of theirlabour; and they are neither _sold_, nor made capable of being_transferred_, because no government whatsoever is invested withsuch a power. 

Thus then may that slavery, in which only the idea of _labour_ isincluded, be perfectly equitable, and the delinquent will always receivehis punishment as a man; whereas in that, which additionally includesthe idea of _property_, and to undergo which, the delinquent mustpreviously change his nature, and become a _brute_; there is aninconsistency, which no arguments can reconcile, and a contradiction toevery principle of nature, which a man need only to appeal to his ownfeelings immediately to evince. And we will venture to assert, from theunited observations that have been made upon the subject, in oppositionto any arguments that may be advanced, that there is scarcely one ofthose, who are called African convicts, on whom the prince has a rightto inflict a punishment at all; and that there is no one whatever, whomhe has a power of sentencing to labour for the benefit of an unoffendedindividual, and much less whom he has a right to sell. 

Having now fully examined the arguments of the _sellers_[052], andhaving made such additional remarks as were necessary, we have only toadd, that we cannot sufficiently express our detestation at theirconduct. Were the reader coolly to reflect upon the case of but_one_ of the unfortunate men, who are annually the victims of_avarice_, and consider his situation in life, as a father, anhusband, or a friend, we are sure, that even on such a partialreflection, he must experience considerable pain. What then must be hisfeelings, when he is told, that, since the slave-trade began, [053]_nine millions_ of men have been torn from their dearestconnections, and sold into slavery. If at this recital his indignationshould arise, let him consider it as the genuine production of nature;that she recoiled at the horrid thought, and that she applied instantlya torch to his breast to kindle his resentment; and if, during hisindignation, she should awaken the sigh of sympathy, or seduce the tearof commiseration from his eye, let him consider each as an additionalargument against the iniquity of the _sellers_. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 048: The total annual exportation from Africa, is estimatedhere at 100, 000 men, two thirds of whom are exported by the Britishmerchants alone. This estimate is less than that which is usually made, and has been published. The author has been informed by disinterestedpeople, who were in most of the West India islands during the late war, and who conversed with many of the most intelligent of the negroes, forthe purpose of inquiring by what methods they had originally beenreduced to slavery, that they did not find even two in twenty, who hadbeen reduced to that situation, by any other means than those mentionedabove. The author, desirous of a farther confirmation of thiscircumstance, stopped the press till he had written to another friend, who had resided twenty years in the West-Indies, and whose opinion hehad not yet asked. The following is an extract from the answer. "I donot among many hundreds recollect to have seen but one or two slaves, ofthose imported from Africa, who had any scars to shew, that they hadbeen in war. They are generally such as are kidnapped, or sold by theirtyrants, after the destruction of a village. In short, I am firmly ofopinion, that crimes and war together do not furnish one slave in anhundred of the numbers introduced into the European colonies. Ofconsequence the trade itself, were it possible to suppose convicts orprisoners of war to be justly sentenced to servitude, is accountable forninety-nine in every hundred slaves, whom it supplies. It an insult tothe publick, to attempt to palliate the method of procuring them. "]

[Footnote 049: The writer of the letter of which this is a faithfulextract, and who was known to the author of the present Essay, was along time on the African coast. He had once the misfortune to beshipwrecked there, and to be taken by the natives, who conveyed him andhis companions a considerable way up into the country. The hardshipswhich he underwent in the march, his treatment during his captivity, thescenes to which he was witness, while he resided among the inlandAfricans, as well as while in the African trade, gave occasion to aseries of very interesting letters. These letters were sent to theauthor of the present Essay, with liberty to make what use of them hechose, by the gentleman to whom they were written. ]

[Footnote 050: Were this not the case, the government of a country couldhave no right to take cognizance of crimes, and punish them, but everyindividual, if injured, would have a right to punish the aggressor withhis own hand, which is contrary to the notions of all civilized men, whether among the ancients or the moderns. ]

[Footnote 051: This same notion is entertained even by the Africanprinces, who do not permit the person injured to revenge his injury, orto receive the convict as his slave. But if the very person who has been_injured_, does not possess him, much less ought any other personwhatsoever. ]

[Footnote 052: There are instances on the African continent, of_parents_ selling their _children_. As the slaves of thisdescription are so few, and are so irregularly obtained, we did notthink it worth our while to consider them as forming an order; and, asGod never gave the parent a power over his child to make him_miserable_, we trust that any farther mention of them will beunnecessary. ]

[Footnote 053: Abbè Raynal, Hist. Phil. Vol. 4. P. 154. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. IX. 

It remains only now to examine by what arguments those, who_receive_ or _purchase_ their fellow-creatures into slavery, defend the _commerce_. Their first plea is, "that they receivethose with propriety, who are convicted of crimes, because they aredelivered into their hands by _their own magistrates_. " But what isthis to you _receivers_? Have the unfortunate _convicts_ beenguilty of injury to _you_? Have they broken _your_ treaties?Have they plundered _your_ ships? Have they carried _your_wives and children into slavery, that _you_ should thus retaliate?Have they offended _you_ even by word or gesture?

But if the African convicts are innocent with respect to you; if youhave not even the shadow of a claim upon their persons; by what right doyou receive them? "By the laws of the Africans, " you will say; "by whichit is positively allowed. "--But can _laws_ alter the nature ofvice? They may give it a sanction perhaps: it will still be immutablythe same, and, though dressed in the outward habiliments of_honour_, will still be _intrinsically base_. 

But alas! you do not only attempt to defend yourselves by thesearguments, but even dare to give your actions the appearance of lenity, and assume _merit_ from your _baseness_! and how first oughtyou particularly to blush, when you assert, "that prisoners of war areonly purchased from the hands of their conquerors, _to deliver themfrom death_. " Ridiculous defence! can the most credulous believe it?You entice the Africans to war; you foment their quarrels; you supplythem with arms and ammunition, and all--from the _motives ofbenevolence_. Does a man set fire to an house, for the purpose ofrescuing the inhabitants from the flames? But if they are onlypurchased, to _deliver them from death_; why, when they aredelivered into your hands, as protectors, do you torture them withhunger? Why do you kill them with fatigue? Why does the whip deformtheir bodies, or the knife their limbs? Why do you sentence them todeath? to a death, infinitely more excruciating than that from which youso kindly saved them? What answer do you make to this? for if you hadnot humanely preserved them from the hands of their conquerors, a quickdeath perhaps, and that in the space of a moment, had freed them fromtheir pain: but on account of your _favour_ and _benevolence_, it is known, that they have lingered years in pain and agony, and havebeen sentenced, at last, to a dreadful death for the most insignificantoffence. 

Neither can we allow the other argument to be true, on which you foundyour merit; "that you take them from their country for their ownconvenience; because Africa, scorched with incessant heat, and subjectto the most violent rains and tempests, is unwholesome, and unfit to beinhabited. " Preposterous men! do you thus judge from your own feelings?Do you thus judge from your own constitution and frame? But if yousuppose that the Africans are incapable of enduring their own climate, because you cannot endure it yourselves; why do you receive them intoslavery? Why do you not measure them here by the same standard? For ifyou are unable to bear hunger and thirst, chains and imprisonment, wounds and torture, why do you not suppose them incapable of enduringthe same treatment? Thus then is your argument turned againstyourselves. But consider the answer which the Scythians gave theÆgyptians, when they contended about the antiquity of theiroriginal[054], "That nature, when she first distinguished countries bydifferent degrees of heat and cold, tempered the bodies of animals, atthe same instant, to endure the different situations: that as theclimate of Scythia was severer than that of Ægypt, so were the bodies ofthe Scythians harder, and as capable of enduring the severity of theiratmosphere, as the Ægyptians the temperateness of their own. "

But you may say perhaps, that, though they are capable of enduring theirown climate, yet their situation is frequently uncomfortable, and evenwretched: that Africa is infested with locusts, and insects of variouskinds; that they settle in swarms upon the trees, destroy the verdure, consume the fruit, and deprive the inhabitants of their food. But thesame answer may be applied as before; "that the same kind Providence, who tempered the body of the animal, tempered also the body of the tree;that he gave it a quality to recover the bite of the locust, which hesent; and to reassume, in a short interval of time, its former glory. "And that such is the case experience has shewn: for the very trees thathave been infested, and stripped of their bloom and verdure, sosurprizingly quick is vegetation, appear in a few days, as if an insecthad been utterly unknown. 

We may add to these observations, from the testimony of those who havewritten the History of Africa from their own inspection, that no countryis more luxurious in prospects, none more fruitful, none more rich inherds and flocks, and none, where the comforts of life, can be gainedwith so little trouble. 

But you say again, as a confirmation of these your former arguments, (bywhich you would have it understood, that the Africans themselves aresensible of the goodness of your intentions) "that they do not appear togo with you against their will. " Impudent and base assertion! Why thendo you load them with chains? Why keep you your daily and nightlywatches? But alas, as a farther, though a more melancholy proof, of thefalsehood of your assertions, how many, when on board your ships, haveput a period to their existence? How many have leaped into the sea? Howmany have pined to death, that, even at the expence of their lives, theymight fly from your _benevolence_?

Do you call them obstinate then, because they refuse your favours? Doyou call them ungrateful, because they make you this return? How muchrather ought you receivers to blush! How much rather ought you receiversto be considered as abandoned and execrable; who, when you usurp thedominion over those, who are as free and independent as yourselves, break the first law of justice, which ordains, "that no person shall doharm to another, without a previous provocation;" who offend againstthe dictates of nature, which commands, "that no just man shall be givenor received into slavery against his own consent;" and who violate thevery laws of the empire that you assume, by consigning your subjects tomisery. 

Now, as a famous Heathen philosopher observes, from whose mouth youshall be convicted[055], "there is a considerable difference, whether aninjury is done, during any perturbation of mind, which is generallyshort and momentary; or whether it is done with any previous meditationand design; for, those crimes, which proceed from any sudden commotionof the mind, are less than those, which are studied and prepared, " howgreat and enormous are your crimes to be considered, who plan yourAfrican voyages at a time, when your reason is found, and your sensesare awake; who coolly and deliberately equip your vessels; and who spendyears, and even lives, in the traffick of _human liberty_. 

But if the arguments of those, who _sell_ or _deliver_ meninto slavery, (as we have shewn before) and of those, who _receive_or _purchase_ them, (as we have now shewn) are wholly false; it isevident that this _commerce_, is not only beyond the possibility ofdefence, but is justly to be accounted wicked, and justly impious, sinceit is contrary to the principles of _law_ and _government_, the dictates of _reason_, the common maxims of _equity_, thelaws of _nature_, the admonitions of _conscience_, and, inshort, the whole doctrine of _natural religion_. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 054: Justin, L. 2. C. 1. ]

[Footnote 055: Cicero de Officiis. L. 1. C. 8. ]

 * * * * *

PART III. 

THE

SLAVERY of the AFRICANS

IN THE

EUROPEAN COLONIES. 

 * * * * *

CHAP. I. Having confined ourselves wholly, in the second part of this Essay, tothe consideration of the _commerce_, we shall now proceed to theconsideration of the _slavery_ that is founded upon it. As thisslavery will be conspicuous in the _treatment_, which theunfortunate Africans uniformly undergo, when they are put into the handsof the _receivers_, we shall describe the manner in which they areaccustomed to be used from this period. 

To place this in the clearest, and most conspicuous point of view, weshall throw a considerable part of our information on this head into theform of a narrative: we shall suppose ourselves, in short, on thecontinent of Africa, and relate a scene, which, from its agreement withunquestionable facts, might not unreasonably be presumed to have beenpresented to our view, had we been really there. 

And first, let us turn our eyes to the cloud of dust that is before us. It seems to advance rapidly, and, accompanied with dismal shrieks andyellings, to make the very air, that is above it, tremble as it rollsalong. What can possibly be the cause? Let us inquire of that melancholyAfrican, who seems to walk dejected near the shore; whose eyes arestedfastly fixed on the approaching object, and whose heart, if we canjudge from the appearance of his countenance, must be greatly agitated. 

"Alas!" says the unhappy African, "the cloud that you see approaching, is a train of wretched slaves. They are going to the ships behind you. They are destined for the English colonies, and, if you will stay herebut for a little time, you will see them pass. They were last nightdrawn up upon the plain which you see before you, where they werebranded upon the breast with an _hot iron_; and when they hadundergone the whole of the treatment which is customary on theseoccasions, and which I am informed that you Englishmen at home use tothe _cattle_ which you buy, they were returned to their prison. AsI have some dealings with the members of the factory which you see at alittle distance, (though thanks to the Great Spirit, I never dealt inthe _liberty_ of my fellow creatures) I gained admittance there. Ilearned the history of some of the unfortunate people, whom I sawconfined, and will explain to you, if my eye should catch them as theypass, the real causes of their servitude. "

Scarcely were these words spoken, when they came distinctly into sight. They appeared to advance in a long column, but in a very irregularmanner. There were three only in the front, and these were chainedtogether. The rest that followed seemed to be chained by pairs, but bypressing forward, to avoid the lash of the drivers, the breadth of thecolumn began to be greatly extended, and ten or more were observedabreast. 

While we were making these remarks, the intelligent African thus resumedhis discourse. "The first three whom you observe, at the head of thetrain, to be chained together, are prisoners of war. As soon as theships that are behind you arrived, the news was dispatched into theinland country; when one of the petty kings immediately assembled hissubjects, and attacked a neighbouring tribe. The wretched people, thoughthey were surprized, made a formidable resistance, as they resolved, almost all of them, rather to lose their lives, than survive theirliberty. The person whom you see in the middle, is the father of the twoyoung men, who are chained to him on each side. His wife and two of hischildren were killed in the attack, and his father being wounded, and, on account of his age, _incapable of servitude_, was left bleedingon the spot where this transaction happened. "

"With respect to those who are now passing us, and are immediatelybehind the former, I can give you no other intelligence, than that someof them, to about the number of thirty, were taken in the same skirmish. Their tribe was said to have been numerous before the attack; thesehowever are _all that are left alive_. But with respect to theunhappy man, who is now opposite to us, and whom you may distinguish, ashe is now looking back and wringing his hands in despair, I can informyou with more precision. He is an unfortunate convict. He lived onlyabout five days journey from the factory. He went out with his king tohunt, and was one of his train; but, through too great an anxiety toafford his royal master diversion, he roused the game from the covertrather sooner than was expected. The king, exasperated at thiscircumstance, immediately sentenced him to slavery. His wife andchildren, fearing lest the tyrant should extend the punishment tothemselves, _which is not unusual_, fled directly to the woods, where they were all devoured. "

"The people, whom you see close behind the unhappy convict, form anumerous body, and reach a considerable way. They speak a language, which no person in this part of Africa can understand, and theirfeatures, as you perceive, are so different from those of the rest, thatthey almost appear a distinct race of men. From this circumstance Irecollect them. They are the subjects of a very distant prince, whoagreed with the _slave merchants, for a quantity of spirituousliquors_, to furnish him with a stipulated number of slaves. Heaccordingly surrounded, and set fire to one of his own villages in thenight, and seized these people, who were unfortunately the inhabitants, as they were escaping from the flames. I first saw them as the merchantswere driving them in, about two days ago. They came in a large body, andwere tied together at the neck with leather thongs, which permittedthem to walk at the distance of about a yard from one another. Many ofthem were loaden with elephants teeth, which had been purchased at thesame time. All of them had bags, made of skin, upon their shoulders; foras they were to travel, in their way from the great mountains, throughbarren sands and inhospitable woods for many days together, they wereobliged to carry water and provisions with them. Notwithstanding this, many of them perished, some by hunger, but the greatest number byfatigue, as the place from whence they came, is at such an amazingdistance from this, and the obstacles, from the nature of the country, so great, that the journey could scarcely be completed in seven moons. "

When this relation was finished, and we had been looking stedfastly forsome time on the croud that was going by, we lost sight of thatpeculiarity of feature, which we had before remarked. We then discoveredthat the inhabitants of the depopulated village had all of them passedus, and that the part of the train, to which we were now opposite, was anumerous body of kidnapped people. Here we indulged our imagination. Wethought we beheld in one of them a father, in another an husband, and inanother a son, each of whom was forced from his various and tenderconnections, and without even the opportunity of bidding them adieu. While we were engaged in these and other melancholy reflections, thewhole body of slaves had entirely passed us. We turned almost insensiblyto look at them again, when we discovered an unhappy man at the end ofthe train, who could scarcely keep pace with the rest. His feet seemedto have suffered much from long and constant travelling, for he waslimping painfully along. 

"This man, " resumes the African. "has travelled a considerable way. Helived at a great distance from hence, and had a large family, for whomhe was daily to provide. As he went out one night to a neighbouringspring, to procure water for his thirsty children, he was kidnapped bytwo _slave hunters_, who sold him in the morning to some countrymerchants for a _bar of iron_. These drove him with other slaves, procured almost in the same manner, to the nearest market, where theEnglish merchants, to whom the train that has just now passed usbelongs, purchased him and two others, by means of their travellingagents, for a _pistol_. His wife and children have been longwaiting for his return. But he is gone for ever from their sight: andthey must be now disconsolate, as they must be certain by his delay, that he has fallen into the hands of the _Christians_". 

"And now, as I have mentioned the name of _Christians_, a name, bywhich the Europeans distinguish themselves from us, I could wish to beinformed of the meaning which such an appellation may convey. Theyconsider themselves as _men_, but us unfortunate Africans, whomthey term _Heathens_, as the _beasts_ that serve us. But ah!how different is the fact! What is _Christianity_, but a systemof _murder_ and _oppression_? The cries and yells of theunfortunate people, who are now soon to embark for the regions ofservitude, have already pierced my heart. Have you not heard me sigh, while we have been talking? Do you not see the tears that now trickledown my cheeks? and yet these hardened _Christians_ are unable tobe moved at all: nay, they will scourge them amidst their groans, andeven smile, while they are torturing them to death. Happy, happyHeathenism! which can detest the vices of Christianity, and feel forthe distresses of mankind. "

"But" we reply, "You are totally mistaken: _Christianity_ is themost perfect and lovely of moral systems. It blesses even the hand ofpersecution itself, and returns good for evil. But the people againstwhom you so justly declaim; are not _Christians_. They are_infidels_. They are _monsters_. They are out of the commoncourse of nature. Their countrymen at home are generous and brave. Theysupport the sick, the lame, and the blind. They fly to the succour ofthe distressed. They have noble and stately buildings for the solepurpose of benevolence. They are in short, of all nations, the mostremarkable for humanity and justice. "

"But why then, " replies the honest African, "do they suffer this? Why isAfrica a scene of blood and desolation? Why are her children wrestedfrom her, to administer to the luxuries and greatness of those whom theynever offended? And why are these dismal cries in vain?"

"Alas!" we reply again, "can the cries and groans, with which the airnow trembles, be heard across this extensive continent? Can the southernwinds convey them to the ear of Britain? If they could reach thegenerous Englishman at home, they would pierce his heart, as they havealready pierced your own. He would sympathize with you in your distress. He would be enraged at the conduct of his countrymen, and resist theirtyranny. "--

But here a shriek unusually loud, accompanied with a dreadful rattlingof chains, interrupted the discourse. The wretched Africans were justabout to embark: they had turned their face to their country, as if totake a last adieu, and, with arms uplifted to the sky, were making thevery atmosphere resound with their prayers and imprecations. 

 * * * * *

CHAP. II. 

The foregoing scene, though it may be said to be imaginary, is strictlyconsistent with fact. It is a scene, to which the reader himself mayhave been witness, if he has ever visited the place, where it issupposed to lie; as no circumstance whatever has been inserted in it, for which the fullest and most undeniable evidence cannot be produced. We shall proceed now to describe, in general terms, the treatment whichthe wretched Africans undergo, from the time of their embarkation. 

When the African slaves, who are collected from various quarters, forthe purposes of sale, are delivered over to the _receivers_, theyare conducted in the manner above described to the ships. Theirsituation on board is beyond all description: for here they are crouded, hundreds of them together, into such a small compass, as would scarcelybe thought sufficient to accommodate twenty, if considered as _freemen_. This confinement soon produces an effect, that may be easilyimagined. It generates a pestilential air, which, co-operating with, badprovisions, occasions such a sickness and mortality among them, that notless than _twenty thousand_[056] are generally taken off in everyyearly transportation. 

Thus confined in a pestilential prison, and almost entirely excludedfrom the chearful face of day, it remains for the sickly survivors tolinger out a miserable existence, till the voyage is finished. But areno farther evils to be expected in the interim particularly if we add totheir already wretched situation the indignities that are daily offeredthem, and the regret which they must constantly feel, at being for everforced from their connexions? These evils are but too apparent. Some ofthem have resolved, and, notwithstanding the threats of the_receivers_, have carried their resolves into execution, to starvethemselves to death. Others, when they have been brought upon deck forair, if the least opportunity has offered, have leaped into the sea, andterminated their miseries at once. Others, in a fit of despair, haveattempted to rise, and regain their liberty. But here what a scene ofbarbarity has constantly ensued. Some of them have been instantly killedupon the spot; some have been taken from the hold, have been bruised andmutilated in the most barbarous and shocking manner, and have beenreturned bleeding to their companions, as a sad example of resistance;while others, tied to the ropes of the ship, and mangled alternatelywith the whip and knife, have been left in that horrid situation, tillthey have expired. 

But this is not the only inhuman treatment which they are frequentlyobliged to undergo; for if there should be any necessity, fromtempestuous weather, for lightening the ship; or if it should bepresumed on the voyage, that the provisions will fall short before theport can be made, they are, many of them, thrown into the sea, withoutany compunction of mind on the part of the _receivers_, and withoutany other regret for their loss, than that which _avarice_inspires. Wretched survivors! what must be their feelings at such asight! how must they tremble to think of that servitude which isapproaching, when the very _dogs_ of the _receivers_ have beenretained on board, and preferred to their unoffending countrymen. Butindeed so lightly are these unhappy people esteemed, that their liveshave been even taken away upon speculation: there has been an instance, within the last five years, of _one hundred and thirty two_ of thembeing thrown into the sea, because it was supposed that, by this_trick_, their value could be recovered from the insurers[057]. 

But if the ship should arrive safe at its destined port, a circumstancewhich does not always happen, (for some have been blown up, and manylost) the wretched Africans do not find an alleviation of their sorrow. Here they are again exposed to sale. Here they are again subjected tothe inspection of other brutal _receivers_, who examine and treatthem with an inhumanity, at which even avarice should blush. To thismortifying circumstance is added another, that they are picked out, asthe purchaser pleases, without any consideration whether the wife isseparated from her husband, or the mother from her son: and if thesecruel instances of separation should happen; if relations, when theyfind themselves about to be parted, should cling together; or if filial, conjugal, or parental affection, should detain them but a moment longerin each other's arms, than these _second receivers_ should thinksufficient, the lash instantly severs them from their embraces. 

We cannot close our account of the treatment, which the wretchedAfricans undergo while in the hands of the _first receivers_, without mentioning an instance of wanton, barbarity, which happened sometime ago; particularly as it may be inserted with propriety in thepresent place, and may give the reader a better idea of the cruelties, to which they are continually exposed, than any that he may have yetconceived. To avoid making a mistake, we shall take the liberty that hasbeen allowed us, and transcribe it from a little manuscript account, with which we have been favoured by a person of the strictest integrity, and who was at that time in the place where the transactionhappened[058]. "Not long after, " says he, (continuing his account) "theperpetrator of a cruel murder, committed in open day light, in the mostpublick part of a town, which was the seat of government, escaped everyother notice than the curses of a few of the more humane witnesses ofhis barbarity. An officer of a Guinea ship, who had the care of a numberof new slaves, and was returning from the _sale-yard_ to thevessel with such as remained unsold; observed a stout fellow among themrather slow in his motions, which he therefore quickened with hisrattan. The slave soon afterwards fell down, and was raised by the sameapplication. Moving forwards a few yards, he fell down again; and thisbeing taken as a proof of his sullen perverse spirit, the enragedofficer furiously repeated his blows, till he expired at his feet. Thebrute coolly ordered some of the surviving slaves to carry the dead bodyto the water's side, where, without any ceremony or delay, being throwninto the sea, the tragedy was supposed to have been immediately finishedby the not more inhuman sharks, with which the harbour then abounded. These voracious fish were supposed to have followed the vessels fromthe coast of Africa, in which ten thousand slaves were imported in thatone season, being allured by the stench, and daily fed by the deadcarcasses thrown overboard on the voyage. "

If the reader should observe here, that cattle are better protected inthis country, than slaves in the colonies, his observation will be just. The beast which is driven to market, is defended by law from the goad ofthe driver; whereas the wretched African, though an human being, andwhose feelings receive of course a double poignancy from the power ofreflection, is unnoticed in this respect in the colonial code, and maybe goaded and beaten till he expires. 

We may now take our leave of the _first receivers_. Their crime hasbeen already estimated; and to reason farther upon it, would beunnecessary. For where the conduct of men is so manifestly impious, there can be no need, either of a single argument or a reflection; asevery reader of sensibility will anticipate them in his own feelings. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 056: It is universally allowed, that at least one fifth of theexported negroes perish in the passage. This estimate is made from thetime in which they are put on board, to the time when they are disposedof in the colonies. The French are supposed to lose the greatest numberin the voyage, but particularly from this circumstance, because theirslave ships are in general so very large, that many of the slaves thathave been put on board sickly, die before the cargo can be completed. ]

[Footnote 057: This instance happened in a ship, commanded by oneCollingwood. On the 29th of November, 1781, fifty-four of them werethrown into the sea alive; on the 30th forty-two more; and in aboutthree days afterwards, twenty-six. Ten others, who were brought upon thedeck for the same purpose, did not wait to be hand-cuffed, but bravelyleaped into the sea, and shared the fate of their companions. It is afact, that the people on board this ship had not been put upon shortallowance. The excuse which this execrable wretch made on board for hisconduct, was the following, "_that if the slaves, who were thensickly, had died a natural death, the loss would have been the owners;but as they were thrown alive into the sea, it would fall upon theunderwriters_. "]

[Footnote 058: This gentleman is at present resident in England. Theauthor of this Essay applied to him for some information on thetreatment of slaves, so far as his own knowledge was concerned. He wasso obliging as to furnish him with the written account alluded to, interspersed only with such instances, as he himself could undertake toanswer for. The author, as he has never met with these instances before, and as they are of such high authority, intends to transcribe two orthree of them, and insert them in the fourth chapter. They will be foundin inverted commas. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. III. 

When the wretched Africans are thus put into the hands of the _secondreceivers_, they are conveyed to the plantations, where they aretotally considered as _cattle_, or _beasts of labour_; theirvery children, if any should be born to them in that situation, beingpreviously destined to the condition of their parents. But here aquestion arises, which, will interrupt the thread of the narration for alittle time, viz. How far their descendants, who compose the fifth orderof slaves, are justly reduced to servitude, and upon what principles the_receivers_ defend their conduct. 

Authors have been at great pains to inquire, why, in the ancientservitude, the child has uniformly followed the condition of the mother. But we conceive that they would have saved themselves much trouble, andhave done themselves more credit, if instead of, endeavouring toreconcile the custom with _heathen_ notions, or their own labouredconjectures, they had shewn its inconsistency with reason and nature, and its repugnancy to common justice. Suffice it to say, that the wholetheory of the ancients, with respect to the descendants slaves, may bereduced to this principle, "that as the parents, by becoming_property_, were wholly considered as _cattle_, their children, like _the progeny of cattle_, inherited their parental lot. "

Such also is the excuse of the tyrannical _receivers_before-mentioned. They allege, that they have purchased the parents, that they can sell and dispose of them as they please, that they possessthem under the same laws and limitations as their cattle, and that theirchildren, like the progeny of these, become their property _bybirth_. 

But the absurdity of the argument will immediately appear. It dependswholly on the supposition, that the parents are _brutes_. If theyare _brutes_, we shall instantly cease to contend: if they are_men_, which we think it not difficult to prove, the argument mustimmediately fall, as we have already shewn that there cannot justly beany _property_ whatever in the _human species_. 

It has appeared also, in the second part of this Essay, that as naturemade, every man's body and mind _his own_, so no _just_ personcan be reduced to slavery against his own _consent_. Do theunfortunate offspring ever _consent_ to be slaves?--They are slavesfrom their birth. --Are they _guilty_ of crimes, that they losetheir freedom?--They are slaves when they cannot speak. --Are their_parents_ abandoned? The crimes of the parents cannot justly extendto the children. 

Thus then must the tyrannical _receivers_, who presume to sentencethe children of slaves to servitude, if they mean to dispute upon thejustice of their cause; either allow them to have been _brutes_from their birth, or to have been guilty of crimes at a time, when theywere incapable of offending the very _King of Kings_. 

 * * * * *

CHAP. IV. 

But to return to the narration. When the wretched Africans are conveyedto the plantations, they are considered as _beasts of labour_, andare put to their respective work. Having led, in their own country, alife of indolence and ease, where the earth brings forth spontaneouslythe comforts of life, and spares frequently the toil and trouble ofcultivation, they can hardly be expected to endure the drudgeries ofservitude. Calculations are accordingly made upon their lives. It isconjectured, that if three in four survive what is called the_seasoning_, the bargain is highly favourable. This seasoning issaid to expire, when the two first years of their servitude arecompleted: It is the time which an African must take to be so accustomedto the colony, as to be able to endure the common labour of aplantation, and to be put into the _gang_. At the end of thisperiod the calculations become verified, _twenty thousand_[059] ofthose, who are annually imported, dying before the seasoning is over. This is surely an horrid and awful consideration: and thus does itappear, (and let it be remembered, that it is the lowest calculationthat has been ever made upon the subject) that out of every annualsupply that is shipped from the coast of Africa, _forty thousandlives_[060] are regularly expended, even before it can be said, thatthere is really any additional stock for the colonies. 

When the seasoning is over, and the survivors are thus enabled to endurethe usual task of slaves, they are considered as real and substantialsupplies. From this period[061] therefore we shall describe theirsituation. 

They are summoned at five in the morning to begin their work. This workmay be divided into two kinds, the culture of the fields, and thecollection of grass for cattle. The last is the most laborious andintolerable employment; as the grass can only be collected blade byblade, and is to be fetched frequently twice a day at a considerabledistance from the plantation. In these two occupations they are jointlytaken up, with no other intermission than that of taking theirsubsistence twice, till nine at night. They then separate for theirrespective huts, when they gather sticks, prepare their supper, andattend their families. This employs them till midnight, when they go torest. Such is their daily way of life for rather more than half theyear. They are _sixteen_ hours, including two intervals at meals, in the service of their masters: they are employed _three_afterwards in their own necessary concerns; _five_ only remain forsleep, and their day is finished. 

During the remaining portion of the year, or the time of crop, thenature, as well as the time of their employment, is considerablychanged. The whole gang is generally divided into two or three bodies. One of these, besides the ordinary labour of the day, is kept in turn atthe mills, that are constantly going, during the whole of the night. This is a dreadful encroachment upon their time of rest, which wasbefore too short to permit them perfectly to refresh their weariedlimbs, and actually reduces their sleep, as long as this season lasts, to about three hours and an half a night, upon a moderatecomputation[062]. Those who can keep their eyes open during theirnightly labour, and are willing to resist the drowsiness that iscontinually coming upon them, are presently worn out; while some ofthose, who are overcome, and who feed the mill between asleep and awake, suffer, for thus obeying the calls of nature, by the loss of alimb[063]. In this manner they go on, with little or no respite fromtheir work, till the crop season is over, when the year (from the timeof our first description) is completed. 

To support[064] a life of such unparalleled drudgery, we should at leastexpect: to find, that they were comfortably clothed, and plentifullyfed. But sad reverse! they have scarcely a covering to defend themselvesagainst the inclemency of the night. Their provisions are frequentlybad, and are always dealt out to them with such a sparing hand, that themeans of a bare livelihood are not placed within the reach of four outof five of these unhappy people. It is a fact, that many of thedisorders of slaves are contracted from eating the vegetables, whichtheir little spots produce, before they are sufficiently ripe: a clearindication, that the calls of hunger are frequently so pressing, as notto suffer them to wait, till they can really enjoy them. 

This, situation, of a want of the common necessaries of life, added tothat of hard and continual labour, must be sufficiently painful ofitself. How then must the pain be sharpened, if it be accompanied withseverity! if an unfortunate slave does not come into the field exactlyat the appointed time, if, drooping with sickness or fatigue, he appearsto work unwillingly, or if the bundle of grass that he has beencollecting, appears too small in the eye of the overseer, he is equallysure of experiencing the whip. This instrument erases the skin, and cutsout small portions of the flesh at almost every stroke; and is sofrequently applied, that the smack of it is all day long in the ears ofthose, who are in the vicinity of the plantations. This severity ofmasters, or managers, to their slaves, which is considered only ascommon discipline, is attended with bad effects. It enables them tobehold instances of cruelty without commiseration, and to be guilty ofthem without remorse. Hence those many acts of deliberate mutilation, that have taken place on the slightest occasions: hence those many actsof inferiour, though shocking, barbarity, that have taken place withoutany occasion at all: the very slitting[065] of ears has been consideredas an operation, so perfectly devoid of pain, as to have been performedfor no other reason than that for which a brand is set upon cattle, _as a mark of property_. 

But this is not the only effect, which this severity produces: forwhile it hardens their hearts, and makes them insensible of the miseryof their fellow-creatures, it begets a turn for wanton cruelty. As aproof of this, we shall mention one, among the many instances thatoccur, where ingenuity has been exerted in contriving modes of torture. "An iron coffin, with holes in it, was kept by a certain colonist, as anauxiliary to the lash. In this the poor victim of the master'sresentment was inclosed, and placed sufficiently near a fire, tooccasion extreme pain, and consequently shrieks and groans, until therevenge of the master was satiated, without any other inconvenience onhis part, than a temporary suspension of the slave's labour. Had he beenflogged to death, or his limbs mutilated, the interest of the brutaltyrant would have suffered a more irreparable loss. 

"In mentioning, this instance, we do not mean to insinuate, that it iscommon. We know that it was reprobated by many. All that we would inferfrom it is, that where men are habituated to a system of severity, theybecome _wantonly cruel_, and that the mere toleration of such aninstrument of torture, in any country, is a clear indication, _thatthis wretched class of men do not there enjoy the protection of anylaws, that may be pretended to have been enacted in their favour_. "

Such then is the general situation of the unfortunate Africans. They arebeaten and tortured at discretion. They are badly clothed. They aremiserably fed. Their drudgery is intense and incessant and their restshort. For scarcely are their heads reclined, scarcely have their bodiesa respite from the labour of the day, or the cruel hand of the overseer, but they are summoned to renew their sorrows. In this manner they go onfrom year to year, in a state of the lowest degradation, without asingle law to protect them, without the possibility of redress, withouta hope that their situation will be changed, unless death shouldterminate the scene. 

Having described the general situation of these unfortunate people, weshall now take notice of the common consequences that are found toattend it, and relate them separately, as they result either from longand painful _labour_, a _want_ of the common necessaries oflife, or continual _severity_. 

Oppressed by a daily task of such immoderate labour as human nature isutterly unable to perform, many of them run away from their masters. They fly to the recesses of the mountains, where they choose rather tolive upon any thing that the soil affords them, nay, the very soilitself, than return to that _happy situation_, which is representedby the _receivers_, as the condition of a slave. 

It sometimes happens, that the manager of a mountain plantation, fallsin with one of these; he immediately seizes him, and threatens to carryhim to his former master, unless he will consent to live on the mountainand cultivate his ground. When his plantation is put in order, hecarries the delinquent home, abandons him to all the suggestions ofdespotick rage, and accepts a reward for his _honesty_. The unhappywretch is chained, scourged, tortured; and all this, because he obeyedthe dictates of nature, and wanted to be free. And who is there, thatwould not have done the same thing, in the same situation? Who is there, that has once known the charms of liberty; that would not fly fromdespotism? And yet, by the impious laws of the _receivers_, theabsence[066] of six months from the lash of tyranny is--_death_. 

But this law is even mild, when compared with another against the sameoffence, which was in force sometime ago, and which we fear is even nowin force, in some of those colonies which this account of the treatmentcomprehends. "Advertisements have frequently appeared there, offering areward for the apprehending of fugitive slaves either alive or_dead_. The following instance was given us by a person ofunquestionable veracity, under whose own observation it fell. As he wastravelling in one of the colonies alluded to, he observed some people inpursuit of a poor wretch, who was seeking in the wilderness an asylumfrom his labours. He heard the discharge of a gun, and soon afterwardsstopping at an house for refreshment, the head of the fugitive, stillreeking with blood, was brought in and laid upon a table withexultation. The production of such a trophy was the proof _required bylaw_ to entitle the heroes to their reward. " Now reader determine ifyou can, who were the most execrable; the rulers of the state inauthorizing murder, or the people in being bribed to commit it. 

This is one of the common consequences of that immoderate share oflabour, which is imposed upon them; nor is that, which is the result ofa scanty allowance of food, less to be lamented. The wretched African isoften so deeply pierced by the excruciating fangs of hunger, as almostto be driven to despair. What is he to do in such a trying situation?Let him apply to the _receivers_. Alas! the majesty of _receivership_is too sacred for the appeal, and the intrusion would befatal. Thus attacked on the one hand, and shut out from everypossibility of relief on the other, he has only the choice of beingstarved, or of relieving his necessities by taking a small portion ofthe fruits of his own labour. Horrid crime! to be found eating thecane, which probably his own hands have planted, and to be eating it, because his necessities were pressing! This crime however is of such amagnitude, as always to be accompanied with the whip; and sounmercifully has it been applied on such an occasion, as to have beenthe cause, in wet weather, of the delinquent's death. But the smart ofthe whip has not been the only pain that the wretched Africans haveexperienced. Any thing that passion could seize, and convert into aninstrument of punishment, has been used; and, horrid to relate! the veryknife has not been overlooked in the fit of phrenzy. Ears have beenslit, eyes have been beaten out, and bones have been broken; and sofrequently has this been the case, that it has been a matter of constantlamentation with disinterested people, who out of curiosity haveattended the markets[067] to which these unhappy people weekly resort, that they have not been able to turn their eyes on any group of themwhatever, but they have beheld these inhuman marks of passion, despotism, and caprice. 

But these instances of barbarity have not been able to deter them fromsimilar proceedings. And indeed, how can it be expected that theyshould? They have still the same appetite to be satisfied as before, andto drive them to desperation. They creep out clandestinely by night, andgo in search of food into their master's, or some neighbouringplantation. But here they are almost equally sure of suffering. Thewatchman, who will be punished himself, if he neglects his duty, frequently seizes them in the fact. No excuse or intreaty will avail; hemust punish them for an example, and he must punish them, not with astick, nor with a whip, but with a cutlass. Thus it happens, that theseunhappy slaves, if they are taken, are either sent away mangled in abarbarous manner, or are killed upon the spot. 

We may now mention the consequences of the severity. The wretchedAfricans, daily subjected to the lash, and unmercifully whipt and beatenon every trifling occasion, have been found to resist their opposers. Unpardonable crime! that they should have the feelings of nature! thattheir breasts should glow with resentment on an injury! that they shouldbe so far overcome, as to resist those, whom _they are under noobligations to obey_, and whose only title to their services consistsin _a violation of the rights of men_! What has been theconsequence?--But here let us spare the feelings of the reader, (wewish we could spare our own) and let us only say, without a recital ofthe cruelty, _that they have been murdered at the discretion of theirmasters_. For let the reader observe, that the life of an African isonly valued at a price, that would scarcely purchase an horse; that themaster has a power of murdering his slave, if he pays but a triflingfine; and that the murder must be attended with uncommon circumstancesof horrour, if it even produces an inquiry. 

Immortal Alfred! father of our invaluable constitution! parent of thecivil blessings we enjoy! how ought thy laws to excite our love andveneration, who hast forbidden us, thy posterity, to tremble at thefrown of tyrants! how ought they to perpetuate thy name, as venerable, to the remotest ages, who has secured, even to the meanest servant, afair and impartial trial! How much does nature approve thy laws, asconsistent with her own feelings, while she absolutely turns pale, trembles, and recoils, at the institutions of these _receivers_!Execrable men! you do not murder the horse, on which you only ride; youdo not mutilate the cow, which only affords you her milk; you do nottorture the dog, which is but a partial servant of your pleasures: butthese unfortunate men, from whom, you derive your very pleasures andyour fortunes, you torture, mutilate, murder at discretion! Sleep thenyou _receivers_, if you can, while you scarcely allow theseunfortunate people to rest at all! feast if you can, and indulge yourgenius, while you daily apply to these unfortunate people the stings ofseverity and hunger! exult in riches, at which even avarice ought toshudder, and, which humanity must detest!

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 059: One third of the whole number imported, is often computedto be lost in the seasoning, which, in round numbers, will be 27000. Theloss in the seasoning depends, in a great measure, on two circumstances, viz. On the number of what are called refuse slaves that are imported, and on the quantity of new land in the colony. In the French windwardislands of Martinico, and Guadaloupe, which are cleared and highlycultivated, and in our old small islands, one fourth, including refuseslaves, is considered as a general proportion. But in St. Domingo, wherethere is a great deal of new land annually taken into culture, and inother colonies in the same situation, the general proportion, includingrefuse slaves, is found to be one third. This therefore is a lowerestimate than the former, and reduces the number to about 23000. We mayobserve, that this is the common estimate, but we have reduced it to20000 to make it free from all objection. ]

[Footnote 060: Including the number that perish on the voyage, and inthe seasoning. It is generally thought that not half the numberpurchased can be considered as an additional stock, and of course that50, 000 are consumed within the first two years from their embarkation. ]

[Footnote 061: That part of the account, that has been hitherto given, extends to all the Europeans and their colonists, who are concerned inthis horrid practice. But we are sorry that we must now make adistinction, and confine the remaining part, of it to the colonists ofthe British West India islands, and to those of the southern provincesof North America. As the employment of slaves is different in the twoparts of the world last mentioned, we shall content ourselves withdescribing it, as it exists in one of them, and we shall afterwardsannex such treatment and such consequences as are applicable to both. Wehave only to add, that the reader must not consider our account as_universally_, but only _generally_, true. ]

[Footnote 062: This computation is made on a supposition, that the gangis divided into three bodies; we call it therefore moderate, because thegang is frequently divided into two bodies, which must therefore set upalternately _every other night_. ]

[Footnote 063: An hand or arm being frequently ground off. ]

[Footnote 064: The reader will scarcely believe it, but it is a fact, that a slave's annual allowance from his master, for provisions, clothing, medicines when sick, &c. Is limited, upon an average, tothirty shillings. ]

[Footnote 065: "A boy having received six slaves as a present from hisfather, immediately slit their ears, and for the following reason, thatas his father was a whimsical man, he might claim them again, unlessthey were marked. " We do not mention this instance as a confirmation ofthe passage to which it is annexed, but only to shew, how cautious weought to be in giving credit to what may be advanced in any work writtenin defence of slavery, by any native of the colonies: for being trainedup to scenes of cruelty from his cradle, he may, consistently with hisown feelings, represent that treatment as mild, at which we, who havenever been used to see them, should absolutely shudder. ]

[Footnote 066: In this case he is considered as a criminal against thestate. The _marshal_, an officer answering to our sheriff, superintends his execution, and the master receives the value of theslave from the publick treasury. We may observe here, that in all caseswhere the delinquent is a criminal of the state, he is executed, and hisvalue is received in the same manner; He is tried and condemned by twoor three justices of the peace, and without any intervention of a_jury_. ]

[Footnote 067: Particularly in Jamaica. These observations were made bydisinterested people, who were there for three or four years during thelate war. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. V. 

Some people may suppose, from the melancholy account that has been givenin the preceding chapter, that we have been absolutely dealing inromance: that the scene exhibited is rather a dreary picture of theimagination, than a representation of fact. Would to heaven, for thehonour of human nature, that this were really the case! We wish we couldsay, that we have no testimony to produce for any of our assertions, andthat our description of the general treatment of slaves has been greatlyexaggerated. 

But the _receivers_, notwithstanding the ample and disinterestedevidence, that can be brought on the occasion, do not admit thedescription to be true. They say first, "that if the slavery were suchas has been now represented, no human being could possibly support itlong. " Melancholy truth! the wretched Africans generally perish in theirprime. Let them reflect upon the prodigious supplies that are_annually_ required, and their argument will be nothing less than aconfession, that the slavery has been justly depicted. 

They appeal next to every man's own reason, and desire him to thinkseriously, whether "self-interest will not always restrain the masterfrom acts of cruelty to the slave, and whether such accounts therefore, as the foregoing, do not contain within themselves, their ownrefutation. " We answer, "No. " For if this restraining principle be aspowerful as it is imagined, why does not the general conduct of menafford us a better picture? What is imprudence, or what is vice, but adeparture from every man's own interest, and yet these are thecharacteristicks of more than half the world?--

--But, to come more closely to the present case, _self-interest_will be found but a weak barrier against the sallies of _passion_:particularly where it has been daily indulged in its greatest latitude, and there are no laws to restrain its calamitous effects. If theobservation be true, that passion is a short madness, then it is evidentthat self-interest, and every other consideration, must be lost, so longas it continues. We cannot have a stronger instance of this, than in acircumstance related in the second part of this Essay, "that though theAfricans have gone to war for the express purpose of procuring slaves, yet so great has been their resentment at the resistance they havefrequently found, that their _passion_ has entirely got the betterof their _interest_, and they have murdered all without anydiscrimination, either of age or sex. " Such may be presumed to be thecase with the no less savage _receivers_. Impressed with the mosthaughty and tyrannical notions, easily provoked, accustomed to indulgetheir anger, and, above all, habituated to scenes of cruelty, and unawedby the fear of laws, they will hardly be found to be exempt from thecommon failings of human nature, and to spare an unlucky slave, at atime when men of cooler temper, and better regulated passions, are sofrequently blind to their own interest. 

But if _passion_ may be supposed to be generally more than aballance for _interest_, how must the scale be turned in favour ofthe melancholy picture exhibited, when we reflect that_self-preservation_ additionally steps in, and demands the most_rigorous severity_. For when we consider that where there is_one_ master, there are _fifty_ slaves; that the latter havebeen all forcibly torn from their country, and are retained in theirpresent situation by violence; that they are perpetually at war in theirhearts with their oppressors, and are continually cherishing the seedsof revenge; it is evident that even _avarice_ herself, however cooland deliberate, however free from passion and caprice, must sacrificeher own sordid feelings, and adopt a system of tyranny and oppression, which it must be ruinous to pursue. 

Thus then, if no picture had been drawn of the situation of slaves, andit had been left solely to every man's sober judgment to determine, whatit might probably be, he would conclude, that if the situation werejustly described, the page must be frequently stained with acts ofuncommon cruelty. 

It remains only to make a reply to an objection, that is usuallyadvanced against particular instances of cruelty to slaves, as recordedby various writers. It is said that "some of these are so inconceivably, and beyond all example inhuman, that their very excess above the commonmeasure of cruelty shews them at once exaggerated and incredible. " Buttheir credibility shall be estimated by a supposition. Let us supposethat the following instance had been recorded by a writer of the highestreputation, "that the master of a ship, bound to the western colonieswith slaves, on a presumption that many of them would die, selected an_hundred and thirty two_ of the most sickly, and ordered them to bethrown into the sea, to recover their value from the insurers, and, above all, that the fatal order was put into execution. " What would thereader have thought on the occasion? Would he have believed the fact? Itwould have surely staggered his faith; because he could never have heardthat any _one_ man ever was, and could never have supposed that any_one_ man ever could be, guilty of the murder of _such anumber_ of his fellow creatures. But when he is informed that such afact as this came before a court[068] of justice in this very country;that it happened within the last five years; that hundreds can comeforwards and say, that they heard the melancholy evidence with tears;what bounds is he to place to his belief? The great God, who looks downupon all his creatures with the same impartial eye, seems to haveinfatuated the parties concerned, that they might bring the horridcircumstance to light, that it might be recorded in the annals of apublick court, as an authentick specimen of the treatment which theunfortunate Africans undergo, and at the same time, as an argument toshew, that there is no species of cruelty, that is recorded to have beenexercised upon these wretched people, so enormous that it may not_readily be believed_. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 068: The action was brought by the owners against theunderwriters, to recover the value of the _murdered_ slaves. It wastried at Guildhall. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. VI. 

If the treatment then, as before described, is confirmed by reason, andthe great credit that is due to disinterested writers on the subject; ifthe unfortunate Africans are used, as if their flesh were stone, andtheir vitals brass; by what arguments do you _receivers_ defendyour conduct?

You say that a great part of your savage treatment consists inpunishment for real offences, and frequently for such offences, as allcivilized nations have concurred in punishing. The first charge that youexhibit against them is specifick, it is that of _theft_. But howmuch rather ought you _receivers_ to blush, who reduce them to sucha situation! who reduce them to the dreadful alternative, that they musteither _steal_ or _perish_! How much rather ought you _receivers_to be considered as _robbers_ yourselves, who cause theseunfortunate people to be _stolen_! And how much greater isyour crime, who are _robbers of human liberty_!

The next charge which you exhibit against them, is general, it is thatof _rebellion_; a crime of such a latitude, that you can impose itupon almost every action, and of such a nature, that you always annex toit the most excruciating pain. But what a contradiction is this tocommon sense! Have the wretched Africans formally resigned theirfreedom? Have you any other claim upon their obedience, than that offorce? If then they are your subjects, you violate the laws ofgovernment, by making them unhappy. But if they are not your subjects, then, even though they should resist your proceedings, they are not_rebellious_. 

But what do you say to that long catalogue of offences, which youpunish, and of which no people but yourselves take cognizance at all?You say that the wisdom of legislation has inserted it in the coloniallaws, and that you punish by authority. But do you allude to thatexecrable code, that _authorises murder_? that tempts an unoffendedperson to kill the slave, that abhors and flies your service? thatdelegates a power, which no host of men, which not all the world, canpossess?--

Or, --What do you say to that daily unmerited severity, which youconsider only as common discipline? Here you say that the Africans arevicious, that they are all of them ill-disposed, that you must ofnecessity be severe. But can they be well-disposed to their oppressors?In their own country they were just, generous, hospitable: qualities, which all the African historians allow them eminently to possess. Ifthen they are vicious, they must have contracted many of their vicesfrom yourselves; and as to their own native vices, if any have beenimported with them, are they not amiable, when compared with yours?

Thus then do the excuses, which have been hitherto made by the_receivers_, force a relation of such circumstances, as makes theirconduct totally inexcusable, and, instead of diminishing at all, highlyaggravates their guilt. 

 * * * * *

CHAP. VII. 

We come now to that other system of reasoning, which is always applied, when the former is confuted; "that the Africans are an inferiour link ofthe chain of nature, and are made for slavery. "

This assertion is proved by two arguments; the first of which wasadvanced also by the ancients, and is drawn from the _inferiority oftheir capacities_. 

Let us allow then for a moment, that they appear to have no parts, thatthey appear to be void of understanding. And is this wonderful, when, you _receivers_ depress their senses by hunger? Is this wonderful, when by incessant labour, the continual application of the lash, and themost inhuman treatment that imagination can devise, you overwhelm theirgenius, and hinder it from breaking forth?--No, --You confound theirabilities by the severity of their servitude: for as a spark of fire, ifcrushed by too great a weight of incumbent fuel, cannot be blown into aflame, but suddenly expires, so the human mind, if depressed by rigorousservitude, cannot be excited to a display of those faculties, whichmight otherwise have shone with the brightest lustre. 

Neither is it wonderful in another point of view. For what is it thatawakens the abilities of men, and distinguishes them from the commonherd? Is it not often the amiable hope of becoming serviceable toindividuals, or the state? Is it not often the hope of riches, or ofpower? Is it not frequently the hope of temporary honours, or a lastingfame? These principles have all a wonderful effect upon the mind. Theycall upon it to exert its faculties, and bring those talents to thepublick view, which had otherwise been concealed. But the unfortunateAfricans have no such incitements as these, that they should shew theirgenius. They have no hope of riches, power, honours, fame. They have nohope but this, that their miseries will be soon terminated by death. 

And here we cannot but censure and expose the murmurings of theunthinking and the gay; who, going on in a continual round of pleasureand prosperity, repine at the will of Providence, as exhibited in theshortness of human duration. But let a weak and infirm old age overtakethem: let them experience calamities: let them feel but half themiseries which the wretched Africans undergo, and they will praise thegoodness of Providence, who hath made them mortal; who hath prescribedcertain ordinary bounds to the life of man; and who, by such alimitation, hath given all men this comfortable hope, that howeverpersecuted in life, a time will come, in the common course of nature, when their sufferings will have an end. 

Such then is the nature of this servitude, that we can hardly expect tofind in those, who undergo it, even the glimpse of genius. For if theirminds are in a continual state of depression, and if they have noexpectations in life to awaken their abilities, and make them eminent, we cannot be surprized if a sullen gloomy stupidity should be theleading mark in their character; or if they should appear inferiour tothose, who do not only enjoy the invaluable blessings of freedom, buthave every prospect before their eyes, that can allure them to exerttheir faculties. Now, if to these considerations we add, that thewretched Africans are torn from their country in a state of nature, andthat in general, as long as their slavery continues, every obstacle isplaced in the way of their improvement, we shall have a sufficientanswer to any argument that may be drawn from the inferiority of theircapacities. 

It appears then, from the circumstances that have been mentioned, thatto form a true judgment of the abilities of these unfortunate people, wemust either take a general view of them before their slavery commences, or confine our attention to such, as, after it has commenced, have hadany opportunity given them of shewing their genius either in arts orletters. If, upon such a fair and impartial view, there should be anyreason to suppose, that they are at all inferiour to others in the samesituation, the argument will then gain some of that weight andimportance, which it wants at present. 

In their own country, where we are to see them first, we must expectthat the prospect will be unfavourable. They are mostly in a savagestate. Their powers of mind are limited to few objects. Their ideas areconsequently few. It appears, however, that they follow the same mode oflife, and exercise the same arts, as the ancestors of those veryEuropeans, who boast of their great superiority, are described to havedone in the same uncultivated state. This appears from the Nubian'sGeography, the writings of Leo, the Moor, and all the subsequenthistories, which those, who have visited the African continent, havewritten from their own inspection. Hence three conclusions; that theirabilities are sufficient for their situation;--that they are as great, as those of other people have been, in the same stage of society;--andthat they are as great as those of any civilized people whatever, whenthe degree of the barbarism of the one is drawn into a comparison withthat of the civilization of the other. 

Let us now follow them to the colonies. They are carried over in theunfavourable situation described. It is observed here, that though theirabilities cannot be estimated high from a want of cultivation, they areyet various, and that they vary in proportion as the nation, from whichthey have been brought, has advanced more or less in the scale of sociallife. This observation, which is so frequently made, is of greatimportance: for if their abilities expand in proportion to theimprovement of their state, it is a clear indication, that if they wereequally improved, they would be equally ingenious. 

But here, before we consider any opportunities that may be affordedthem, let it be remembered that even their most polished situation maybe called barbarous, and that this circumstance, should they appear lessdocile than others, may be considered as a sufficient answer to anyobjection that may be made to their capacities. Notwithstanding this, when they are put to the mechanical arts, they do not discover a want ofingenuity. They attain them in as short a time as the Europeans, andarrive at a degree of excellence equal to that of their teachers. Thisis a fact, almost universally known, and affords us this proof, thathaving learned with facility such of the mechanical arts, as they havebeen taught, they are capable of attaining any other, at least, of thesame class, if they should receive but the same instruction. 

With respect to the liberal arts, their proficiency is certainly less;but not less in proportion to their time and opportunity of study; notless, because they are less capable of attaining them, but because theyhave seldom or ever an opportunity of learning them at all. It is yetextraordinary that their talents appear, even in some of these sciences, in which they are totally uninstructed. Their abilities in musick aresuch, as to have been generally noticed. They play frequently upon avariety of instruments, without any other assistance than their owningenuity. They have also tunes of their own composition. Some of thesehave been imported among us; are now in use; and are admired for theirsprightliness and ease, though the ungenerous and prejudiced importerhas concealed their original. 

Neither are their talents in poetry less conspicuous. Every occurrence, if their spirits are not too greatly depressed, is turned into a song. These songs are said to be incoherent and nonsensical. But this proceedsprincipally from two causes, an improper conjunction of words, arisingfrom an ignorance of the language in which they compose; and a wildnessof thought, arising from the different manner, in which the organs ofrude and civilized people will be struck by the same object. And as totheir want of harmony and rhyme, which is the last objection, thedifference of pronunciation is the cause. Upon the whole, as they areperfectly consistent with their own ideas, and are strictly musical aspronounced by themselves, they afford us as high a proof of theirpoetical powers, as the works of the most acknowledged poets. 

But where these impediments have been removed, where they have receivedan education, and have known and pronounced the language with propriety, these defects have vanished, and their productions have been lessobjectionable. For a proof of this, we appeal to the writings of anAfrican girl[069], who made no contemptible appearance in this speciesof composition. She was kidnapped when only eight years old, and, in theyear 1761, was transported to America, where she was sold with otherslaves. She had no school education there, but receiving some littleinstruction from the family, with whom she was so fortunate as to live, she obtained such a knowledge of the English language within sixteenmonths from the time of her arrival, as to be able to speak it and readit to the astonishment of those who heard her. She soon afterwardslearned to write, and, having a great inclination to learn the Latintongue, she was indulged by her master, and made a progress. HerPoetical works were published with his permission, in the year 1773. They contain thirty-eight pieces on different subjects. We shall begleave to make a short extract from two or three of them, for theobservation of the reader. 

_From an Hymn to the Evening_[070]. 

"Fill'd with the praise of him who gives the light, And draws the sable curtains of the night, Let placid slumbers sooth each weary mind, At morn to wake more heav'nly and refin'd;So shall the labours of the day begin, More pure and guarded from the snares of sin. ----&c. &c. "

 * * * * *

_From an Hymn to the Morning_. 

"Aurora hail! and all the thousand dies, That deck thy progress through the vaulted skies!The morn awakes, and wide extends her rays, On ev'ry leaf the gentle zephyr plays. Harmonious lays the feather'd race resume, Dart the bright eye, and shake the painted plume. ----&c. &c. "

 * * * * *

_From Thoughts on Imagination_. 

"Now here, now there, the roving _fancy_ flies, Till some lov'd object strikes her wand'ring eyes, Whose silken fetters all the senses bind, And soft captivity involves the mind. 

"_Imagination!_ who can sing thy force, Or who describe the swiftness of thy course?Soaring through air to find the bright abode, Th' empyreal palace of the thund'ring God, We on thy pinions can surpass the wind, And leave the rolling universe behind:From star to star the mental opticks rove, Measure the skies, and range the realms above. There in one view we grasp the mighty whole, Or with new worlds amaze th' unbounded soul. ----&c. &c. "

 * * * * *

Such is the poetry which we produce as a proof of our assertions. Howfar it has succeeded, the reader may by this time have determined in hisown mind. We shall therefore only beg leave to accompany it with thisobservation, that if the authoress _was designed for slavery_, (asthe argument must confess) the greater part of the inhabitants ofBritain must lose their claim to freedom. 

To this poetry we shall only add, as a farther proof of their abilities, the Prose compositions of Ignatius Sancho, who received some littleeducation. His letters are too well known, to make any extract, orindeed any farther mention of him, necessary. If other examples ofAfrican genius should be required, suffice it to say, that they can beproduced in abundance; and that if we were allowed to enumerateinstances of African gratitude, patience, fidelity, honour, as so manyinstances of good sense, and a sound understanding, we fear thatthousands of the enlightened Europeans would have occasion to blush. 

But an objection will be made here, that the two persons whom we haveparticularized by name, are prodigies, and that if we were to live formany years, we should scarcely meet with two other Africans of the samedescription. But we reply, that considering their situation as beforedescribed, two persons, above mediocrity in the literary way, are asmany as can be expected within a certain period of years; and farther, that if these are prodigies, they are only such prodigies as every daywould produce, if they had the same opportunities of acquiring knowledgeas other people, and the same expectations in life to excite theirgenius. This has been constantly and solemnly asserted by the piousBenezet[071], whom we have mentioned before, as having devoted aconsiderable part of his time to their instruction. This great man, forwe cannot but mention him with veneration, had a better opportunity ofknowing them than any person whatever, and he always uniformly declared, that he could never find a difference between their capacities and thoseof other people; that they were as capable of reasoning as anyindividual Europeans; that they were as capable of the highestintellectual attainments; in short, that their abilities were equal, andthat they only wanted to be equally cultivated, to afford specimens ofas fine productions. 

Thus then does it appear from the testimony of this venerable man, whose authority is sufficient of itself to silence all objectionsagainst African capacity, and from the instances that have beenproduced, and the observations that have been made on the occasion, thatif the minds of the Africans were unbroken by slavery; if they had thesame expectations in life as other people, and the same opportunities ofimprovement, they would be equal; in all the various branches ofscience, to the Europeans, and that the argument that states them "to bean inferiour link of the chain of nature, and designed for servitude, "as far as it depends on the _inferiority of their capacities_, iswholly malevolent and false[072]. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 069: Phillis Wheatley, negro slave to Mr. John Wheatley, ofBoston, in New-England. ]

[Footnote 070:Lest it should be doubted whether these Poems are genuine, we shalltranscribe the names of those, who signed a certificate of theirauthenticity. 

His Excellency Thomas Hutchinson, Governor. The Honourable Andrew Oliver, Lieutenant Governor. 

The Hon. Thomas HubbardThe Hon. John ErvingThe Hon. James PittsThe Hon. Harrison GrayThe Hon. James BowdoinJohn Hancock, Esq. Joseph Green, Esq. Richard Carey, Esq. The Rev. Cha. Chauncy, D. D. The Rev. Mather Byles, D. D. The Rev. Ed. Pemberton, D. D. The Rev. Andrew Elliot, D. D. The Rev. Sam. Cooper, D. D. The Rev. Samuel MatherThe Rev. John MoorheadMr. John Wheatley, her Master. ]

[Footnote 071: In the Preface. ]

[Footnote 072: As to Mr. Hume's assertions with respect to Africancapacity, we have passed them over in silence, as they have been soadmirably refuted by the learned Dr. Beattie, in his Essay on Truth, towhich we refer the reader. The whole of this admirable refutationextends from p. 458. To 464. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. VIII. 

The second argument, by which it is attempted to be proved, "that theAfricans are an inferiour link of the chain of nature, and are designedfor slavery, " is drawn from _colour_, and from those other marks, which distinguish them from the inhabitants of Europe. 

To prove this with the greater facility, the _receivers_ divide inopinion. Some of them contend that the Africans, from thesecircumstances, are the descendants of Cain[073]: others, that they arethe posterity of Ham; and that as it was declared by divine inspiration, that these should be servants to the rest of the world, so they aredesigned for slavery; and that the reducing of them to such a situationis only the accomplishment of the will of heaven: while the rest, considering them from the same circumstances as a totally distinctspecies of men, conclude them to be an inferiour link of the chain ofnature, and deduce the inference described. 

To answer these arguments in the clearest and fullest manner, we areunder the necessity of making two suppositions, first, that thescriptures are true; secondly, that they are false. 

If then the scriptures are true, it is evident that the posterity ofCain were extinguished in the flood. Thus one of the arguments is nomore. 

With respect to the curse of Ham, it appears also that it was limited;that it did not extend to the posterity of all his sons, but only to thedescendants of him who was called Canaan[074]: by which it was foretoldthat the Canaanites, a part of the posterity of Ham, should serve theposterity of Shem and Japhet. Now how does it appear that these wretchedAfricans are the descendants of Canaan?--By those marks, it will besaid, which distinguish them from the rest of the world. --But where arethese marks to be found in the divine writings? In what page is it said, that the Canaanites were to be known by their _colour_, their_features_, their _form_, or the very _hair of their heads_, which is brought into the account?--But alas! so far are thedivine writings from giving any such account, that they shew theassertion to be false. They shew that the descendants of Cush[075] wereof the colour, to which the advocates for slavery allude; and of course, that there was no such limitation of colour to the posterity of Canaan, or the inheritors of the curse. 

Suppose we should now shew, upon the most undeniable evidence[076], thatthose of the wretched Africans, who are singled out as inheriting thecurse, are the descendants of Cush or Phut; and that we should shewfarther, that but a single remnant of Canaan, which was afterwardsruined, was ever in Africa at all. --Here all is consternation. --

But unfortunately again for the argument, though wonderfully for theconfirmation that the scriptures are of divine original, the wholeprophecy has been completed. A part of the descendants of Canaan werehewers of wood and drawers of water, and became tributary and subject tothe Israelites, or the descendants of Shem. The Greeks afterwards, aswell as the Romans, who were both the descendants of Japhet, not onlysubdued those who were settled in Syria and Palestine, but pursued andconquered all such as were then remaining. These were the Tyrians andCarthaginians: the former of whom were ruined by Alexander and theGreeks, the latter by Scipio and the Romans. 

It appears then that the second argument is wholly inapplicable andfalse: that it is false in its _application_, because those, whowere the objects of the curse, were a totally distinct people: that itis false in its _proof_, because no such distinguishing marks, ashave been specified, are to be found in the divine writings: and that, if the proof could be made out, it would be now _inapplicable_, asthe curse has been long completed. 

With respect to the third argument, we must now suppose that thescriptures are false; that mankind did not all spring from the sameoriginal; that there are different species of men. Now what must wejustly conclude from such a supposition? Must we conclude that onespecies is inferiour to another, and that the inferiority depends upontheir _colour_, or their _features_, or their _form_?--No--Wemust now consult the analogy of nature, and the conclusion will be this:"that as she tempered the bodies of the different species of men in adifferent degree, to enable them to endure the respective climates oftheir habitation, so she gave them a variety of colour and appearancewith a like benevolent design. "

To sum up the whole. If the scriptures are true, it is evident that theposterity of _Cain_ are no more; that the curse of _Ham_ hasbeen accomplished; and that, as all men were derived from the samestock, so this variety of appearance in men must either have proceededfrom some interposition of the Deity; or from a co-operation of certaincauses, which have an effect upon the human frame, and have the power ofchanging it more or less from its primitive appearance, as they happento be more or less numerous or powerful than those, which acted upon theframe of man in the first seat of his habitation. If from theinterposition of the Deity, then we must conclude that he, who bringethgood out of evil, produced it for their convenience. If, from theco-operation of the causes before related, what argument may not befound against any society of men, who should happen to differ, in thepoints alluded to, from ourselves?

If, on the other hand, the scriptures are false, then it is evident, that there was neither such a person as _Cain_, nor _Ham_, nor_Canaan_; and that nature bestowed such colour, features, and form, upon the different species of men, as were best adapted to theirsituation. 

Thus, on which ever supposition it is founded, the whole argument mustfall. And indeed it is impossible that it can stand, even in the eye ofcommon sense. For if you admit the _form_ of men as a justificationof slavery, you may subjugate your own brother: if _features_, thenyou must quarrel with all the world: if _colour_, where are you tostop? It is evident, that if you travel from the equator to the northernpole, you will find a regular gradation of colour from black to white. Now if you can justly take him for your slave, who is of the deepestdie, what hinders you from taking him also, who only differs from theformer but by a shade. Thus you may proceed, taking each in a regularsuccession to the poles. But who are you, that thus take into slavery somany people? Where do you live yourself? Do you live in _Spain_, orin _France_, or in _Britain_? If in either of these countries, take care lest the _whiter natives of the north_ should have aclaim upon yourself. --But the argument is too ridiculous to be farthernoticed. 

Having now silenced the whole argument, we might immediately proceed tothe discussion of other points, without even declaring our opinion as towhich of the suppositions may be right, on which it has been refuted;but we do not think ourselves at liberty to do this. The present agewould rejoice to find that the scriptures had no foundation, and wouldanxiously catch at the writings of him, who should mention them in adoubtful manner. We shall therefore declare our sentiments, by assertingthat they are true, and that all mankind, however various theirappearances are derived from the same stock. 

To prove this, we shall not produce those innumerable arguments, bywhich the scriptures have stood the test of ages, but advert to a singlefact. It is an universal law, observable throughout the whole creation, _that if two animals of a different species propagate, their offspringis unable to continue its own species_. By this admirable law, thedifferent species are preserved distinct; every possibility of confusionis prevented, and the world is forbidden to be over-run by a race ofmonsters. Now, if we apply this law to those of the human kind, who aresaid to be of a distinct species from each other, it immediately fails. The _mulattoe_ is as capable of continuing his own species as hisfather; a clear and irrefragable proof, that the scripture[077] accountof the creation is true, and that "God, who hath made the world, hathmade of one blood[078] all the nations of men that dwell on all the faceof the earth. "

But if this be the case, it will be said that mankind were originally ofone colour; and it will be asked at the same time, what it is probablethat the colour was, and how they came to assume so various anappearance? To, each of these we shall make that reply, which weconceive to be the most rational. 

As mankind were originally of the same stock, so it is evident that theywere originally of the same colour. But how shall we attempt toascertain it? Shall we _Englishmen_ say, that it was the same asthat which we now find to be peculiar to ourselves?--No--This would bea vain and partial consideration, and would betray our judgment to havearisen from that false fondness, which habituates us to suppose, thatevery thing belonging to ourselves is the perfectest and the best. Addto this, that we should always be liable to a just reproof from everyinhabitant of the globe, whose colour was different from our own;because he would justly say, that he had as good a right to imagine thathis own was the primitive colour, as that of any other people. 

How then shall we attempt to ascertain it? Shall we look into thevarious climates of the earth, see the colour that generally prevails inthe inhabitants of each, and apply the rule? This will be certainly freefrom partiality, and will afford us a better prospect of success: for asevery particular district has its particular colour, so it is evidentthat the complexion of Noah and his sons, from whom the rest of theworld were descended, was the same as that, which is peculiar to thecountry, which was the seat of their habitation. This, by such a mode ofdecision, will be found a dark olive; a beautiful colour, and a justmedium between white and black. That this was the primitive colour, ishighly probable from the observations that have been made; and, ifadmitted, will afford a valuable lesson to the Europeans, to be cautioushow they deride those of the opposite complexion, as there is greatreason to presume, _that the purest white[079] is as far removed fromthe primitive colour as the deepest black_. 

We come now to the grand question, which is, that if mankind wereoriginally of this or any other colour, how came it to pass, that theyshould wear so various an appearance? We reply, as we have had occasionto say before, either _by the interposition of the Deity_; or _bya co-operation of certain causes, which have an effect upon the humanframe, and have the power of changing it more or less from its primitiveappearance, as they are more or less numerous or powerful than those, which acted upon the frame of man in the first seat of hishabitation_. 

With respect to the Divine interposition, two epochs have been assigned, when this difference of colour has been imagined to have been soproduced. The first is that, which has been related, when the curse waspronounced on a branch of the posterity of _Ham_. But this argumenthas been already refuted; for if the particular colour alluded to wereassigned at this period, it was assigned to the descendants of_Canaan_, to distinguish them from those of his other brothers, andwas therefore _limited_ to the former. But the descendants of_Cush_[080], as we have shewn before, partook of the same colour; aclear proof, that it was neither assigned to them on this occasion, norat this period. 

The second epoch is that, when mankind were dispersed on the building of_Babel_. It has been thought, that both _national features andcolour_ might probably have been given them at this time, becausethese would have assisted the confusion of language, by causing them todisperse into tribes, and would have united more firmly the individualsof each, after the dispersion had taken place. But this is improbable:first, because there is great reason to presume that Moses, who hasmentioned the confusion of language, would have mentioned thesecircumstances also, if they had actually contributed to bring about sosingular an event: secondly, because the confusion of language wassufficient of itself to have accomplished this; and we cannot supposethat the Deity could have done any thing in vain: and thirdly, because, if mankind had been dispersed, each tribe in its peculiar hue, it isimpossible to conceive, that they could have wandered and settled insuch a manner, as to exhibit that regular gradation of colour from theequator to the poles, so conspicuous at the present day. 

These are the only periods, which there has been even the shadow of aprobability for assigning; and we may therefore conclude that thepreceding observations, together with such circumstances as will appearin the present chapter, will amount to a demonstration, that thedifference of colour was never caused by any interposition of the Deity, and that it must have proceeded therefore from that _incidentalco-operation of causes_, which has been before related. 

What these causes are, it is out of the power of human wisdom positivelyto assert: there are facts, however, which, if properly weighed and puttogether, will throw considerable light upon the subject. These we shallsubmit to the perusal of the reader, and shall deduce from them suchinferences only, as almost every person must make in his own mind, ontheir recital. 

The first point, that occurs to be ascertained, is, "What part of theskin is the seat of colour?" The old anatomists usually divided the skininto two parts, or lamina; the exteriour and thinnest, called by theGreeks _Epidermis_, by the Romans _Cuticula_, and hence by us_Cuticle_; and the interiour, called by the former _Derma_, and by the latter _Cutis_, or _true skin_. Hence they mustnecessarily have supposed, that, as the _true skin_ was in everyrespect the same in all human subjects, however various their externalhue, so the seat of colour must have existed in the _Cuticle_, orupper surface. 

Malphigi, an eminent Italian physician, of the last century, was thefirst person who discovered that the skin was divided into three lamina, or parts; the _Cuticle_, the _true skin_, and a certaincoagulated substance situated between both, which he distinguished bythe title of _Mucosum Corpus_; a title retained by anatomists tothe present day: which coagulated substance adhered so firmly to the_Cuticle_, as, in all former anatomical preparations, to have comeoff with it, and, from this circumstance to have led the ancientanatomists to believe, that there were but two lamina, or divisibleportions in the human skin. 

This discovery was sufficient to ascertain the point in question: for itappeared afterwards that the _Cuticle_, when divided according tothis discovery from the other lamina, was semi-transparent; that thecuticle of the blackest negroe was of the same transparency and colour, as that of the purest white; and hence, the _true skins_ of bothbeing invariably the same, that the _mucosum corpus_ was the seatof colour. 

This has been farther confirmed by all subsequent anatomicalexperiments, by which it appears, that, whatever is the colour of thisintermediate coagulated substance, nearly the same is the apparentcolour of the upper surface of the skin. Neither can it be otherwise;for the _Cuticle_, from its transparency, must necessarily transmitthe colour of the substance beneath it, in the same manner, though notin the same degree, as the _cornea_ transmits the colour of the_iris_ of the eye. This transparency is a matter of oculardemonstration in white people. It is conspicuous in every blush; for noone can imagine, that the cuticle becomes red, as often as this happens:nor is it less discoverable in the veins, which are so easy to bediscerned; for no one can suppose, that the blue streaks, which heconstantly sees in the fairest complexions, are painted, as it were, onthe surface of the upper skin. From these, and a variety of otherobservations[081], no maxim is more true in physiology, than that _onthe mucosum corpus depends the colour of the human body_; or, inother words, that the _mucosum corpus_ being of a different colourin different inhabitants of the globe, and appearing through the cuticleor upper surface of the skin, gives them that various appearance, whichstrikes us so forcibly in contemplating the human race. 

As this can be incontrovertibly ascertained, it is evident, thatwhatever causes cooperate in producing this different appearance, theyproduce it by acting upon the _mucosum corpus_, which, from thealmost incredible manner in which the cuticle[082] is perforated, is asaccessible as the cuticle itself. These causes are probably thosevarious qualities of things, which, combined with the influence of thesun, contribute to form what we call _climate_. For when any personconsiders, that the mucous substance, before-mentioned, is found to varyin its colour, as the _climates_ vary from the equator to thepoles, his mind must be instantly struck with the hypothesis, and hemust adopt it without any hesitation, as the genuine cause of thephænomenon. 

This fact[083], _of the variation of the mucous substance according tothe situation of the place_, has been clearly ascertained in thenumerous anatomical experiments that have been made; in which, subjectsof all nations have come under consideration. The natives of many of thekingdoms and isles of _Asia_, are found to have their _corpusmucosum_ black. Those of _Africa_, situated near the line, ofthe same colour. Those of the maritime parts of the same continent, of adusky brown, nearly approaching to it; and the colour becomes lighter ordarker in proportion as the distance from the equator is either greateror less. The Europeans are the fairest inhabitants of the world. Thosesituated in the most southern regions of _Europe_, have in their_corpus mucosum_ a tinge of the dark hue of their _African_neighbours: hence the epidemick complexion, prevalent among them, isnearly of the colour of the pickled Spanish olive; while in thiscountry, and those situated nearer the north pole, it appears to benearly, if not absolutely, white. 

These are facts[084], which anatomy has established; and we acknowledgethem to be such, that we cannot divest ourselves of the idea, that_climate_ has a considerable share in producing a difference ofcolour. Others, we know, have invented other hypotheses, but all of themhave been instantly refuted, as unable to explain the difficulties forwhich they were advanced, and as absolutely contrary to fact: and theinventors themselves have been obliged, almost as soon as they haveproposed them, to acknowledge them deficient. 

The only objection of any consequence, that has ever been made to thehypothesis of _climate_, is this, _that people under the sameparallels are not exactly of the same colour_. But this is noobjection in fact: for it does not follow that those countries, whichare at an equal distance from the equator, should have their climatesthe same. Indeed nothing is more contrary to experience than this. Climate depends upon a variety of accidents. High mountains, in theneighbourhood of a place, make it cooler, by chilling the air that iscarried over them by the winds. Large spreading succulent plants, ifamong the productions of the soil, have the same effect: they affordagreeable cooling shades, and a moist atmosphere from their continualexhalations, by which the ardour of the sun is considerably abated. While the soil, on the other hand, if of a sandy nature, retains theheat in an uncommon degree, and makes the summers considerably hotterthan those which are found to exist in the same latitude, where the soilis different. To this proximity of what may be termed _burningsands_, and to the sulphurous and metallick particles, which arecontinually exhaling from the bowels of the earth, is ascribed thedifferent degree of blackness, by which some _African_ nations aredistinguishable from each other, though under the same parallels. Tothese observations we may add, that though the inhabitants of the sameparallel are not exactly of the same hue, yet they differ only by shadesof the same colour; or, to speak with more precision, that there are notwo people, in such a situation, one of whom is white, and the otherblack. To sum up the whole--Suppose we were to take a common globe; tobegin at the equator; to paint every country along the meridian line insuccession from thence to the poles; and to paint them with the samecolour which prevails in the respective inhabitants of each, we shouldsee the black, with which we had been obliged to begin, insensiblychanging to an olive, and the olive, through as many intermediatecolours, to a white: and if, on the other hand, we should complete anyone of the parallels according to the same plan, we should see adifference perhaps in the appearance of some of the countries throughwhich it ran, though the difference would consist wholly in shades ofthe same colour. 

The argument therefore, which is brought against the hypothesis, is sofar from being, an objection, that we shall consider it one of the firstarguments in its favour: for if _climate_ has really an influenceon the _mucous substance_ of the body, it is evident, that we mustnot only expect to see a gradation of colour in the inhabitants from theequator to the poles, but also different[085] shades of the same colourin the inhabitants of the same parallel. 

To this argument, we shall add one that is incontrovertible, which is, that when the _black_ inhabitants of _Africa_ are transplantedto _colder_, or the _white_ inhabitants of _Europe_ to _hotter_climates, their children, _born there_, are of a _differentcolour from themselves_; that is, lighter in the first, anddarker in the second instance. 

As a proof of the first, we shall give the words of the AbbéRaynal[086], in his admired publication. "The children, " says he, "whichthey, (the _Africans_) procreate in _America_, are not soblack as their parents were. After each generation the differencebecomes more palpable. It is possible, that after a numerous successionof generations, the men come from _Africa_ would not bedistinguished from those of the country, into which they may have beentransplanted. "

This circumstance we have had the pleasure of hearing confirmed by avariety of persons, who have been witnesses of the fact; butparticularly by many intelligent[087] Africans, who have been parentsthemselves in _America_, and who have declared that the differenceis so palpable in the _northern provinces_, that not only theythemselves have constantly observed it, but that they have heard itobserved by others. 

Neither is this variation in the children from the colour of theirparents improbable. _The children of the blackest Africans are bornwhite_[088]. In this state they continue for about a month, when theychange to a pale yellow. In process of time they become brown. Theirskin still continues to increase in darkness with their age, till itbecomes of a dirty, sallow black, and at length, after a certain periodof years, glossy and shining. Now, if climate has any influence on the_mucous substance_ of the body, this variation in the children fromthe colour of their parents is an event, which must be reasonablyexpected: for being born white, and not having equally powerful causesto act upon them in colder, as their parents had in the hotter climateswhich they left, it must necessarily follow, that the same affect cannotpossibly be produced. 

Hence also, if the hypothesis be admitted, may be deduced the reason, why even those children, who have been brought from their country at anearly age into colder regions, have been observed[089] to be of alighter colour than those who have remained at home till they arrived ata state of manhood. For having undergone some of the changes which wementioned to have attended their countrymen from infancy to a certainage, and having been taken away before the rest could be completed, these farther changes, which would have taken place had they remained athome, seem either to have been checked in their progress, or weakened intheir degree, by a colder climate. 

We come now to the second and opposite case; for a proof of which weshall appeal to the words of Dr. Mitchell[090], in the PhilosophicalTransactions. "The _Spaniards_ who have inhabited _America_under the torrid zone for any time, are become as dark coloured as ournative _Indians_ of _Virginia_, of which, _I myself havebeen a witness_; and were they not to intermarry with the_Europeans_, but lead the same rude and barbarous lives with the_Indians_, it is very probable that, in a succession of manygenerations, they would become as dark in complexion. "

To this instance we shall add one, which is mentioned by a latewriter[091], who describing the _African_ coast, and the_European_ settlements there, has the following passage. "There areseveral other small _Portuguese_ settlements, and one of some noteat _Mitomba_, a river in _Sierra Leon_. The people herecalled _Portuguese_, are principally persons bred from a mixture ofthe first _Portuguese discoverers_ with the natives, and nowbecome, in their _complexion_ and _woolly quality_ of theirhair, _perfect negroes_, retaining however a smattering of the_Portuguese_ language. "

These facts, with respect to the colonists of the _Europeans_, areof the highest importance in the present case, and deserve a seriousattention. For when we know to a certainty from whom they are descended;when we know that they were, at the time of their transplantation, ofthe same colour as those from whom they severally sprung; and when, onthe other hand, we are credibly informed, that they have changed it forthe native colour of the place which they now inhabit; the evidence insupport of these facts is as great, as if a person, on the removal oftwo or three families into another climate, had determined to ascertainthe circumstance; as if he had gone with them and watched theirchildren; as if he had communicated his observations at his death to asuccessor; as if his successor had prosecuted the plan, and thus anuninterrupted chain of evidence had been kept up from their firstremoval to any determined period of succeeding time. 

But though these facts seem sufficient of themselves to confirm ouropinion, they are not the only facts which can be adduced in itssupport. It can be shewn, that the members of the _very samefamily_, when divided from each other, and removed into differentcountries, have not only changed their family complexion, but that theyhave changed it to _as many different colours_ as they have goneinto _different regions of the world_. We cannot have, perhaps, amore striking instance of this, than in the _Jews_. These people, are scattered over the face of the whole earth. They have preservedthemselves distinct from the rest of the world by their religion; and, as they never intermarry with any but those of their own sect, so theyhave no mixture of blood in their veins, that they should differ fromeach other: and yet nothing is more true, than that the _EnglishJew_[092] is white, the _Portuguese_ swarthy, the _Armenian_olive, and the _Arabian_ copper; in short, that there appearto be as many different species of _Jews_, as there are countriesin which they reside. 

To these facts we shall add the following observation, that if we cangive credit to the ancient historians in general, a change from thedarkest black to the purest white must have actually been accomplished. One instance, perhaps, may be thought sufficient. _Herodotus_[093]relates, that the _Colchi were black_, and that they had _crispedhair_. These people were a detachment of the _Æthiopian_ armyunder _Sesostris_, who followed him in his expedition, and settledin that part of the world, where _Colchis_ is usually representedto have been situated. Had not the same author informed us of thiscircumstance, we should have thought it strange[094], that a people ofthis description should have been found in such a latitude. Now as theywere undoubtedly settled there, and as they were neither so totallydestroyed, nor made any such rapid conquests, as that history shouldnotice the event, there is great reason to presume, that theirdescendants continued in the same, or settled in the adjacent country;from whence it will follow, that they must have changed their complexionto that, which is observable in the inhabitants of this particularregion at the present day; or, in other words, that the _blackinhabitant of Colchis_ must have been changed into the _fairCircassian_[095]. 

As we have now shewn it to be highly probable, from the facts which havebeen advanced, that climate is the cause of the difference of colourwhich prevails in the different inhabitants of the globe, we shall nowshew its probability from so similar an effect produced on the _mucoussubstance_ before-mentioned by so similar a cause, that though thefact does not absolutely prove our conjecture to be right, yet it willgive us a very lively conception of the manner, in which the phænomenonmay be caused. 

This probability may be shewn in the case of _freckles_, which areto be seen in the face of children, but of such only, as have thethinnest and most transparent skins, and are occasioned by the rays ofthe sun, striking forcibly on the _mucous substance_ of the face, and drying the accumulating fluid. This accumulating fluid, orperspirable matter, is at first colourless; but being exposed to violentheat, or dried, becomes brown. Hence, the _mucosum corpus_ beingtinged in various parts by this brown coagulated fluid, and the parts sotinged appearing through the _cuticle_, or upper surface of theskin, arises that spotted appearance, observable in the case recited. 

Now, if we were to conceive a black skin to be an _universalfreckle_, or the rays of the sun to act so universally on the_mucous substance_ of a person's face, as to produce these spots socontiguous to each other that they should unite, we should then see, inimagination, a face similar to those, which are daily to be seen amongblack people: and if we were to conceive his body to be exposed or actedupon in the same manner, we should then see his body assuming a similarappearance; and thus we should see the whole man of a perfect black, orresembling one of the naked inhabitants of the torrid zone. Now as thefeat of freckles and of blackness is the same; as their appearance issimilar; and as the cause of the first is the ardour of the sun, it istherefore probable that the cause of the second is the same: hence, ifwe substitute for the word "_sun_, " what is analogous to it, theword _climate_, the same effect may be supposed to be produced, andthe conjecture to receive a sanction. 

Nor is it unlikely that the hypothesis, which considers the cause offreckles and of blackness as the same, may be right. For if blackness isoccasioned by the rays of the sun striking forcibly and universally onthe _mucous substance_ of the body, and drying the accumulatingfluid, we can account for the different degrees of it to be found in thedifferent inhabitants of the globe. For as the quantity of perspirablefluid, and the force of the solar rays is successively increased, asthe climates are successively warmer, from any given parallel to theline, it follows that the fluid, with which the _mucous substance_will be stained, will be successively thicker and deeper coloured; andhence, as it appears through the cuticle, the complexion successivelydarker; or, what amounts to the same thing, there will be a differenceof colour in the inhabitants of every successive parallel. 

From these, and the whole of the preceding observations on the subject, we may conclude, that as all the inhabitants of the earth cannot beotherwise than the children of the same parents, and as the differenceof their appearance must have of course proceeded from incidentalcauses, these causes are a combination of those qualities, which we call_climate_; that the blackness of the _Africans_ is so faringrafted in their constitution, in a course of many generations, thattheir children wholly inherit it, if brought up in the same spot, butthat it is not so absolutely interwoven in their nature, that it cannotbe removed, if they are born and settled in another; that _Noah_and his sons were probably of an _olive_ complexion; that those oftheir descendants, who went farther to the south, became of a deeperolive or _copper_; while those, who went still farther, became of adeeper copper or _black_; that those, on the other hand, whotravelled farther to the north, became less olive or _brown_, whilethose who went still farther than the former, became less brown or_white_; and that if any man were to point out any one of thecolours which prevails in the human complexion, as likely to furnish anargument, that the people of such a complexion were of a differentspecies from the rest, it is probable that his own descendants, ifremoved to the climate to which this complexion is peculiar, would, inthe course of a few generations, degenerate into the same colour. 

Having now replied to the argument, "that the Africans are an inferiourlink of the chain of nature, " as far as it depended on their_capacity_ and _colour_, we shall now only take notice of anexpression, which the _receivers_ before-mentioned are pleased tomake use of, "that they are made for slavery. "

Had the Africans been _made for slavery_, or to become the propertyof any society of men, it is clear, from the observations that have beenmade in the second part of this Essay, that they must have been created_devoid of reason_: but this is contrary to fact. It is clearalso, that there must have been, many and evident signs of the_inferiority of their nature_, and that this society of men musthave had a _natural right_ to their dominion: but this is equallyfalse. No such signs of _inferiority_ are to be found in the one, and the right to dominion in the other is _incidental_: for in whatvolume of nature or religion is it written, that one society of menshould _breed slaves_ for the benefit, of another? Nor is it lessevident that they would have wanted many of those qualities which theyhave, and which brutes have not: they would have wanted that _spiritof liberty_, that _sense of ignominy and shame_[096], which sofrequently drives them to the horrid extremity of finishing their ownexistence. Nor would they have been endowed with a _contemplativepower_; for such a power would have been unnecessary to people insuch a situation; or rather, its only use could have been to increasetheir pain. We cannot suppose therefore that God has made an order ofbeings, with such mental qualities and powers, for the sole purpose ofbeing used as _beasts_, or _instruments_ of labour. And here, what a dreadful argument presents itself against you _receivers_?For if they have no understandings as you confess, then is your conductimpious, because, as they cannot perceive the intention of yourpunishment, your severities cannot make them better. But if, on theother hand, they have had understandings, (which has evidently appeared)then is your conduct equally impious, who, by destroying their facultiesby the severity of your discipline, have reduced men; who had once thepower of reason, to an equality with the brute creation. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 073: Genesis, ch. Iv. 15. ]

[Footnote 074: Genesis, ch. Ix. 25, 26, 27. ]

[Footnote 075: Jeremiah says, ch. Xiii. 23, "Can the Æthiopian changehis colour, or the leopard his spots?" Now the word, which is heretranslated _Æthiopian_, is in the original Hebrew "_the descendant ofCush_, " which shews that this colour was not confined to the descendantsof _Canaan_, as the advocates for slavery assert. ]

[Footnote 076: It is very extraordinary that the advocates for slaveryshould consider those Africans, whom they call negroes, as thedescendants of _Canaan_, when few historical facts can be so wellascertained, as that out of the descendants of the four sons of Ham, thedescendants of Canaan were the only people, (if we except theCarthaginians, who were a colony of Canaan, and were afterwards ruined)who did not settle in that quarter of the globe. Africa wasincontrovertibly peopled by the posterity of the three other sons. Wecannot shew this in a clearer manner, than in the words of the learnedMr. Bryant, in his letter to Mr. Granville Sharp on this subject. 

"We learn from scripture, that Ham had four sons, _Chus, Mizraim, Phut_, and _Canaan_, Gen. X. 5, 6. _Canaan_ occupied _Palestine_, and thecountry called by his name: _Mizraim, Egypt_: but _Phut_ passed deepinto _Africa_, and, I believe, most of the nations in that part of theworld are descended from him; at least more than from any other person. "_Josephus_ says, "_that Phut was the founder of the nations in Libya, and the people were from him called (phoutoi) Phuti_. " Antiq. L. 1. C. 7. "By _Lybia_ he understands, as the _Greeks_ did, _Africa_ in general:for the particular country called _Lybia Proper_, was peopled by the_Lubim_, or _Lehabim_, one of the branches from _Mizraim_, (Labieim ex ouLibnes) Chron. Paschale, p. 29. 

"The sons of _Phut_ settled in _Mauritania_, where was a country called_Phutia_, and a river of the like denomination. Mauritaniæ Fluvius usquead præsens Tempus _Phut_ dicitur, omnisq; circa eum Regio _Phutensis_. Hieron. Tradit. Hebroeæ. --Amnem, quem vocant _Fut_. " Pliny, L. 5. C. 1. Some of this family settled above Ægypt, near Æthiopia, and were styledTroglodytæ. (phoud ex ou troglodotai). Syncellus, p. 47. Many of thempassed inland, and peopled the Mediterranean country. "

"In process of time the sons of _Chus_ also, (after their expulsion fromEgypt) made settlements upon the sea coast of _Africa_, and came into_Mauritania_. Hence we find traces of them also in the names of places, such as _Churis, Chusares_, upon the coast: and a river _Chusa_, and acity _Cotta_, together with a promontory, _Cotis_, in _Mauritania_, alldenominated from _Chus_; who at different times, and by differentpeople, was called _Chus, Cuth, Cosh_, and _Cotis_. The river _Cusa_ ismentioned by _Pliny_, Lib. 5. C. 1. And by _Ptolomy_. "

"Many ages after these settlements, there was another eruption of the_Cushites_ into these parts, under the name of _Saracens_ and _Moors_, who over-ran _Africa_, to the very extremity of Mount Atlas. They passedover and conquered _Spain_ to the north, and they extended themselvessouthward, as I said in my treatise, to the rivers _Senegal_ and_Gambia_, and as low as the _Gold Coast_. I mentioned this, because I donot think that they proceeded much farther: most of the nations to the_south_ being, as I imagine, of the race of _Phut_. The very countryupon the river _Gambia_ on one side, is at this day called _Phuta_, ofwhich _Bluet_, in his history of _Juba Ben Solomon_, gives an account. "]

[Footnote 077: When America was first discovered, it was thought bysome, that the scripture account of the creation was false, and thatthere were different species of men, because they could never supposethat people, in so rude a state as the Americans, could have transportedthemselves to that continent from any parts of the known world. Thisopinion however was refuted by the celebrated Captain Cooke, who shewedthat the traject between the continents of Asia and America, was asshort as some, which people in as rude a state have been actually knownto pass. This affords an excellent caution against an ill-judged andhasty censure of the divine writings, because every difficulty which maybe started, cannot be instantly cleared up. ]

[Footnote 078: The divine writings, which assert that all men werederived from the _same stock_, shew also, in the same instance of_Cush_, (Footnote 075), that some of them had changed their originalcomplexion. ]

[Footnote 079: The following are the grand colours discernible inmankind, between which there are many shades;

White } { Copper }--Olive--{Brown } { Black]

[Footnote 080: See note, (Footnote 075). To this we may add, that therest of the descendants of _Ham_, as far as they can be traced, are nowalso black, at well as many of the descendants of _Shem_. ]

[Footnote 081: Diseases have a great effect upon the _mucosum corpus_, but particularly the jaundice, which turns it yellow. Hence, beingtransmitted through the cuticle, the yellow appearance of the wholebody. But this, even as a matter of ocular demonstration, is notconfined solely to white people; negroes themselves, while affected withthese or other disorders, changing their black colour for that which thedisease has conveyed to the _mucous_ substance. ]

[Footnote 082: The cutaneous pores are so excessively small, that onegrain of sand, (according to Dr. Lewenhoeck's calculations) would covermany hundreds of them. ]

[Footnote 083: We do not mean to insinuate that the same people havetheir _corpus mucosum_ sensibly vary, as often as they go into anotherlatitude, but that the fact is true only of different people, who havebeen long established in different latitudes. ]

[Footnote 084: We beg leave to return our thanks here to a gentleman, eminent in the medical line, who furnished us with the above-mentionedfacts. ]

[Footnote 085: Suppose we were to see two nations, contiguous to eachother, of black and white inhabitants in the same parallel, even thiswould be no objection, for many circumstances are to be considered. Ablack people may have wandered into a white, and a white people into ablack latitude, and they may not have been settled there a sufficientlength of time for such a change to have been accomplished in theircomplexion, as that they should be like the old established inhabitantsof the parallel, into which they have lately come. ]

[Footnote 086: Justamond's Abbe Raynal, v. 5. P. 193. ]

[Footnote 087: The author of this Essay made it his business to inquireof the most intelligent of those, whom he could meet with in London, asto the authenticity of the fact. All those from _America_ assured himthat it was strictly true; those from the West-Indies, that they hadnever observed it there; but that they had found a sensible differencein themselves since they came to England. ]

[Footnote 088: This circumstance, which always happens, shews that theyare descended from the same parents as ourselves; for had they been adistinct species of men, and the blackness entirely ingrafted in theirconstitution and frame, there is great reason to presume, that theirchildren would have been born _black_. ]

[Footnote 089: This observation was communicated to us by the gentlemanin the medical line, to whom we returned our thanks for certainanatomical facts. ]

[Footnote 090: Philos. Trans. No. 476. Sect. 4. ]

[Footnote 091: Treatise upon the Trade from Great Britain to Africa, byan African merchant. ]

[Footnote 092: We mean such only as are _natives_ of the countries whichwe mention, and whose ancestors have been settled there for a certainperiod of time. ]

[Footnote 093: Herodotus. Euterpe. P. 80. Editio Stephani, printed1570. ]

[Footnote 094: This circumstance confirms what we said in a former note, (Footnote 085), that even if two nations were to be found in the sameparallel, one of whom was black, and the other white, it would form noobjection against the hypothesis of climate, as one of them might havebeen new settlers from a distant country. ]

[Footnote 095: Suppose, without the knowledge of any historian, they hadmade such considerable conquests, as to have settled themselves at thedistance of 1000 miles in any one direction from _Colchis_, still theymust have changed their colour. For had they gone in an Eastern orWestern direction, they must have been of the same colour as the_Circassians_; if to the north, whiter; if to the south, of a copper. There are no people within that distance of _Colchis_, who are black. ]

[Footnote 096: There are a particular people among those transportedfrom Africa to the colonies, who immediately on receiving punishment, destroy themselves. This is a fact which the _receivers_ are unable tocontradict. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. IX. 

The reader may perhaps think, that the _receivers_ have by thistime expended all their arguments, but their store is not so easilyexhausted. They are well aware that justice, nature, and religion, willcontinue, as they have ever uniformly done, to oppose their conduct. This has driven them to exert their ingenuity, and has occasioned thatmultiplicity of arguments to be found in the present question. 

These arguments are of a different complexion from the former. Theyconsist in comparing the state of _slaves_ with that of some of theclasses of _free_ men, and in certain scenes of felicity, which theformer are said to enjoy. 

It is affirmed that the punishments which the Africans undergo, are lesssevere than the military; that their life is happier than that of theEnglish peasant; that they have the advantages of manumission; that theyhave their little spots of ground, their holy-days, their dances; inshort, that their life is a scene of festivity and mirth, and that theyare much happier in the colonies than in their own country. 

These representations, which have been made out with much ingenuity andart, may have had their weight with the unwary; but they will never passwith men of consideration and sense, who are accustomed to estimate theprobability of things, before they admit them to be true. Indeed thebare assertion, that their situation is even comfortable, contains itsown refutation, or at least leads us to suspect that the person, whoasserted it, has omitted some important considerations in the account. Such we shall shew to have been actually the case, and that therepresentations of the _receivers_, when stripped of their glossyornaments, are but empty declamation. 

It is said, first, of _military punishments_, that they are moresevere than those which the _Africans_ undergo. But this is a bareassertion without a proof. It is not shewn even by those, who assert it, how the fact can be made out. We are left therefore to draw thecomparison ourselves, and to fill up those important considerations, which we have just said that the _receivers_ had omitted. 

That military punishments are severe we confess, but we deny that theyare severer than those with which they are compared. Where is themilitary man, whose ears have been slit, whose limbs have beenmutilated, or whose eyes have been beaten out? But let us even allow, that their punishments are equal in the degree of their severity: stillthey must lose by comparison. The soldier is never punished but after afair and equitable trial, and the decision of a military court; theunhappy African, at the discretion of his Lord. The one knows whatparticular conduct will constitute an offence[097]; the other has nosuch information, as he is wholly at the disposal of passion andcaprice, which may impose upon any action, however laudable, theappellation of a crime. The former has it of course in his power toavoid a punishment; the latter is never safe. The former is punished fora real, the latter, often, for an imaginary fault. 

Now will any person assert, on comparing the whole of thosecircumstances together, which relate to their respective punishments, that there can be any doubt, which of the two are in the worstsituation, as to their penal systems?

With respect to the declaration, that the life of an _African_ inthe colonies is happier than that of an _English_ peasant, it isequally false. Indeed we can scarcely withhold our indignation, when weconsider, how shamefully the situation of this latter class of men hasbeen misrepresented, to elevate the former to a state of fictitioushappiness. If the representations of the _receivers_ be true, itis evident that those of the most approved writers, who have placed aconsiderable share of happiness in the _cottage_, have beenmistaken in their opinion; and that those of the rich, who have beenheard to sigh, and envy the felicity of the _peasant_, have beentreacherous to their own sensations. 

But which are we to believe on the occasion? Those, who endeavour todress _vice_ in the habit of _virtue_, or those, who derivetheir opinion from their own feelings? The latter are surely to bebelieved; and we may conclude therefore, that the horrid picture whichis given of the life of the _peasant_, has not so just a foundationas the _receivers_ would, lead us to suppose. For has he nopleasure in the thought, that he lives in his _own country_, andamong his relations and friends? That he is actually _free_, andthat his children will be the same? That he can never be _sold_ asa beast? That he can speak his mind _without the fear of the lash_?That he cannot even be struck _with impunity_? And that hepartakes, equally with his superiours, of the _protection of thelaw_?--Now, there is no one of these advantages which the_African_ possesses, and no one, which the defenders of slaverytake into their account. 

Of the other comparisons that are usually made, we may observe ingeneral, that, as they consist in comparing the iniquitous practice ofslavery with other iniquitous practices in force among other nations, they can neither raise it to the appearance of virtue, nor extenuate itsguilt. The things compared are in these instances both of them evilsalike. They call equally for redress[098], and are equally disgracefulto the governments which suffer them, if not encourage them, to exist. To attempt therefore to justify one species of iniquity by comparing itwith another, is no justification at all; and is so far from answeringthe purpose, for which the comparison is intended, as to give us reasonto suspect, that the _comparer_ has but little notion either ofequity or honour. 

We come now to those scenes of felicity, which slaves are said to enjoy. The first advantage which they are said to experience, is that of_manumission_. But here the advocates for slavery conceal animportant circumstance. They expatiate indeed on the charms of freedom, and contend that it must be a blessing in the eyes of those, upon whomit is conferred. We perfectly agree with them in this particular. Butthey do not tell us that these advantages are _confined_; that theyare confined to some _favourite domestick_; that not _one in anhundred_ enjoy them; and that they are _never_ extended tothose, who are employed in the _cultivation of the field_, as longas they can work. These are they, who are most to be pitied, who aredestined to _perpetual_ drudgery; and of whom _no one whatever_has a chance of being freed from his situation, till deatheither releases him at once, or age renders him incapable of continuinghis former labour. And here let it be remarked, _to the disgrace ofthe receivers_, that he is then made free, not--_as a reward forhis past services_, but, as his labour is then of little or novalue, --_to save the tax_[099]. 

With the same artifice is mention also made of the little spots, or_gardens_, as they are called, which slaves are said to possessfrom the _liberality_ of _the receivers_. But people must notbe led away by agreeable and pleasant sounds. They must not suppose thatthese gardens are made for _flowers_; or that they are places of_amusement_, in which they can spend their time in botanicalresearches and delights. Alas, they do not furnish them with a theme forsuch pleasing pursuits and speculations! They must be cultivated inthose hours, which ought to be appropriated to rest[100]; and they mustbe cultivated, not for an amusement, but to make up, _if it bepossible_, the great deficiency in their weekly allowance ofprovisions. Hence it appears, that the _receivers_ have no meritwhatever in such an appropriation of land to their unfortunate slaves:for they are either under the necessity of doing this, or of_losing_ them by the jaws of famine. And it is a notorious fact, that, with their weekly allowance, and the produce of their spotstogether, it is often with the greatest difficulty that they preserve awretched existence. 

The third advantage which they are said to experience, is that of_holy-days_, or days of respite from their usual discipline andfatigue. This is certainly a great indulgence, and ought to be recordedto the immortal honour of the _receivers_. We wish we could expresstheir liberality in those handsome terms, in which it deserves to berepresented, or applaud them sufficiently for deviating for once fromthe rigours of servile discipline. But we confess, that we are unequalto the task, and must therefore content ourselves with observing, thatwhile the horse has _one_ day in _seven_ to refresh his limbs, the happy _African_[101] has but _one_ in _fifty-two_, asa relaxation from his labours. 

With respect to their _dances_, on which such a particular stresshas been generally laid, we fear that people may have been as shamefullydeceived, as in the former instances. For from the manner in which theseare generally mentioned, we should almost be led to imagine, that theyhad certain hours allowed them for the purpose of joining in the dance, and that they had every comfort and convenience, that people aregenerally supposed to enjoy on such convivial occasions. But this is farfrom the case. Reason informs us, that it can never be. If they wish forsuch innocent recreations, they must enjoy them in the time that isallotted them for sleep; and so far are these dances from proceedingfrom any uncommon degree of happiness, which excites them to convivialsociety, that they proceed rather from an uncommon depression ofspirits, which makes them even sacrifice their rest[102], for the sakeof experiencing for a moment a more joyful oblivion of their cares. Forsuppose any one of the _receivers_, in the middle of a dance, wereto address his slaves in the following manner: "_Africans!_ I beginat last to feel for your situation; and my conscience is severely hurt, whenever I reflect that I have been reducing those to a state of miseryand pain, who have never given me offence. You seem to be fond of theseexercises, but yet you are obliged to take them at such unseasonablehours, that they impair your health, which is sufficiently broken by theintolerable share of labour which I have hitherto imposed upon you. Iwill therefore make you a proposal. Will you be content to live in thecolonies, and you shall have the half of every week entirely toyourselves? or will you choose to return to your miserable, wretchedcountry?"--But what is that which strikes their ears? Which makes themmotionless in an instant? Which interrupts the festive scene?--theircountry?--transporting sound!--Behold! they are now flying from thedance: you may see them running to the shore, and, frantick as it werewith joy, demanding with open arms an instantaneous passage to theirbeloved native plains. 

Such are the _colonial delights_, by the representation of whichthe _receivers_ would persuade us, that the _Africans_ aretaken from their country to a region of conviviality and mirth; and thatlike those, who leave their usual places of residence for a summer'samusement, they are conveyed to the colonies--_to bathe_, --_todance_, --_to keep holy-day_, --_to be jovial_. --But thereis something so truly ridiculous in the attempt to impose these scenesof felicity on the publick, as scenes which fall to the lot of slaves, that the _receivers_ must have been driven to great extremities, tohazard them to the eye of censure. 

The last point that remains to be considered, is the shameful assertion, that the _Africans_ are much _happier in the colonies, than intheir own country_. But in what does this superiour happinessconsist? In those real scenes, it must be replied, which have been justmentioned; for these, by the confession of the receivers, constitute thehappiness they enjoy. --But it has been shewn that these have beenunfairly represented; and, were they realized in the most extensivelatitude, they would not confirm the fact. For if, upon arecapitulation, it consists in the pleasure of _manumission_, theysurely must have passed their lives in a much more comfortable manner, who, like the _Africans at home_, have had no occasion for such abenefit at all. But the _receivers_, we presume, reason upon thisprinciple, that we never know the value of a blessing but by its loss. This is generally true: but would any one of them make himself a_slave_ for years, that he might run the chance of the pleasures of_manumission_? Or that he might taste the charms of liberty with_a greater relish_? Nor is the assertion less false in every otherconsideration. For if their happiness consists in the few_holy-days_, which _in the colonies_ they are permitted toenjoy, what must be their situation _in their own country_, wherethe whole year is but one continued holy-day, or cessation fromdiscipline and fatigue?--If in the possession of _a mean andcontracted spot_, what must be their situation, where a whole regionis their own, producing almost spontaneously the comforts of life, andrequiring for its cultivation none of those hours, which should beappropriated to _sleep_?--If in the pleasures of the _colonialdance_, what must it be in _their own country_, where they maydance for ever; where there is no stated hour to interrupt theirfelicity, no intolerable labour immediately to succeed theirrecreations, and no overseer to receive them under the discipline of thelash?--If these therefore are the only circumstances, by which theassertion can be proved, we may venture to say, without fear ofopposition, that it can never be proved at all. 

But these are not the only circumstances. It is said that they arebarbarous at home. --But do you _receivers_ civilize them?--Yourunwillingness to convert them to Christianity, because you suppose youmust use them more kindly when converted, is but a bad argument infavour of the fact. 

It is affirmed again, that their manner of life, and their situation issuch in their own country, that to say they are happy is a jest. "Butwho are you, who pretend to judge[103] of another man's happiness? Thatstate which each man, under the guidance of his maker, forms forhimself, and not one man for another? To know what constitutes mine oryour happiness, is the sole prerogative of him who created us, and castus in so various and different moulds. Did your slaves ever complain toyou of their unhappiness, amidst their native woods and desarts? Or, rather, let me ask, did they ever cease complaining of their conditionunder you their lordly masters? Where they see, indeed, theaccommodations of civil life, but see them all pass to others, themselves unbenefited by them. Be so gracious then, ye petty tyrantsover human freedom, to let your slaves judge for themselves, what it iswhich makes their own happiness, and then see whether they do not placeit _in the return to their own country_, rather than in thecontemplation of your grandeur, of which their misery makes so large apart. "

But since you speak with so much confidence on the subject, let us askyou _receivers_ again, if you have ever been informed by yourunfortunate slaves, that they had no connexions in the country fromwhich they have forcibly been torn away: or, if you will take upon youto assert, that they never sigh, when they are alone; or that they neverrelate to each other their tales of misery and woe. But you judge ofthem, perhaps, in an happy moment, when you are dealing out to themtheir provisions for the week; and are but little aware, that, thoughthe countenance may be cheered with a momentary smile, the heart may beexquisitely tortured. Were you to shew us, indeed, that there are laws, subject to no evasion, by which you are obliged to clothe and feed themin a comfortable manner; were you to shew us that they areprotected[104] at all; or that even _one_ in a _thousand_ ofthose masters have suffered death[105], who have been guilty of_premeditated_ murder to their slaves, you would have a betterclaim to our belief: but you can neither produce the instances nor thelaws. The people, of whom you speak, are _slaves_, are your own_property_, are wholly _at your own disposal_; and this ideais sufficient to overturn your assertions of their happiness. 

But we shall now mention a circumstance, which, in the present case, will have more weight than all the arguments which have hitherto beenadvanced. It is an opinion, which the _Africans_ universallyentertain, that, as soon as death shall release them from the hands oftheir oppressors, they shall immediately be wafted back to their nativeplains, there to exist again, to enjoy the sight of their belovedcountrymen, and to spend the whole of their new existence in scenes oftranquillity and delight; and so powerfully does this notion operateupon them, as to drive them frequently to the horrid extremity ofputting a period to their lives. Now if these suicides are frequent, (which no person can deny) what are they but a proof, that the situationof those who destroy themselves must have been insupportably wretched:and if the thought of returning to their country after death, _whenthey have experienced the colonial joys_, constitutes their supremefelicity, what are they but a proof, that they think there is as muchdifference between the two situations, as there is between misery anddelight?

Nor is the assertion of the _receivers_ less liable to a refutationin the instance of those, who terminate their own existence, than ofthose, whom nature releases from their persecutions. They die with asmile upon their face, and their funerals are attended by a vastconcourse of their countrymen, with every possible demonstration ofjoy[106]. But why this unusual mirth, if their departed brother has leftan happy place? Or if he has been taken from the care of an indulgentmaster, who consulted his pleasures, and administered to his wants? Butalas, it arises from hence, that _he is gone to his happy country_:a circumstance, sufficient of itself, to silence a myriad of thosespecious arguments, which the imagination has been racked, and willalways be racked to produce, in favour of a system of tyranny andoppression. 

It remains only, that we should now conclude the chapter with a fact, which will shew that the account, which we have given of the situationof slaves, is strictly true, and will refute at the same time all thearguments which have hitherto been, and may yet be brought by the_receivers_, to prove that their treatment is humane. In one of thewestern colonies of the Europeans, [107]six hundred and fifty thousandslaves were imported within an hundred years; at the expiration of whichtime, their whole posterity were found to amount to one hundred andforty thousand. This fact will ascertain the treatment of itself. Forhow shamefully must these unfortunate people have been oppressed? What adreadful havock must famine, fatigue, and cruelty, have made among them, when we consider, that the descendants of _six hundred and fiftythousand_ people in the prime of life, gradually imported within acentury, are less numerous than those, which only _ten thousand_[108]would have produced in the same period, under common advantages, and in a country congenial to their constitutions?

But the _receivers_ have probably great merit on the occasion. Letus therefore set it down to their humanity. Let us suppose for once, that this incredible waste of the human species proceeds from abenevolent design; that, sensible of the miseries of a servile state, they resolve to wear out, as fast as they possibly can, theirunfortunate slaves, that their miseries may the sooner end, and that awretched posterity may be prevented from sharing their parentalcondition. Now, whether this is the plan of reasoning which the_receivers_ adopt, we cannot take upon us to decide; but true itis, that the effect produced is exactly the same, as if they hadreasoned wholly on this _benevolent_ principle. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 097: The articles of war are frequently read at the head ofevery regiment in the service, stating those particular actions whichare to be considered as crimes. ]

[Footnote 098: We cannot omit here to mention one of the customs, whichhas been often brought as a palliation of slavery, and which prevailedbut a little time ago, and we are doubtful whether it does not prevailnow, in the metropolis of this country, of kidnapping men for theservice of the East-India Company. Every subject, as long as he behaveswell, has a right to the protection of government; and the tacitpermission of such a scene of iniquity, when it becomes known, is asmuch a breach of duty in government, as the conduct of those subjects, who, on other occasions, would be termed, and punished as, rebellious. ]

[Footnote 099: The expences of every parish are defrayed by a poll-taxon negroes, to save which they pretend to liberate those who are pastlabour; but they still keep them employed in repairing fences, or indoing some trifling work on a scanty allowance. For to free a_field-negroe_, so long as he can work, is a maxim, which, notwithstanding the numerous boasted manumissions, no master _everthinks of adopting_ in the colonies. ]

[Footnote 100: They must be cultivated always on a _Sunday_, andfrequently in those hours which should be appropriated to _sleep_, or the wretched possessors must be inevitably _starved_. ]

[Footnote 101: They are allowed in general three holy-days at Christmas, but in Jamaica they have two also at Easter, and two at Whitsuntide: sothat on the largest scale, they have only seven days in a year, or oneday in fifty-two. But this is on a supposition, that the receivers donot break in upon the afternoons, which they are frequently too apt todo. If it should be said that Sunday is an holy-day, it is not true; itis so far an holy-day, that they do not work for their masters; but suchan holy-day, that if they do not employ it in the cultivation of theirlittle spots, they must _starved_. ]

[Footnote 102: These dances are usually in the middle of the night; andso desirous are these unfortunate people of obtaining but a joyful hour, that they not only often give up their sleep, but add to the labours ofthe day, by going several miles to obtain it. ]

[Footnote 103: Bishop of Glocester's sermon, preached before the societyfor the propagation of the gospel, at the anniversary meeting, on the21st of February, 1766. ]

[Footnote 104: There is a law, (but let the reader remark, that itprevails but in _one_ of the colonies), against mutilation. It tookits rise from the frequency of the inhuman practice. But though a mastercannot there chop off the limb of a slave with an axe, he may yet work, starve, and beat him to death with impunity. ]

[Footnote 105: _Two_ instances are recorded by the_receivers_, out of about _fifty-thousand_, where a white manhas suffered death for the murder of a negroe; but the receivers do nottell us, that these suffered more because they were the pests ofsociety, than because the _murder of slaves was a crime_. ]

[Footnote 106: A negroe-funeral is considered as a curious sight, and isattended with singing, dancing, musick, and every circumstance that canshew the attendants to be happy on the occasion. ]

[Footnote 107: In 96 years, ending in 1774, 800, 000 slaves had beenimported into the French part of St. Domingo, of which there remainedonly 290, 000 in 1774. Of this last number only 140, 000 were creoles, ornatives of the island, i. E. Of 650, 000 slaves, the whole posterity were140, 000. _Considerations sur la Colonie de St. Dominique_, (Seeerrata--should be read as "_St. Domingue_") published by authorityin 1777. ]

[Footnote 108: Ten thousand people under fair advantages, and in a soilcongenial to their constitutions, and where the means of subsistence areeasy, should produce in a century 160, 000. This is the proportion inwhich the Americans increased; and the Africans in their own countryincrease in the same, if not in a greater proportion. Now as the climateof the colonies is as favourable to their health as that of their owncountry, the causes of the prodigious decrease in the one, and increasein the other, will be more conspicuous. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. X. 

We have now taken a survey of the treatment which the unfortunate_Africans_ undergo, when they are put into the hands of the_receivers_. This treatment, by the four first chapters of thepresent part of this Essay, appears to be wholly insupportable, and tobe such as no human being can apply to another, without the imputationof such crimes, as should make him tremble. But as many arguments areusually advanced by those who have any interest in the practice, bywhich they would either exculpate the treatment, or diminish itsseverity, we allotted the remaining chapters for their discussion. Inthese we considered the probability of such a treatment against themotives of interest; the credit that was to be given to thosedisinterested writers on the subject, who have recorded particularinstances of barbarity; the inferiority of the _Africans_ to thehuman species; the comparisons that are generally made with respect totheir situation; the positive scenes of felicity which they are said toenjoy, and every other argument, in short, that we have found to haveever been advanced in the defence of slavery. These have been allconsidered, and we may venture to pronounce, that, instead of answeringthe purpose for which they were intended, they serve only to bring suchcircumstances to light, as clearly shew, that if ingenuity were rackedto invent a situation, that would be the most distressing andinsupportable to the human race; it could never invent one, that wouldsuit the description better, than the--_colonial slavery_. 

If this then be the case, and if slaves, notwithstanding all thearguments to the contrary, are exquisitely miserable, we ask you_receivers, by what right_ you reduce them to so wretched asituation?

You reply, that you _buy them_; that your _money_ constitutesyour _right_, and that, like all other things which you purchase, they are wholly at your own disposal. 

Upon this principle alone it was, that we professed to view yourtreatment, or examine your right, when we said, that "the question[109]resolved itself into two separate parts for discussion; into the_African_ commerce, as explained in the history of slavery, and thesubsequent slavery in the colonies, _as founded on the equity of thecommerce_. " Now, since it appears that this commerce, upon thefullest investigation, is contrary to "_the principles[110] of law andgovernment, the dictates of reason, the common maxims of equity, thelaws of nature, the admonitions of conscience, and, in short, the wholedoctrine of natural religion_, " it is evident that the _right_, which is founded upon it, must be the same; and that if thosethings only are lawful in the sight of God, which are eithervirtuous in themselves, or proceed from virtuous principles, you _haveno right over them at all_. 

You yourselves also confess this. For when we ask you, whether any humanbeing has a right to sell you, you immediately answer, No; as if naturerevolted at the thought, and as if it was so contradictory to your ownfeelings, as not to require consideration. But who are you, that havethis exclusive charter of trading in the liberties of mankind? When didnature, or rather the Author of nature, make so partial a distinctionbetween you and them? When did He say, that you should have theprivilege of selling others, and that others should not have theprivilege of selling you?

Now since you confess, that no person whatever has a right to dispose ofyou in this manner, you must confess also, that those things areunlawful to be done to you, which are usually done in consequence of thesale. Let us suppose then, that in consequence of the _commerce_you were forced into a ship; that you were conveyed to another country;that you were sold there; that you were confined to incessant labour;that you were pinched by continual hunger and thirst; and subject to bewhipped, cut, and mangled at discretion, and all this at the hands ofthose, whom you had never offended; would you not think that you had aright to resist their treatment? Would you not resist it with a safeconscience? And would you not be surprized, if your resistance should betermed rebellion?--By the former premises you must answer, yes. --Suchthen is the case with the wretched _Africans_. They have a right toresist your proceedings. They can resist them, and yet they cannotjustly be considered as rebellious. For though we suppose them to havebeen guilty of crimes to one another; though we suppose them to havebeen the most abandoned and execrable of men, yet are they perfectlyinnocent with respect to you _receivers_. You have no right totouch even the hair of their heads without their own consent. It is notyour money, that can invest you with a right. Human liberty can neitherbe bought nor sold. Every lash that you give them is unjust. It is alash against nature and religion, and will surely stand recorded againstyou, since they are all, with respect to your _impious_ selves, ina state of nature; in a state of original dissociation; perfectly free. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 109: See Part II Chapter I second paragraph. ]

[Footnote 110: See Part II Chapter IX last paragraph. ]

 * * * * *

CHAP. XI. 

Having now considered both the _commerce_ and _slavery_, itremains only to collect such arguments as are scattered in differentparts of the work, and to make such additional remarks, as presentthemselves on the subject. 

And first, let us ask you, who have studied the law of nature, and you, who are learned in the law of the land, if all property must not beinferiour in its nature to its possessor, or, in other words, (for it isa case, which every person must bring home to his own breast) if yousuppose that any human being can have _a property in yourselves_?Let us ask you appraisers, who scientifically know the value of things, if any human creature is equivalent only to any of the trinkets that youwear, or at most, to any of the horses that you ride: or in other words, if you have ever considered the most costly things that you have valued, as _equivalent to yourselves?_ Let us ask you rationalists, if man, as a reasonable being, is not _accountable_ for his actions, andlet us put the same question to you, who have studied the divinewritings? Let us ask you parents, if ever you thought that you possessedan _authority_ as such, or if ever you expected a _duty_ fromyour sons; and let us ask you sons, if ever you felt an impulse in yourown breasts to _obey_ your parents. Now, if you should all answeras we could wish, if you should all answer consistently with reason, nature, and the revealed voice of God, what a dreadful argument willpresent itself against the commerce and slavery of the human species, when we reflect, that no man whatever can be bought or reduced to thesituation of a slave, _but he must instantly become a brute, he mustinstantly be reduced to the value of those things, which were made forhis own use and convenience; he must instantly cease to be accountablefor his actions, and his authority as a parent, and his duty as a son, must be instantly no more_. 

Neither does it escape our notice, when we are speaking of the fatalwound which every social duty must receive, how considerablyChristianity suffers by the conduct of you _receivers_. For byprosecuting this impious commerce, you keep the _Africans_ in astate of perpetual ferocity and barbarism; and by prosecuting it in sucha manner, as must represent your religion, as a system of robbery andoppression, you not only oppose the propagation of the gospel, as far asyou are able yourselves, but throw the most certain impediments in theway of others, who might attempt the glorious and important task. 

Such also is the effect, which the subsequent slavery in the coloniesmust produce. For by your inhuman treatment of the unfortunate_Africans_ there, you create the same insuperable impediments to aconversion. For how must they detest the very name of _Christians_, when you _Christians_ are deformed by so many and dreadful vices?How must they detest that system of religion, which appears to resistthe natural rights of men, and to give a sanction to brutality andmurder?

But, as we are now mentioning Christianity, we must pause for a littletime, to make a few remarks on the arguments which are usually deducedfrom thence by the _receivers_, in defence of their system ofoppression. For the reader may readily suppose, that, if they did nothesitate to bring the _Old_ Testament in support of theirbarbarities, they would hardly let the _New_ escape them. 

_St. Paul_, having converted _Onesimus_ to the Christianfaith, who was a fugitive slave of _Philemon_, sent him back to hismaster. This circumstance has furnished the _receivers_ with aplea, that Christianity encourages slavery. But they have not onlystrained the passages which they produce in support of their assertions, but are ignorant of historical facts. The benevolent apostle, in theletter which he wrote to _Philemon_, the master of _Onesimus_, addresses him to the following effect: "I send him back to you, but notin his former capacity[111], _not now as a servant, but above aservant, a brother beloved_. In this manner I beseech you to receivehim, for though I could _enjoin_ you to do it, yet I had rather itshould be a matter of your _own will_, than of _necessity_. "

It appears that the same _Onesimus_, when he was sent back, was nolonger _a slave_, that he was a minister of the gospel, that he wasjoined with _Tychicus_ in an ecclesiastical commission to thechurch of the _Colossians_, and was afterwards bishop of_Ephesus_. If language therefore has any meaning, and if historyhas recorded a fact which may be believed, there is no case moreopposite to the doctrine of the _receivers_, than this which theyproduce in its support. 

It is said again, that Christianity, among the many important preceptswhich it contains, does not furnish us with one for the abolition ofslavery. But the reason is obvious. Slavery at the time of theintroduction of the gospel was universally prevalent, and ifChristianity had abruptly declared, that the millions of slaves shouldhave been made free, who were then in the world, it would have beenuniversally rejected, as containing doctrines that were dangerous, ifnot destructive, to society. In order therefore that it might beuniversally received, it never meddled, by any positive precept, withthe civil institutions of the times; but though it does not expresslysay, that "you shall neither buy, nor sell, nor possess a slave, " it isevident that, in its general tenour, it sufficiently militates againstthe custom. 

The first doctrine which it inculcates, is that of _brotherlylove_. It commands good will towards men. It enjoins us to love ourneighbours as ourselves, and to do unto all men, as we would that theyshould do unto us. And how can any man fulfil this scheme of universalbenevolence, who reduces an unfortunate person _against his will_, to the _most insupportable_ of all human conditions; who considershim as his _private property_, and treats him, not as a brother, nor as one of the same parentage with himself, but as an _animal ofthe brute creation?_

But the most important doctrine is that, by which we are assured thatmankind are to exist in a future state, and to give an account of thoseactions, which they have severally done in the flesh. This strikes atthe very root of slavery. For how can any man be justly called to anaccount for his actions, whose actions are not _at his owndisposal?_ This is the case with the _proper_[112] slave. Hisliberty is absolutely bought and _appropriated_; and if thepurchase is _just and equitable_, he is _under the necessity_of perpetrating any crime, which the purchaser may order him to commit, or, in other words, of ceasing to be _accountable for his actions_. 

These doctrines therefore are sufficient to shew, that slavery isincompatible, with the Christian system. The _Europeans_ consideredthem as such, when, at the close of the twelfth century, they resisted, their hereditary prejudices, and occasioned its abolition. Hence one, among many other proofs, that Christianity was the production ofinfinite wisdom; that though it did not take such express cognizance ofthe wicked national institutions of the times, as should hinder itsreception, it should yet contain such doctrines, as, when it should befully established, would be sufficient for the abolition of them all. 

Thus then is the argument of you _receivers_ ineffectual, and yourconduct impious. For, by the prosecution of this wicked slavery andcommerce, you not only oppose the propagation of that gospel which wasordered to be preached unto every creature, and bring it into contempt, but you oppose its tenets also: first, because you violate that law of_universal benevolence_, which was to take away those hatefuldistinctions of _Jew_ and _Gentile_, _Greek_ and _Barbarian, bond_ and _free_, which prevailed when the gospel was introduced;and secondly, because, as every man is to give an account ofhis actions hereafter, it is necessary that he should be _free_. 

Another argument yet remains, which, though nature will absolutely turnpale at the recital, cannot possibly be omitted. In those wars, whichare made for the sake of procuring slaves, it is evident that thecontest must be generally obstinate, and that great numbers must beslain on both sides, before the event can be determined. This we mayreasonably apprehend to be the case: and we have shewn[113], that therehave not been wanting instances, where the conquerors have been soincensed at the resistance they have found, that their spirit ofvengeance has entirely got the better of their avarice, and they havemurdered, in cool blood, every individual, without discrimination, either of age or sex. From these and other circumstances, we thought wehad sufficient reason to conclude, that, where _ten_ were supposedto be taken, an _hundred_, including the victors and vanquished, might be supposed to perish. Now, as the annual exportation from_Africa_ consists of an hundred thousand men, and as the twoorders, of those who are privately kidnapped by individuals, and ofthose, who are publickly seized by virtue of the authority of theirprince, compose together, at least, nine-tenths of the _African_slaves, it follows, that about ten thousand consist of convicts andprisoners of war. The last order is the most numerous. Let us supposethen that only six thousand of this order are annually sent intoservitude, and it will immediately appear that no less than_sixty-thousand_ people annually perish in those wars, which aremade only for the purpose of procuring slaves. But that this number, which we believe to be by no means exaggerated, may be free from allobjection, we will include those in the estimate, who die as they aretravelling to the ships. Many of these unfortunate people have a journeyof one thousand miles to perform on foot, and are driven like sheepthrough inhospitable woods and deserts, where they frequently die ingreat numbers, from fatigue and want. Now if to those, who thus perishon the _African_ continent, by war and travelling, we subjointhose[114], who afterwards perish on the voyage, and in the seasoningtogether, it will appear that, in every yearly attempt to supply thecolonies, an _hundred thousand_ must perish, even before _one_useful individual can be obtained. 

Gracious God! how wicked, how beyond all example impious, must be thatservitude, which cannot be carried on without the continual murder of somany and innocent persons! What punishment is not to be expected forsuch monstrous and unparalleled barbarities! For if the blood of oneman, unjustly shed, cries with so loud a voice for the divine vengeance, how shall the cries and groans of an _hundred thousand_ men, _annually murdered_, ascend the celestial mansions, and bring downthat punishment, which such enormities deserve! But do we mentionpunishment? Do we allude to that punishment, which shall be inflicted onmen as individuals, in a future life? Do we allude to that awful day, which shall surely come, when the master shall behold his murderednegroe face to face? When a train of mutilated slaves shall be broughtagainst him? When he shall stand confounded and abashed? Or, do weallude to that punishment, which may be inflicted on them here, asmembers of a wicked community? For as a body politick, if its membersare ever so numerous, may be considered as an whole, acting of itself, and by itself, in all affairs in which it is concerned, so it isaccountable, as such, for its conduct; and as these kinds of politieshave only their existence here, so it is only in this world, that, assuch, they can be punished. 

"Now, whether we consider the crime, with respect to the individualsimmediately concerned in this most barbarous and cruel traffick, orwhether we consider it as patronized[115] and encouraged by the laws ofthe land, it presents to our view an equal degree of enormity. A crime, founded on a dreadful pre-eminence in wickedness, --a crime, which beingboth of individuals and the nation, must sometime draw down upon us theheaviest judgment of Almighty God, who made of one blood all the sons ofmen, and who gave to all equally a natural right to liberty; and who, ruling all the kingdoms of the earth with equal providential justice, cannot suffer such deliberate, such monstrous iniquity, to pass longunpunished[116]. "

But alas! he seems already to have interfered on the occasion! Theviolent[117] and supernatural agitations of all the elements, which, fora series of years, have prevailed in those European settlements, wherethe unfortunate _Africans_ are retained in a state of slavery, andwhich have brought unspeakable calamities on the inhabitants, andpublick losses on the states to which they severally belong, are so manyawful visitations of God for this inhuman violation of his laws. And itis not perhaps unworthy of remark, that as the subjects of Great-Britainhave two thirds of this impious commerce in their own hands, so theyhave suffered[118] in the same proportion, or more severely than therest. 

How far these misfortunes may appear to be acts of providence, and tocreate an alarm to those who have been accustomed to refer every effectto its apparent cause; who have been habituated to stop there, and tooverlook the finger of God; because it is slightly covered under theveil of secondary laws, we will not pretend to determine? but this wewill assert with confidence, that the _Europeans_ have richlydeserved them all; that the fear of sympathy, which can hardly berestrained on other melancholy occasions, seems to forget to flow at therelation of these; and that we can never, with any shadow of justice, with prosperity to the undertakers of those, whose success must be atthe expence of the happiness of millions of their fellow-creatures. 

But this is sufficient. For if liberty is only an adventitious right; ifmen are by no means superiour to brutes; if every social duty is acurse; if cruelty is highly to be esteemed; if murder is strictlyhonourable, and Christianity is a lye; then it is evident, that the_African_ slavery may be pursued, without either the remorse ofconscience, or the imputation of a crime. But if the contrary of this istrue, which reason must immediately evince, it is evident that no customestablished among men was ever more impious; since it is contrary to_reason, justice, nature, the principles of law and government, thewhole doctrine, in short, of natural religion, and the revealed voice ofGod_. 

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 111: Epist. To Philemon. ]

[Footnote 112: The _African_ slave is of this description; and wecould wish, in all our arguments on the present subject, to beunderstood as having spoken only of _proper slaves_. The slave whois condemned to the oar, to the fortifications, and other publick works, is in a different predicament. His liberty is not _appropriated_, and therefore none of those consequences can be justly drawn, which havebeen deduced in the present case. ]

[Footnote 113: See the description of an African battle (Footnote 049). ]

[Footnote 114: The lowest computation is 40, 000, (Footnote 060). ]

[Footnote 115: The legislature has squandered away more money in theprosecution of the slave trade, within twenty years, than in any othertrade whatever, having granted from the year 1750, to the year 1770, thesum of 300, 000 pounds. ]

[Footnote 116: Sermon preached before the University of Cambridge, bythe Rev. Peter Peckard. ]

[Footnote 117: The first noted earthquake at Jamaica, happened June the7th 1692, when Port Royal was totally sunk. This was succeeded by one inthe year 1697, and by another in the year 1722, from which time to thepresent, these regions of the globe seem to have been severely visited, but particularly during the last six or seven years. See a generalaccount of the calamities, occasioned by the late tremendous hurricanesand earthquakes in the West-Indian islands, by Mr. Fowler. ]

[Footnote 118: The many ships of war belonging to the British navy, which were lost with all their crews in these dreadful hurricanes, willsufficiently prove the fact. ]

 * * * * *

FINIS. 

 * * * * *